The data met assumptions of normality and homogeneity of variances. For each marker within each region, unexposed controls from the respective time-points were first compared for possible differences due to batch variation of staining efficiency. When no differences were found (p>0.10), controls were pooled, and data were analysed by one-way ANOVA, and the respective alcohol-exposed group was compared to the pooled control group using Dunnett’s post-hoc test. This was true for all markers within the dentate gyrus, and BrdU, Ki67 and SOX2 in the SVZ. DCX-IR within the SVZ showed significant batch-to-batch variation. We approached this in two different ways. A widely used method to overcome batch variation is to normalize experimental values to control from the same batch, which allows for valid comparisons between batches (Walker, 2006). Following this approach, data from each batch were normalized to their respective controls, after which analysis proceeded as described above. To examine the robustness of this approach, we also analysed the data using a two-way ANOVA of raw, non-normalized optical densities, with time (0, 3, 7, 21 d) and treatment (alcohol or
