Long-Term Shaking Intervention During Aging in SAMP10 Mice: Longitudinal Behavioral Trajectories and Endpoint Hippocampal–Amygdalar Histology

Published: 28 August 2026| Version 3 | DOI: 10.17632/d3s8k9wp5h.3
Contributor:
Runhong Yao

Description

Overview This dataset contains the complete behavioral, histological, and statistical results from a longitudinal study investigating long-term shaking exercise effects on behavioral adaptation and hippocampal–amygdalar serotonergic (5-HT1A) and GABAergic (GABAA) receptor-associated immunoreactivity in aging SAMP10 mice. Study Design: Randomized parallel-group comparison Animals: Male SAMP10 mice (n = 28 behavioral; n = 12 histological) Intervention: 25 weeks of shaking exercise (150 movements/min, 50-mm distance, 30 min/day, 3 days/week) vs. control conditions Assessment Points: 3 longitudinal behavioral timepoints; endpoint histological analysis Table 1: Behavioral Outcomes Across Three Assessments Content: Longitudinal behavioral data from all 28 mice (14 Shaking, 14 Control) at three assessment timepoints. Variables: TST immobility (s): Tail Suspension Test immobility duration in seconds, measuring depressive-like behavior EPM open-arm time (s): Elevated Plus Maze time spent in open arms, measuring anxiety-related behavior EPM closed-arm time (s): Time spent in closed arms EPM open-arm entries: Number of entries into open arms EPM closed-arm entries: Number of entries into closed arms Table 2: Primary Continuous DAB Contrast Analysis Content: Animal-level group means for continuous locally background-corrected DAB (3,3′-diaminobenzidine) signal, the primary histological endpoint. Variables: Mean DAB Contrast (Shaking/Control): Animal-level mean of locally background-corrected DAB signal Difference: Shaking − Control (unstandardized group difference) Hedges' g: Bias-corrected effect-size estimate 95% CI: Confidence interval from 20,000 bootstrap resamples (seed 20260728) Exact P: Two-sided permutation p-value (924 allocations tested) Holm q: Holm multiplicity-adjusted p-value within the DAB contrast family (10 comparisons) Table 3: Categorical Sensitivity Analysis Content: Animal-level categorical classification results comparing strict and inclusive positivity criteria. Interpretation Tiers: Variables: Strict Positivity Fraction: Proportion of profiles meeting strict immunohistochemical criteria Inclusive Positivity Fraction: Includes equivocal profiles in positive category Difference: Strict/Inclusive Shaking − Control Exact P: Two-sided permutation p-value (exploratory, not multiplicity-adjusted) Guardrail: Quality-control note for each module Supplementary Table S1: Morphological Quality-Control Analysis (Source-Unidentified Fraction) Content: Animal-level analysis of unidentified/unresolved morphology as a morphology-based quality-control endpoint. Supplementary Table S2: Neurite-Like Object Analysis (Annotation-Derived Counts) Content: Descriptive analysis of axon-like and dendrite-like annotations derived from automated image segmentation.

Files

Institutions

Categories

Neuroscience

Licence