Analysis of Electromyographic Features of the MitoPark Mouse Forearm Restricted; Files Only
Lapeza, Elijah (Spring 2025)
Abstract
The characteristic locomotor disturbances of Parkinson's disease (PD) include shuffling gait, short steps, and low walking velocity. In this study, we investigated features of walking in the transgenic MitoPark mouse model for PD. We assessed gait and electromyographic (EMG) patterns of the biceps and triceps during voluntary, unimpeded locomotion. When compared to control mice, MitoPark mice demonstrated shorter strides and shorter EMG bursts in the biceps and lower amplitude bursts in the triceps.
Table of Contents
1.
Introduction............................................................................................................1
1.1
Parkinson’s Disease in Humans..............................................................................1
1.2
Mouse Models for PD.............................................................................................2
1.2.1
6-OHDA............................................................................................................2
1.2.2
MitoPark..........................................................................................................2
2.
Materials and Methods.........................................................................................3
2.1
Animals..................................................................................................................3
2.2
Surgery..................................................................................................................3
2.3
Open-Field Setup...................................................................................................5
2.4
Recordings.............................................................................................................5
2.5
Video Tracing.........................................................................................................6
2.6
Gait Tracking..........................................................................................................7
2.7
EMG Preprocessing................................................................................................8
2.8
Evaluation of EMG Quality.....................................................................................9
2.9
Analysis Methods...................................................................................................10
3.
Results....................................................................................................................13
3.1
Gait.........................................................................................................................13
3.1.1
Time Between Steps.........................................................................................13
3.1.2
MitoPark Mouse Takes Fewer, Shorter Steps..................................................14
3.1.3
The MP Mouse Moves Slower than the WT Mouse........................................15
3.2
EMG Analysis.........................................................................................................16
3.2.1
Representative EMG for Biceps and Triceps Show Variations in Noise...........16
3.2.2
The MP EMG Burst is Shorter than WT Bursts for Biceps but Not Triceps.....20
3.2.3
MP Peak Burst Magnitude is Lower Than WT Peak Burst Magnitude............21
3.2.4
Late Peak Times for MP Bursts.......................................................................22
4.
Discussion.............................................................................................................24
4.1
Triceps Differ in Amplitude and Peak Time but Not Duration..............................24
4.2
Biceps Differ in Amplitude, Peak Time, and Duration...........................................24
4.3
Relation to Gait.....................................................................................................24
4.4
Limitations............................................................................................................25
4.5
Challenges.............................................................................................................25
4.6
Future Directions...................................................................................................26
5.
References.............................................................................................................27
About this Honors Thesis
School | |
---|---|
Department | |
Degree | |
Submission | |
Language |
|
Research Field | |
Parola chiave | |
Committee Chair / Thesis Advisor | |
Committee Members |

Primary PDF
Thumbnail | Title | Date Uploaded | Actions |
---|---|---|---|
![]() |
File download under embargo until 22 May 2027 | 2025-04-08 09:22:34 -0400 | File download under embargo until 22 May 2027 |
Supplemental Files
Thumbnail | Title | Date Uploaded | Actions |
---|