Three-month-old TgCRND8 mice differ from NTg in their homeostatic response to total sleep deprivation.

<p>Normalized NREM sleep power spectrums from 0.125–40 Hz and quantification of NREM delta power (0.5–4.5 Hz) <b>(A)</b>, time spent awake <b>(B)</b>, time spent in NREM sleep <b>(C),</b> and time spent in REM sleep <b>(D)</b> under baseline and rebound conditions in 3-month-old NTg (n = 7) and TgCRND8 mice (n = 9). Total sleep deprivation (TSD) was performed for 6 hours, beginning at the onset of the light phase. The rebound period corresponds to the 2-hour period immediately following TSD. (<b>A)</b> Both TgCRND8 and NTg mice show a significant shift towards higher NREM delta power during the rebound period in comparison to baseline. Interestingly, the NREM delta power rebound response was blunted in TgCRND8 mice, with an 18% and 27% increase between baseline and rebound in TgCRND8 and NTg, respectively. (<b>B)</b> TgCRND8 show a significant decrease in time spent awake during the rebound period in comparison to baseline. No significant change in time spent awake during the rebound period in comparison to the baseline period was observed in NTg, and this response did not differ significantly from TgCRND8. (<b>C)</b> TgCRND8 show a significant increase in time spent in NREM sleep during the rebound period in comparison to baseline. No significant change in time spent in NREM sleep during the rebound period in comparison to the baseline was observed in NTg, and this response did not differ significantly from that observed in TgCRND8. (<b>D)</b> TgCRND8 show a significant increase in time spent in REM sleep during the rebound period in comparison to baseline. No significant change in time spent in REM sleep during the rebound period in comparison to the baseline period in NTg, and this response differed significantly from that observed in TgCRND8. Time spent in REM sleep during the rebound period was significantly greater in TgCRND8 in comparison to NTg. Error bars represent SEM. Mixed design two-way ANOVAs followed by simple effects analysis or Tukey’s post hoc where appropriate, * <i>P</i><0.05, ** <i>P</i><0.01, *** <i>P</i><0.001.