目的 采用路徑分析數(shù)學(xué)模型定量表征逍遙散功效藥隊(duì)（健脾藥隊(duì)、疏肝藥隊(duì)）對(duì)整方抗抑郁藥效的貢獻(xiàn)。方法 大鼠適應(yīng)性飼養(yǎng)1周后，基于行為學(xué)數(shù)據(jù)以及體質(zhì)量，隨機(jī)分為對(duì)照組、模型組、疏肝（25 g·kg^-1，柴胡、薄荷、白芍、當(dāng)歸）組、健脾（21.3 g·kg^-1，白術(shù)、茯苓、生姜、甘草）組、逍遙散（46.3 g·kg^-1，柴胡、當(dāng)歸、白芍、白術(shù)、茯苓、甘草、薄荷、生姜質(zhì)量比為6∶6∶6∶6∶6∶3∶2∶2）組，制備慢性溫和不可預(yù)知應(yīng)激（CUMS）抑郁大鼠模型同時(shí)給藥。對(duì)照組和模型組給予等量生理鹽水，在給藥1 h后開始造模，每天給藥1次，持續(xù)28 d。在第0、1、2、3、4周分別對(duì)所有動(dòng)物進(jìn)行稱體質(zhì)量、糖水偏愛實(shí)驗(yàn)；在造模結(jié)束后對(duì)大鼠進(jìn)行強(qiáng)迫游泳和水迷宮行為學(xué)測(cè)試。應(yīng)用IBM SPSS Statistics 26軟件，處理、分析行為學(xué)數(shù)據(jù)，并繪制路徑分析效果圖。結(jié)果 造模第4周，模型組大鼠體質(zhì)量、糖水偏愛率、水迷宮穿越平臺(tái)次數(shù)顯著低于對(duì)照組（P＜0.05），強(qiáng)迫游泳不動(dòng)時(shí)間顯著高于對(duì)照組（P＜0.05）。與模型組比較，各給藥組體質(zhì)量、穿越平臺(tái)次數(shù)顯著增加（P＜0.05、0.01） ，其中逍遙散組效果最優(yōu)，健脾組效果次之，最后為疏肝組；各給藥組糖水偏愛率顯著增加（P＜ 0.01） ，逍遙散的作用優(yōu)于健脾組和疏肝組，與對(duì)照組最為接近；各給藥組不動(dòng)時(shí)間顯著減少（P＜ 0.05、0.01），健脾的效果優(yōu)于逍遙散和疏肝組。路徑分析結(jié)果顯示，體質(zhì)量：疏肝藥隊(duì)對(duì)整方的作用是促進(jìn)作用，但健脾藥隊(duì)具有抑制作用，疏肝藥隊(duì)的正向作用強(qiáng)于健脾藥隊(duì)的抑制作用；水迷宮實(shí)驗(yàn)：疏肝藥隊(duì)和健脾藥隊(duì)均發(fā)揮正向促進(jìn)作用；糖水偏愛率：健脾藥隊(duì)對(duì)整方的貢獻(xiàn)是正向促進(jìn)作用，但疏肝藥隊(duì)是抑制作用，健脾藥隊(duì)的正向促進(jìn)作用強(qiáng)于疏肝藥隊(duì)的抑制作用；強(qiáng)迫游泳：健脾藥隊(duì)的作用是正向促進(jìn)的，但疏肝藥隊(duì)是抑制作用，疏肝的抑制作用強(qiáng)于健脾的正向作用。結(jié)論 與疏肝藥隊(duì)相比，健脾藥隊(duì)能更好地改善抑郁癥行為學(xué)指標(biāo)；路徑分析模型可直觀反映各藥隊(duì)抗抑郁作用的強(qiáng)弱，又能定量表征各藥隊(duì)對(duì)整方抗抑郁作用的貢獻(xiàn)。

Objectives To explore the application of path analysis in the study of the compatibility of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) prescriptions, we used the path analysis mathematical model to quantitatively characterize the contributions of Xiaoyaosan's efficacy groups, i.e. the antidepressant efficacy of the Shugan group and the Jianpi group in the whole prescription. Methods After one week of adaptive feeding, the rats were randomly divided into control group, model group, Shugan group (25 g·kg^-1), Jianpi group (21.3 g·kg^-1) group, and Xiaoyaosan (46.3 g·kg^-1) group based on behavioral data and body weight. Rats in control group and the model group were given the same amount of normal saline. The model was established 1 h later. The model was administered once a day for 28 d. At the 0, 1, 2, 3 and 4 weeks, all animals were tested for weight and sugar preference. Forced swimming and water maze behavior tests were performed on the rats after modeling. Finally, the IBM SPSS Statistics 26 software was used to proceed and analyze the behavioral data. Besides, a path analysis effect diagram was drawn. Results At the 4th week of modeling, the body weight, sugar preference rate and times of water maze crossing platform in model group were significantly lower than those in control group (P<0.05), while the immobility time of forced swimming was significantly higher than that in control group (P<0.05). Compared with model group, body weight and times of crossing platform in each administration group were significantly increased (P<0.05, 0.01). Xiaoyaosan group exhibited the best effect, followed by Jianpi group, and finally was Shugan group. The sugar preference rate of each administration group increased significantly (P<0.01), and the effect of Xiaoyaosan was stronger than that of Jianpi group and Shugan group, which was closest to the control group. The immobile time of each administration group was significantly decreased (P<0.05, 0.01). The results of path analysis showed that body weight: the effect of Shugan group on the whole formula was promoting, but the effect of Jianpi group was inhibiting. The positive effect of Shugan group was stronger than that of Jianpi group. Water maze test: both Shugan group and Jianpi group played a positive role in promoting the whole formula; Sugar preference rate: the contribution of Jianpi group to the whole formula was positive promoting effect, but that of Shugan drug team was inhibitory effect. The positive promoting effect of Jianpi group was greater than that of Shugan group. Forced swimming: in the test, the effect of Jianpi was positively promoting, but the effect of Shugan was inhibitory, and the inhibitory effect of Shugan was stronger than the positive effect of Jianpi. Conclusions Compared with Shugan group, the Jianpi group could improve the behavioral indicators of depression stronger. The path analysis model can not only reflect intuitively the efficacies of efficacy groups, but also characteristic quantitatively the contributions of efficacy groups to the antidepressant effect of Xiaoyaosan.

R285.5

國(guó)家自然科學(xué)基金青年項(xiàng)目(81803962);山西省留學(xué)回國(guó)人員科技活動(dòng)擇優(yōu)資助項(xiàng)目(20200013)