Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2026 Jul 1.
Published in final edited form as: Neuroscience. 2026 Jun 9;610:147–162. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2026.06.002

Fig. 7. GFAP-labeling in the hippocampus from Sal female and male rats following CIS.

Fig. 7.

a-b, d-e. Representative micrographs showing GFAP labeling in the CA1 of Sal US female (a), Sal CIS female (b), Sal US Male (d), and Sal CIS male (e) rats. c. CA2/3a: Sal CIS females compared to Sal US females had higher GFAP densities in SP. f. CA2/3a: Sal CIS males compared to Sal US males had higher GFAP densities in SO. g-h, j-k. Representative micrographs showing GFAP labeling in the CA2/3a of Sal US female (g), Sal CIS female (h), Sal US male (j), and Sal CIS male (k) rats. i. DG: Sal CIS females and males compared to their unstressed counterparts had lower GFAP densities in the SGL, IGL, and CH Moreover, Sal CIS males compared to Sal US males had decreased GFAP densities in the GCL. Data are expressed as mean +/− SEM, N = 5–6 rats/grp. *p < 0.05, **p<0.01, ***p<0.001, ****p<0.0001. Scale Bars: a-d & g-j, 100 microns