Table 2

Full statistical report for electrophysiological passive and active properties of medium spiny neurons in the core and shell of nucleus accumbens of naive and rewarded animals

	Effects	F, df, p	Post hoc Comparison	t/F, df, p
Figure 2
2B, resting membrane potential	Subregion (no main effect)^a	F_(1,125) = 1.90, p = 0.17	-	-
2C, input resistance	Subregion (main effect)^a	F_(1,125) = 32.2, p < 0.0001	Naive: core vs shell^c Rewarded: core vs shell^c	t₍₁₂₅₎ = 3.067, p = 0.0053 t₍₁₂₅₎ = 5.232, p < 0.0001
2D, cell capacitance	Subregion (main effect)^a	F_(1,125) = 64.6, p < 0.0001	Naive: core vs shell^c Rewarded: core vs shell^c	t₍₁₂₅₎ = 5.661, p < 0.0001 t₍₁₂₅₎ = 5.789, p < 0.0001
Figure 3
3C, voltage/current curve Hyperpolarizing: −500–0 pA Depolarizing: 0–100 pA	Subregion (main effect)^b Current injection (main effect)^b Subregion × current injection (interaction)^b Subregion (main effect)^b Current injection (main effect)^b Subregion × current injection (interaction)^b	F_(1,1596) = 224, p = 1.48 × 10⁻⁴⁷ F_(20,1596) = 109, p = 1.02 × 10⁻²⁸¹ F_(20,1793) = 1.68, p = 0.03 F_(1,375) = 86.8, p = 1.06 × 10⁻¹⁸ F_(4,375) = 142, p = 9.26 × 10⁻⁷⁴ F_(4,375) = 11.7, p = 6.17 × 10⁻⁹	Naive: core vs shell^b Rewarded: core vs shell^d Naive: core vs shell^b Rewarded: core vs shell^d	F_(1,504) = 55.8, p = 3.61 × 10⁻¹³ F_(1,1092) = 227, p = 8.66 × 10⁻⁴⁷ F_(1,117) = 40.4, p = 4.11 × 10⁻⁹ F_(1,258) = 47.3, p = 4.65 × 10⁻¹¹
3E, sag ratio	Subregion (main effect)^a	F_(1,76) = 47.6, p < 0.0001	Naive: core vs shell^c Rewarded: core vs shell^c	t₍₇₆₎ = 4.32, p < 0.0001 t₍₇₆₎ = 5.86, p < 0.0001
Figure 4
4C, number of spikes	Subregion (main effect)^b Current injection (main effect)^b Subregion × current injection (interaction)^b	F_(1,1793) = 137, p = 1.34 × 10⁻³⁰ F_(14,1793) = 89.4, p = 2.17 × 10⁻¹⁹⁴ F_(14,1793) = 2.55, p = 0.001	Naive: core vs shell^b Rewarded: core vs shell^d	F_(1,706) = 72.8, p = 8.57 × 10⁻¹⁷ F_(1,1087) = 66.6, p = 8.93 × 10⁻¹⁶
4D, firing frequency	Subregion (main effect)^b Current injection (main effect)^b Group (main effect)^b Subregion × current injection (interaction)^b	F_(1,1793) = 162, p = 9.17 × 10⁻³⁶ F_(14,1793) = 97.7, p = 8.23 × 10⁻²⁰⁹ F_(1,1793) = 4.09, p = 0.043 F_(14,1793) = 2.94, p = 0.0002	Naive: core vs shell^b Rewarded: core vs shell^d Core: Naive vs rewarded^d	F_(1,706) = 81.7, p = 1.48 × 10⁻¹⁸ F_(1,1087) = 84.1, p = 2.25 × 10⁻¹⁹ F_(1,1097) = 7.38, p = 0.007
Figure 5
5C, current to threshold	Subregion (main effect)^a	F_(1,117) = 23.6, p < 0.0001	Naive: core vs shell^c Rewarded: core vs shell^c	t₍₁₁₇₎ = 2.73, p = 0.014 t₍₁₁₇₎ = 4.32, p < 0.0001
5D, threshold potential	Subregion (main effect)^a	F_(1,117) = 13.3, p = 0.0004	Naive: core vs shell^c Rewarded: core vs shell^c	t₍₁₁₇₎ = 2.37, p = 0.038 t₍₁₁₇₎ = 2.86, p = 0.01
Table 1 (not in figure)
Δ RMP/AP threshold	Subregion (main effect)^a	F_(1,117) = 7.59, p = 0.0068	Naive: core vs shell^c Rewarded: core vs shell^c	t₍₁₁₇₎ = 2.22, p = 0.056 t₍₁₁₇₎ = 1.64, p = 0.20
AP amplitude	Subregion (main effect)^a	F_(1,117) = 5.0, p = 0.028	Naive: core vs shell^c Rewarded: core vs shell^c	t₍₁₁₇₎ = 1.23, p = 0.39 t₍₁₁₇₎ = 2.01, p = 0.090
Δ RMP/AP amplitude	Subregion (main effect)^a	F_(1,117) = 6.07, p = 0.015	Naive: core vs shell^c Rewarded: core vs shell^c	t₍₁₁₇₎ = 1.00, p = 0.53 t₍₁₁₇₎ = 2.64, p = 0.018
Δ AP threshold/AP amplitude	Subregion (main effect)^a	F_(1,117) = 12.7, p = 0.0005	Naive: core vs shell^c Rewarded: core vs shell^c	t₍₁₁₇₎ = 2.20, p = 0.059 t₍₁₁₇₎ = 2.94, p = 0.0078
AP halfwidth	Subregion (no main effect)^a	F_(1,117) = 0.96, p = 0.33	-	-

Table is organized by figures and lists analyses performed, main effects and interactions, as well as post hoc and planned comparisons for group and subregion effects.
↵a Two-way ANOVA
↵b Mixed-effects model
↵c Sidak’s
↵d Planned comparison