Effect of myricetin on behavioral paradigms of anxiety

Figures & data

Table 1.  Effect of myricetin on time spent in open arms, entries in open and closed arms, and head dips in elevated plus maze.

Group no.	Treatment (mg/kg)	Elevated plus maze
		Time spent in open arm (s)	Entries in open arm	Entries in closed arm	Number of head dips
1	Control	31.77 ± 6.23	4.28 ± 1.15	5.85 ± 1.24	5 ± 0.75
2	Diazepam (1)	76.2 ± 8.58*	8.8 ± 1.56	13.6 ± 1.93*	11.2 ± 2.35
3	Myricetin (10)	139.2 ± 5.52*	10.8 ± 0.37*	6.8 ± 1.20	14.2 ± 2.05*
4	Myricetin (30)	173.4 ± 2.87*	13.6 ± 1.91*	9.0 ± 1.70	14.0 ± 1.97*
5	Myricetin (100)	110.7 ± 18.11*	10.0 ± 1.86*	6.33 ± 0.71	10.17 ± 2.0
	F4,20	31.48	5.28	5.04	3.85

n = 5. The observations are mean ± SEM. *p < 0.05, as compared to vehicle (ANOVA followed by Dunnett’s test).

Table 2.  Effect of myricetin on m-CPP induced anxiety in elevated plus maze apparatus.

Group no.	Treatment (mg/kg)	Elevated plus maze
		Time spent in open arm (s)	Entries in open arm	Entries in closed arm	Number of head dips
1	Control (m-CPP)	2.8 ± 0.33	0.4 ± 0.24	6.0 ± 1.14	0 ± 0
2	Myricetin (10) + m-CPP (1)	2.4 ± 0.4	0.2 ± 0.2	2.2 ± 0.73*	0 ± 0
3	Myricetin (30) + m-CPP (1)	13.2 ± 3.17	1.8 ± 0.86	2.2 ± 0.96*	1.2 ± 0.73
4	Myricetin (100) + m-CPP (1)	40.6 ± 7.35*	3.0 ± 0.83*	4.6 ± 1.03	2.0 ± 0.31*
	F3,16	15.59	4.50	3.70	6.08

n = 5. The observations are mean ± SEM. *p < 0.05, as compared to vehicle (ANOVA followed by Dunnett’s test).

Figure 1.  Effect of myricetin on time spent in lit zone and number of transitions in light/dark apparatus. Group 1 = control, group 2 = diazepam (1), group 3 = myricetin (10), group 4 = myricetin (30), group 5 = myricetin (100) (n = 5). The observations are mean ± SEM. *p < 0.05, as compared to vehicle (ANOVA followed by Dunnett’s test).

Figure 2.  Effect of myricetin on locomotion and rearing in open field apparatus. Group 1 = control, group 2 = diazepam (1), group 3 = myricetin (10), group 4 = myricetin (30), group 5 = myricetin (100) (n = 5). The observations are mean ± SEM. *p < 0.05, as compared to vehicle (ANOVA followed by Dunnett’s test).

Figure 3.  Effect of myricetin on number of head pokings in hole board apparatus. Group 1 = control, group 2 = diazepam (1), group 3 = myricetin (10), group 4 = myricetin (30), group 5 = myricetin (100) (n = 5). The observations are mean ± SEM. *p < 0.05, as compared to vehicle (ANOVA followed by Dunnett’s test).

Figure 4.  Effect of myricetin on lithium sulfate (200 mg/kg) induced head twitches in rats. Group 1 = control, group 2 = myricetin (30), group 3 = myricetin (100) (n = 5). The observations are mean ± SEM. *p < 0.05, as compared to vehicle (ANOVA followed by Dunnett’s test).

Figure 5.  Effect of myricetin (10 μg/mL) on cumulative concentration response curve (CCRC) of 5-HT using rat fundus. (n = 5). 1 = 3.77, 2 = 4.12, 3 = 4.41, 4 = 4.71, 5 = 5.01, 6 = 5.31. The observations are mean ± SEM. *p < 0.05, as compared to vehicle (ANOVA followed by Dunnett’s test).