BW
Body weight of rats was increased obviously according with time [F (2, 22) =60.756, P < 0.01]; Time and group interaction factors (time*groups) were obviously significant [F (2, 22) =14.339, P < 0.01]. There were also obvious significance among groups [F (2, 22) =7.705, P = 0.003]. During the whole procedure including stress conditions and treatment period, body weight of three groups was growing all the time [F (2, 22) =46.717, P < 0.01; F (2, 22) =23.780, P < 0.01; F (2, 22) =62.456, P < 0.01, respectively]. When compared with the control group, body weight of post-treatment in the lily jujube group was significantly increased whereas it was increased without significance in the fluoxetine group [F(2,22) = 2.278, P = 0.045; F(2,22) = 2.278, P = 0.331, respectively] (See Fig. 2).
FST
Immobility time, swimming time and climbing time were homogeneous among pre-model animals by one-way ANOVA [F (2, 22) =1.016, P = 0.379; F (2, 22) =0.62, P = 0.548; F (2, 22) =0.418, P = 0.664, respectively]. During the whole procedure, three indexes in the FST were changed obviously according with time [F (2, 22) =19.228, P < 0.01; F (2, 22) =16.045, P < 0.01; F (2, 22) =25.766, P < 0.01, respectively]; Time and group interaction factors (time*groups) for immobility time and swimming time were significant while that of climbing time was not significant [F (2, 22) =3.807, P = 0.01; F (2, 22) =3.485, P = 0.017; F (2, 22) =1.031, P = 0.386, respectively]. After the CUMS procedure, immobility time, swimming time and climbing time were noticeably changed in model rats by pared-samples T test (t = -4.652, P < 0.05; t = -4.745, P < 0.05; t = 6.443, P < 0.05). Following antidepressant treatment for 4w, immobility time in the lily jujube group and fluoxetine group was significantly decreased [F (2, 22) =35.135, P < 0.01; F (2, 22) =7.090, P = 0.025, respectively]; swimming time in the two groups was significantly increased [F (2, 22) =48.107, P < 0.01; F (2, 22) =14.914, P = 0.025, respectively]; climbing time in the two groups was not significantly improved [F (2, 22) =41.659, P = 0.661; F (2, 22) =11.709, P = 0.991, respectively]. However, in the control group, no similar effect was found. After treatment for 4w, comparison of three indexes with the control group showed: immobility time in both the lily jujube group and the fluoxetine group was significantly decreased [F(2,22) = 10.266, P < 0.01; F(2,22) = 10.266, P < 0.01, respectively]; swimming time in both the lily jujube group and fluoxetine group was increased obviously [F(2,22) = 12.301, P <0.01; F(2,22) = 12.301, P <0.01, respectively]; climbing time in the two groups was also significantly different [F(2,22) = 5.929, P < 0.01; F(2,22) = 5.929, P <0.01, respectively] (See Fig. 3).
SCT
Before modeling, sucrose consumption was similar among the groups [F (2, 22) =0.105, P = 0.901]. During the whole procedure, the sucrose consumption was changed obviously according with the time [F (2, 22) =30.875, P < 0.01]; Time and group interaction factors (time*groups) were obviously significant [F (2, 22) =7.769, P < 0.01]. CUMS procedure significantly decreased sucrose consumption compared by pared-samples T test (t = 7.235, P < 0.01). Treatment with the ziziphi spinosae lily powder suspension and fluoxetine remarkably alleviated the decrease in sucrose consumption in CUMS model animals [F (2, 22) =20.311, P < 0.01; F (2, 22) =14.763, P < 0.01, respectively]. However, in the control group, no similar effect was found. When compared with the control group, sucrose consumption of post-treatment in both the lily jujube group and the fluoxetine group was significantly increased [F(2,22) = 14.451, P < 0.01; F(2,22) = 14.451, P < 0.01, respectively] (See Fig. 4).
OFT
Before modeling, the number of rearing, crossing and fecal granule was similar among the groups [F (2, 22) =0.607, P = 0.554; F (2, 22) =0.439, P = 0.650; F (2, 22) =2.063, P = 0.153, respectively].
Rearing movement during the whole procedure was changed obviously according with time [F (2, 22) =10.848, P < 0.01]. Time and group interaction factors (time*groups) were not obviously significant [F (2, 22) =3.24, P = 0.21]. CUMS procedure decreased rearing movement significantly (t = 3.733, P < 0.01). Treatment with the ziziphi spinosae lily powder suspension remarkably alleviated the decrease in rearing movement in CUMS model animals [F (2, 22) =4.787, P = 0.042]. However, in the fluoxetine group and control group, no similar effect was found [F (2, 22) =2.977, P = 0.349; F (2, 22) =19.562, P = 1]. When compared with the control group, rearing movement of post-treatment in the lily jujube group was significantly increased whereas it was not obviously increased in the fluoxetine group [F(2,22) = 5.583, P < 0.01; F(2,22) = 5.583, P = 0.51, respectively] (See Fig. 5).
Crossing movement during the whole procedure was also changed obviously according with time [F (2, 22) =18.143, P < 0.01]. But, time and group interaction factors (time*groups) were not obviously significant [F (2, 22) =0.536, P = 0.71]. CUMS procedure decreased crossing movement significantly (t = 3.913, P < 0.01). However, none of the groups was obviously elevated after the treatment procedure (See Fig. 5). When compared with the control group, crossing movement of post-treatment in both the lily jujube group and the fluoxetine group was increased without significance [F(2,22) = 2.092, P = 0.06; F(2,22) = 2.092, P = 0.228, respectively] (See Fig. 5).
The number of fecal granule during the whole procedure was changed obviously according with time [F (2, 22) =10.691, P < 0.01]. Time and group interaction factors (time*groups) were obviously significant [F (2, 22) =6.347, P < 0.01]. CUMS procedure increased the number of fecal granule significantly compared by pared-samples T test (t = -4.227, P < 0.05). Treatment with the ziziphi spinosae lily powder suspension and fluoxetine remarkably alleviated the increase of fecal granule in CUMS model animals [F (2, 22) =13.532, P = 0.048; F (2, 22) =9.488, P < 0.01, respectively]. However, in the control group, no similar effect was found. When compared with the control group, the number of fecal granule of post-treatment in both the lily jujube group and the fluoxetine group was decreased significantly [F(2,22) = 14.413, P P < 0.01; F(2,22) =14.413, P P < 0.01, respectively] (See Fig. 5).
Serum 5-HT and brain 5-HIAA
Compared with the control group, serum 5-HT of both the lily jujube group and the fluoxetine group were increased significantly [F (2, 22) =3.356, P = 0.032; F (2, 22) =3.356, P = 0.041, respectively] (See Fig. 6). There was similar result observed with brain 5-HIAA determination in both the lily jujube group and the fluoxetine group [F (2, 22) =3.198, P = 0.042; F (2, 22) =3.198, P = 0.038, respectively].