. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2011 Oct 5.

Published in final edited form as: Physiol Behav. 2010 Jun 17;101(3):331–343. doi: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2010.06.003

Table 2.

Analysis of the daily sugar solution intakes in Fig. 1. We show F-ratios (df) from two-way ANOVAs, performed separately on each sugar type and strain.

		Source of variation
Sugar type	Strain	Sugar solution	Time	Interaction
Sucrose	AKR	27.0 (2,819) ^*	9.5 (39,819) ^*	5.1 (78,819) ^*
	129P3	231.4 (2,819) ^*	4.9 (39,819) ^*	2.9 (78,819) ^*
	B6	530.0 (2,819) ^*	4.9 (39,819) ^*	2.9 (78,819) ^*
	FVB	532.7 (2,819) ^*	3.6 (39,819) ^*	1.8 (78,819) ^*
Fructose	AKR	3.5 (2,819) ^*	7.2 (39,819) ^*	1.7 (78,819) ^*
	129P3	42.9 (2,780) ^*	14.9 (39,780) ^*	6.9 (78,780) ^*
	B6	52.9 (2,819) ^*	5.3 (39,819) ^*	1.8 (78,819) ^*
	FVB	156.8 (2,819) ^*	3.1 (39,819) ^*	1.1 (78,819)

P ≤ 0.05