Unformatted text preview: ponses [Fig. 3; Syn, ﬁrst ta
Viv Viv (1) (1) 1.3;1.3; NS]. On P3, fewer Flt neonates tal ve
x2 x2 5 5 NS]. On P3, fewer Flt neonates tal vestib
responded compared with SynSyn and Viv animals [Flt, tuses.
responded compared with and Viv animals [Flt, tuses. Th
SynSyn (1) 5 27.7, P , 0.0001; Flt,6 Viv Viv (1) 5 50.0; previous a
x2 x2 (1) 5 27.7, P , 0.0001; Flt, x2 x2 (1) 5 50.0; previo
P ,P0.0001; P ,P0.001], whereas the the two control con- trols a
, 0.0001; , 0.001], whereas two control con- trols and
deliver Into t
ditions y dide did not differ from one2 another [Syn, Viv xenyenythe
ditionsh nnot differ from one another [Syn, Viv x2 2
(1) 5 1.1;1.1; NS].
(1) 5 NS].
Table 2 shows the the percentage of neonates assigned a ﬂight
Table 2 shows percentage of neonates assigned a ﬂight dur
Fig. 3. Relative 0, 1, body 2 during analysis of the the video images
score of rates of or movements, measuredanalysis oftransitions from an immediately with m
score of 0, 1, or 2 during23 in self-referenced video images with mod
previous timepoint, and expressed on three vectors (X, Y, Z) of movement. Data were from time-matched
takenbehavior of pregnant dams housed in theOn On twiceflight and from Flt Flt review
samplestaken during water righting. P1, P1, twicemany Synchronous We re
of during water righting. AEM during orbital as as many
Controlneonates incompared with Syn was yoked to temperature and humidity wellth
an environmental Syn neonates made no no
neonates compared with chamber that neonates made at- atwell as a
conditions of the Space Shuttle middeck.
tempt to right themselves in the the bath. Analyses of
tempt to right themselves in bath. Analyses of
response latencies on P3 indicated that Flt Flt neonates
response latencies on P3 indicated that neonates
displayed about seven times more to achieve the the prone position
took signiﬁcantly longer rolling movements prone position This
took signiﬁcantly lon...
View Full Document
- Fall '13