Skip to main content
. 2017 Feb 8;8(2):310–319. doi: 10.1021/acschemneuro.6b00300

Figure 4.

Figure 4

Peak [DA]o evoked by same-site and multiple-site sampling in dStr. (A) Average increases in [DA]o evoked by pulse-train eStim (30 pulses, 10 Hz) from 3–4 stable records per site with repetitive same-site stimulation at 10 min intervals (n = 7 stimulations in slices from 2 mice) or from multiple-site recording (n = 15 stimulations in slices from 4 mice). (B) Average increases in [DA]o evoked by pulse-train oStim (30 pulses, 10 Hz) from the last 3 reliably detectable responses with repetitive same-site stimulation (n = 13 stimulations in slices from 4 mice) or from multiple-site recording (n = 23 sites in slices from 4 mice). (C) Comparison of peak [DA]o evoked by multiple-site recording in HET/HET dStr with eStim (from panel A) and oStim (from panel B). (D) Summary of the data illustrated in panels A–C, showing comparisons of peak evoked [DA]o among various conditions. The multiple-site recording protocol allowed consistent and reliable control data to be obtained with oStim, whereas same-site recording did not. Significantly higher release was also seen with eStim than oStim (see text). Data are means ± SEM, and comparisons were made using a two-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s post hoc tests (*p < 0.05; ***p < 0.001).