Table 2.

Mean c-Fos-positive neuron density

	Congenic		D2		ANOVA	post hoc
	Saline	Ethanol	Saline	Ethanol
Rostral SNr	0 ± 0	290 ± 83	1 ± 0	771 ± 62	H(3,40) = 27.4; p < 10−4	p = 9.6 × 10−3
Caudal SNr	2 ± 1	374 ± 87	4 ± 2	766 ± 38	H(3,40) = 25.5; p < 10−4	p = 1.2 × 10−2
Dorsomedial SNr	0 ± 0	616 ± 190	4 ± 3	1515 ± 118	H(3,40) = 25.0; p < 10−4	p = 1.5 × 10−2
Ventral pallidum	1 ± 1	285 ± 74	0 ± 0	818 ± 45	H(3,40) = 29.7; p < 10−4	p = 2.6 × 10−4
Rostromedial LGP	0 ± 0	385 ± 98	0 ± 0	996 ± 54	H(3,40) = 29.6; p < 10−4	p = 6.0 × 10−3
Subthalamic nucleus	0 ± 0	1256 ± 313	12 ± 10	2611 ± 130	H(3,40) = 25.2; p < 10−4	p = 1.9 × 10−3

The number of labeled cells/mm² ± SEM in six brain regions is shown. Densities of c-Fos-positive neurons in discrete brain regions. The densities of c-Fos-positive neurons were measured throughout the rostrocaudal extent of the six brain regions that displayed significant effects of strain in Table 1. Values represent the mean density of c-Fos-immunoreactive neurons ±SEM/mm². In each region, the results of a Kruskal–Wallis one-way ANOVA and the post hoc comparison between ethanol withdrawn congenic and background strain mice are indicated.