Fig. 3. Gavaged with fluoxetine reversed the weight loss caused by CUMS. (A) Body weight in the process of CUMS of mice. (B) Body weight gain at the end of CUMS of mice (n = 10 in NC group, n = 20 in CUMS group). (C) Body weight in the process of treatment of mice. (D) Body weight gain at the end of treatment of mice (n = 10/group; *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, CUMS group vs. NC group; ##p < 0.01, CUMS + FLX group vs. NC group). (E) Body weight in the process of CUMS of rats. (F) Body weight gain at the end of CUMS of rats (n = 10 in NC group, n = 20 in CUMS group). (G) Body weight in the process of treatment of rats. (H) Body weight gain at the end of treatment of rats (n = 10/group, #p < 0.05, ##p < 0.01, CUMS group vs. NC group; *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, CUMS + FLX group vs. NC group). The statistical analyses in-volved the two independent samples t test for comparisons between two groups and one-way analyses of variance alongside the Tukey test for comparisons across multiple groups.
NC, normal control; CUMS, chronic unpredictable mild stress; FLX, fluoxetine.
© Clin Psychopharmacol Neurosci
