Tin et al 2025a - Revision history

Tomamil: Tomamil moved page Review 697180794924 to Tin et al 2025a

2025-06-23T15:17:43Z

Tomamil moved page Review 697180794924 to Tin et al 2025a

Aaront109 at 19:27, 21 June 2025

2025-06-21T19:27:49Z

Show changes

Aaront109 at 19:07, 25 February 2025

2025-02-25T19:07:56Z

Aaront109 at 19:07, 25 February 2025

2025-02-25T19:07:13Z

Aaront109: Aaront109 moved page Draft Tin 964552002 to Review 697180794924

2025-02-25T18:57:29Z

Aaront109 moved page Draft Tin 964552002 to Review 697180794924

Aaront109: Created page with " ==The Effects of White Mulberry on Alcohol-Induced Withdrawal in Planaria == Ethanol, commonly known as drinking alcohol, is a psychoactive drug that gives the stimulative..."

2025-02-25T18:52:12Z

Created page with " ==The Effects of White Mulberry on Alcohol-Induced Withdrawal in Planaria == Ethanol, commonly known as drinking alcohol, is a psychoactive drug that gives the stimulative..."

Show changes

@@ Line 145: / Line 145: @@
 |  style="border: 1pt solid black;vertical-align: top;"|
 [[Image:Draft_Tin_964552002-image6-c.png|600px]]
 '''Figure 1. Average motility for pre-treatment groups. '''Values represent means ± SEM. Each bar is representative of differing trials, significance is respective to trials. ANOVA Tukey HSD was run between treatments for each trial. This figure demonstrates the average lines crossed for each treatment group. In trial 1, the control, 3% pre-treatment, and 9% pre-treatment groups crossed significantly fewer lines than the vehicle group (p < 0.05); the 6% pre-treatment group is not significantly different from either the vehicle or control. In trial 2, the control, 3% pre-treatment, and 6% pre-treatment groups crossed significantly fewer lines than the vehicle group (p < 0.05); the 9% pre-treatment group is not significantly different from either the vehicle or control. In trial 3, the control and 3% pre-treatment groups crossed significantly fewer lines than the vehicle group (p < 0.05); the 6% pre-treatment and 9% pre-treatment groups are not significantly different from either the vehicle or control.
 |}
@@ Line 153: / Line 154: @@
 |  style="border: 1pt solid black;vertical-align: top;"|
 [[Image:Draft_Tin_964552002-image7-c.png|center|600px]]
 '''Figure 2. Average number of head bops for pre-treatment groups. '''Values represent means ± SEM. Each bar is representative of differing trials, significance is respective to trials. ANOVA Tukey HSD was run between treatments for each trial. This figure demonstrates the average number of head bops for each treatment group. In trial 1, the vehicle group performed a significantly higher amount of head bops than the control, the 3% pre-treatment, and 9% pre-treatment groups (p<0.01), the 6% pre-treatment group was less significantly different (p<0.05). In trial 2, the vehicle group performed a significantly higher amount of head bops than the control (p<0.05) and the 6% pre-treatment groups (p<0.01). The 3% pre-treatment and 9% pre-treatment groups were not significantly different from either the vehicle or control groups.
 |}
@@ Line 161: / Line 163: @@
 |  style="border: 1pt solid black;vertical-align: top;"|
 [[Image:Draft_Tin_964552002-image8-c.png|center|600px]]
 '''Figure 3. Average number of C-shapes for pre-treatment groups. '''Values represent means ± SEM. Each bar is representative of differing trials, significance is respective to trials. ANOVA Tukey HSD was run between treatments for each trial. This figure demonstrates the average number of C-shapes for each treatment group. In trial 1, the control, 3% pre-treatment, and 9% pre-treatment groups performed significantly fewer C-shapes than the vehicle group (p<0.01). The 6% pre-treatment group was not significantly different from either the control or vehicle.
 |}
@@ Line 169: / Line 172: @@
 |  style="border: 1pt solid black;vertical-align: top;width: 0%;"|
 [[Image:Draft_Tin_964552002-image3-c.png|center|600px]]
 '''Figure 4. Conditional Preference Test for pre-treatment groups. '''Values represent means ± SEM. Each bar is representative of differing trials, significance is respective to trials. ANOVA Tukey HSD was run between treatments for each trial. This figure demonstrates planarias’ dark and light preference for each treatment group. In trial 1, the control and 3% pre-treatment groups spent significantly more time in the light zone when compared to the vehicle group (p<0.01). The 6% pre-treatment and 9% pre-treatment groups are not significantly different from either the control group or the vehicle group. In trial 3, The control group spent significantly more time in the light zone when compared to the vehicle, 6% pre-treatment, and 9% pre-treatment groups (p<0.05). The 6% pre-treatment and 9% pre-treatment groups are not significantly different from the vehicle.
 |}
@@ Line 177: / Line 181: @@
 |  style="border: 1pt solid black;vertical-align: top;"|
 [[Image:Draft_Tin_964552002-image2-c.png|center|600px]]
 '''Figure 5. Average motility for post-treatment groups. '''Values represent means ± SEM. Each bar is representative of differing trials, significance is respective to trials. ANOVA Tukey HSD was run between treatments for each trial. Demonstrates the average lines crossed for each treatment group. Across all trials, the control, 3% post-treatment, 6% post-treatment, and 9% post-treatment groups crossed significantly fewer lines compared to the vehicle (p<0.01). In trial 2, 6% post-treatment, and 9% post-treatment groups crossed significantly fewer lines compared to the control group (p<0.05).
 |}
@@ Line 185: / Line 190: @@
 |  style="border: 1pt solid black;vertical-align: top;"|
 [[Image:Draft_Tin_964552002-image4-c.png|center|600px]]
 '''Figure 6. Average number of head bops for post-treatment groups. '''Values represent means ± SEM. Each bar is representative of differing trials, significance is respective to trials. ANOVA Tukey HSD was run between treatments for each trial. This figure demonstrates the average number of head bops for each treatment group. In trial 1, the vehicle group performed a significantly higher amount of head bops than the control, 3% post-treatment, and 9% post-treatment groups (p<0.01). In trial 2, the control, 3% post-treatment, 6% post-treatment, and 9% post-treatment groups perform significantly less head bop compared to the vehicle (p<0.01), and the 6% post-treatment and 9% post-treatment groups perform significantly fewer head bops compared to the control group (p<0.05). In trial 3, the vehicle performs a significantly higher amount of head bops compared to the groups that receive ethanol.
 |}
@@ Line 193: / Line 199: @@
 |  style="border: 1pt solid black;vertical-align: top;"|
 [[Image:Draft_Tin_964552002-image5-c.png|600px]]
 '''Figure 7. Average number of C-shapes for post-treatment groups. '''Values represent means ± SEM. Each bar is representative of differing trials, significance is respective to trials. ANOVA Tukey HSD was run between treatments for each trial. This figure demonstrates the average number of C-shapes for each treatment group. Trials 2 and 3 produced a significantly higher number of C-shapes within the vehicle group compared to the control group (p<0.01). All trials demonstrated a higher number of C-shapes in the vehicle compared to the 3% post-treatment and 9% post-treatment groups (p<0.01).
 |}
@@ Line 201: / Line 208: @@
 |  style="border: 1pt solid black;vertical-align: top;width: 0%;"|
 [[Image:Draft_Tin_964552002-image1-c.png|center|600px]]
 '''Figure 8. Conditional Preference Test for post-treatment groups. '''Values represent means ± SEM. Each bar is representative of differing trials, significance is respective to trials. ANOVA Tukey HSD was run between treatments for each trial. This figure demonstrates planaria's dark and light preference for each treatment group. Trial 1 and Trial 3 showcase a heightened time in lightzone in the control group, compared to both the vehicle and post-treatment groups. There were no significant data within any trials.
 |}

@@ Line 143: / Line 143: @@
 {| style="width: 100%;border-collapse: collapse;"
 |-
-|  style="border: 1pt solid black;vertical-align: top;"|''' [[Image:Draft_Tin_964552002-image6-c.png|600px]] '''
+|  style="border: 1pt solid black;vertical-align: top;"|
 [[Image:Draft_Tin_964552002-image6-c.png|600px]]
 '''Figure 1. Average motility for pre-treatment groups. '''Values represent means ± SEM. Each bar is representative of differing trials, significance is respective to trials. ANOVA Tukey HSD was run between treatments for each trial. This figure demonstrates the average lines crossed for each treatment group. In trial 1, the control, 3% pre-treatment, and 9% pre-treatment groups crossed significantly fewer lines than the vehicle group (p < 0.05); the 6% pre-treatment group is not significantly different from either the vehicle or control. In trial 2, the control, 3% pre-treatment, and 6% pre-treatment groups crossed significantly fewer lines than the vehicle group (p < 0.05); the 9% pre-treatment group is not significantly different from either the vehicle or control. In trial 3, the control and 3% pre-treatment groups crossed significantly fewer lines than the vehicle group (p < 0.05); the 6% pre-treatment and 9% pre-treatment groups are not significantly different from either the vehicle or control.
 |}
@@ Line 151: / Line 151: @@
 {| style="width: 100%;border-collapse: collapse;"
 |-
-|  style="border: 1pt solid black;vertical-align: top;"|'''Figure 2. Average number of head bops for pre-treatment groups. '''Values represent means ± SEM. Each bar is representative of differing trials, significance is respective to trials. ANOVA Tukey HSD was run between treatments for each trial. This figure demonstrates the average number of head bops for each treatment group. In trial 1, the vehicle group performed a significantly higher amount of head bops than the control, the 3% pre-treatment, and 9% pre-treatment groups (p<0.01), the 6% pre-treatment group was less significantly different (p<0.05). In trial 2, the vehicle group performed a significantly higher amount of head bops than the control (p<0.05) and the 6% pre-treatment groups (p<0.01). The 3% pre-treatment and 9% pre-treatment groups were not significantly different from either the vehicle or control groups.
+|  style="border: 1pt solid black;vertical-align: top;"|
 [[Image:Draft_Tin_964552002-image7-c.png|center|600px]]
+'''Figure 2. Average number of head bops for pre-treatment groups. '''Values represent means ± SEM. Each bar is representative of differing trials, significance is respective to trials. ANOVA Tukey HSD was run between treatments for each trial. This figure demonstrates the average number of head bops for each treatment group. In trial 1, the vehicle group performed a significantly higher amount of head bops than the control, the 3% pre-treatment, and 9% pre-treatment groups (p<0.01), the 6% pre-treatment group was less significantly different (p<0.05). In trial 2, the vehicle group performed a significantly higher amount of head bops than the control (p<0.05) and the 6% pre-treatment groups (p<0.01). The 3% pre-treatment and 9% pre-treatment groups were not significantly different from either the vehicle or control groups.
 |}
@@ Line 159: / Line 159: @@
 {| style="width: 100%;border-collapse: collapse;"
 |-
-|  style="border: 1pt solid black;vertical-align: top;"|'''Figure 3. Average number of C-shapes for pre-treatment groups. '''Values represent means ± SEM. Each bar is representative of differing trials, significance is respective to trials. ANOVA Tukey HSD was run between treatments for each trial. This figure demonstrates the average number of C-shapes for each treatment group. In trial 1, the control, 3% pre-treatment, and 9% pre-treatment groups performed significantly fewer C-shapes than the vehicle group (p<0.01). The 6% pre-treatment group was not significantly different from either the control or vehicle.
+|  style="border: 1pt solid black;vertical-align: top;"|
 [[Image:Draft_Tin_964552002-image8-c.png|center|600px]]
+'''Figure 3. Average number of C-shapes for pre-treatment groups. '''Values represent means ± SEM. Each bar is representative of differing trials, significance is respective to trials. ANOVA Tukey HSD was run between treatments for each trial. This figure demonstrates the average number of C-shapes for each treatment group. In trial 1, the control, 3% pre-treatment, and 9% pre-treatment groups performed significantly fewer C-shapes than the vehicle group (p<0.01). The 6% pre-treatment group was not significantly different from either the control or vehicle.
 |}
@@ Line 169: / Line 169: @@
 |  style="border: 1pt solid black;vertical-align: top;width: 0%;"|
 [[Image:Draft_Tin_964552002-image3-c.png|center|600px]]
 '''Figure 4. Conditional Preference Test for pre-treatment groups. '''Values represent means ± SEM. Each bar is representative of differing trials, significance is respective to trials. ANOVA Tukey HSD was run between treatments for each trial. This figure demonstrates planarias’ dark and light preference for each treatment group. In trial 1, the control and 3% pre-treatment groups spent significantly more time in the light zone when compared to the vehicle group (p<0.01). The 6% pre-treatment and 9% pre-treatment groups are not significantly different from either the control group or the vehicle group. In trial 3, The control group spent significantly more time in the light zone when compared to the vehicle, 6% pre-treatment, and 9% pre-treatment groups (p<0.05). The 6% pre-treatment and 9% pre-treatment groups are not significantly different from the vehicle.
 |}
@@ Line 176: / Line 175: @@
 {| style="width: 100%;border-collapse: collapse;"
 |-
-|  style="border: 1pt solid black;vertical-align: top;"|'''Figure 5. Average motility for post-treatment groups. '''Values represent means ± SEM. Each bar is representative of differing trials, significance is respective to trials. ANOVA Tukey HSD was run between treatments for each trial. Demonstrates the average lines crossed for each treatment group. Across all trials, the control, 3% post-treatment, 6% post-treatment, and 9% post-treatment groups crossed significantly fewer lines compared to the vehicle (p<0.01). In trial 2, 6% post-treatment, and 9% post-treatment groups crossed significantly fewer lines compared to the control group (p<0.05).
+|  style="border: 1pt solid black;vertical-align: top;"|
 [[Image:Draft_Tin_964552002-image2-c.png|center|600px]]
+'''Figure 5. Average motility for post-treatment groups. '''Values represent means ± SEM. Each bar is representative of differing trials, significance is respective to trials. ANOVA Tukey HSD was run between treatments for each trial. Demonstrates the average lines crossed for each treatment group. Across all trials, the control, 3% post-treatment, 6% post-treatment, and 9% post-treatment groups crossed significantly fewer lines compared to the vehicle (p<0.01). In trial 2, 6% post-treatment, and 9% post-treatment groups crossed significantly fewer lines compared to the control group (p<0.05).
 |}
@@ Line 184: / Line 183: @@
 {| style="width: 100%;border-collapse: collapse;"
 |-
-|  style="border: 1pt solid black;vertical-align: top;"|'''Figure 6. Average number of head bops for post-treatment groups. '''Values represent means ± SEM. Each bar is representative of differing trials, significance is respective to trials. ANOVA Tukey HSD was run between treatments for each trial. This figure demonstrates the average number of head bops for each treatment group. In trial 1, the vehicle group performed a significantly higher amount of head bops than the control, 3% post-treatment, and 9% post-treatment groups (p<0.01). In trial 2, the control, 3% post-treatment, 6% post-treatment, and 9% post-treatment groups perform significantly less head bop compared to the vehicle (p<0.01), and the 6% post-treatment and 9% post-treatment groups perform significantly fewer head bops compared to the control group (p<0.05). In trial 3, the vehicle performs a significantly higher amount of head bops compared to the groups that receive ethanol.
+|  style="border: 1pt solid black;vertical-align: top;"|
 [[Image:Draft_Tin_964552002-image4-c.png|center|600px]]
+'''Figure 6. Average number of head bops for post-treatment groups. '''Values represent means ± SEM. Each bar is representative of differing trials, significance is respective to trials. ANOVA Tukey HSD was run between treatments for each trial. This figure demonstrates the average number of head bops for each treatment group. In trial 1, the vehicle group performed a significantly higher amount of head bops than the control, 3% post-treatment, and 9% post-treatment groups (p<0.01). In trial 2, the control, 3% post-treatment, 6% post-treatment, and 9% post-treatment groups perform significantly less head bop compared to the vehicle (p<0.01), and the 6% post-treatment and 9% post-treatment groups perform significantly fewer head bops compared to the control group (p<0.05). In trial 3, the vehicle performs a significantly higher amount of head bops compared to the groups that receive ethanol.
 |}
@@ Line 192: / Line 191: @@
 {| style="width: 100%;border-collapse: collapse;"
 |-
-|  style="border: 1pt solid black;vertical-align: top;"|''' [[Image:Draft_Tin_964552002-image5-c.png|600px]] '''
+|  style="border: 1pt solid black;vertical-align: top;"|
 [[Image:Draft_Tin_964552002-image5-c.png|600px]]
 '''Figure 7. Average number of C-shapes for post-treatment groups. '''Values represent means ± SEM. Each bar is representative of differing trials, significance is respective to trials. ANOVA Tukey HSD was run between treatments for each trial. This figure demonstrates the average number of C-shapes for each treatment group. Trials 2 and 3 produced a significantly higher number of C-shapes within the vehicle group compared to the control group (p<0.01). All trials demonstrated a higher number of C-shapes in the vehicle compared to the 3% post-treatment and 9% post-treatment groups (p<0.01).
 |}
@@ Line 202: / Line 201: @@
 |  style="border: 1pt solid black;vertical-align: top;width: 0%;"|
 [[Image:Draft_Tin_964552002-image1-c.png|center|600px]]
 '''Figure 8. Conditional Preference Test for post-treatment groups. '''Values represent means ± SEM. Each bar is representative of differing trials, significance is respective to trials. ANOVA Tukey HSD was run between treatments for each trial. This figure demonstrates planaria's dark and light preference for each treatment group. Trial 1 and Trial 3 showcase a heightened time in lightzone in the control group, compared to both the vehicle and post-treatment groups. There were no significant data within any trials.
 |}

← Older revision	Revision as of 15:17, 23 June 2025
(No difference)

← Older revision	Revision as of 18:57, 25 February 2025
(No difference)