Fig. 2

The effect of DMF treatment on CUS-induced anxiety-like behaviours in the novelty suppressed feeding task (NSFT). A Task timeline and graphics. B In male rats, there were no group differences in the latency to feed in the lightened open field arena in the NSFT. C However, the latency to first approach the centre of the arena was increased with CUS and unchanged with DMF treatment. D Male in-cage feeding latency showed no group differences after the NSFT, E but CUS reduced in-cage food consumption, an effect unaltered by DMF treatment. F During the NSFT, the latency to feed in the lightened open field arena showed no group differences in female rats. G Whilst CUS increased the latency to first approach the centre of the arena, there was no effect of DMF. After the NSFT, there was no group differences in the female H in-cage feeding latency or I in-cage food consumption. The data are presented as mean ± SEM of N = 9–10 animals per group. *p < 0.05 and **p < 0.01 compared to vehicle. A one-way ANOVA followed by a Tukey or Games-Howell post-hoc test was used for all analyses