@phdthesis{Sareen2011,
  author    = {Sareen, Preeti},
  title     = {Visual attention in Drosophila melanogaster},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-69616},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t W{\"u}rzburg},
  year      = {2011},
  abstract  = {There is such vast amount of visual information in our surroundings at any time that filtering out the important information for further processing is a basic requirement for any visual system. This is accomplished by deploying attention to focus on one source of sensory inputs to the exclusion of others (Luck and Mangun 2009). Attention has been studied extensively in humans and non human primates (NHPs). In Drosophila, visual attention was first demonstrated in 1980 (Wolf and Heisenberg 1980) but this field remained largely unexplored until recently. Lately, however, studies have emerged that hypothesize the role of attention in several behaviors but do not specify the characteristic properties of attention. So, the aim of this research was to characterize the phenomenon of visual attention in wild-type Drosophila, including both externally cued and covert attention using tethered flight at a torque meter. Development of systematic quantifiable behavioral tests was a key aspect for this which was not only important for analyzing the behavior of a population of wild-type flies but also for comparing the wild-type flies with mutant flies. The latter would help understand the molecular, genetic, and neuronal bases of attention. Since Drosophila provides handy genetic tools, a model of attention in Drosophila will serve to the greater questions about the neuronal circuitry and mechanisms involved which might be analogous to those in primates. Such a model might later be used in research involving disorders of attention. Attention can be guided to a certain location in the visual field by the use of external cues. Here, using visual cues the attention of the fly was directed to one or the other of the two visual half-fields. A simple yet robust paradigm was designed with which the results were easily quantifiable. This paradigm helped discover several interesting properties of the cued attention, the most substantial one being that this kind of external guidance of attention is restricted to the lower part of the fly's visual field. The guiding cue had an after-effect, i.e. it could occur at least up to 2 seconds before the test and still bias it. The cue could also be spatially separated from the test by at least 20° and yet attract the attention although the extent of the focus of attention (FoA) was smaller than one lower visual half-field. These observations excluded the possibility of any kind of interference between the test and the cue stimuli. Another interesting observation was the essentiality of continuous visibility of the test stimulus but not the cue for effective cuing. When the contrast of the visual scene was inverted, differences in response frequencies and cuing effects were observed. Syndirectional yaw torque responses became more frequent than the antidirectional responses and cuing was no longer effective in the lower visual field with inverted contrast. Interestingly, the test stimulus with simultaneous displacement of two stripes not only effectuated a phasic yaw torque response but also a landing response. A 50 landing response was produced in more than half of the cases whenever a yaw torque response was produced. Elucidation of the neuronal correlates of the cued attention was commenced. Pilot experiments with hydroxyurea (HU) treated flies showed that mushroom bodies were not required for the kind of guidance of attention tested in this study. Dopamine mutants were also tested for the guidance of attention in the lower visual field. Surprisingly, TH-Gal4/UAS-shits1 flies flew like wild-type flies and also showed normal optomotor response during the initial calibration phase of the experiment but did not show any phasic yaw torque or landing response at 18 °C, 25 °C or 30 °C. dumb2 flies that have almost no D1 dopamine receptor dDA1 expression in the mushroom bodies and the central complex (Kim et al. 2007) were also tested and like THGal4/ UAS-shits1 flies did not show any phasic yaw torque or landing response. Since the dopamine mutants did not show the basic yaw torque response for the test the role of dopamine in attention could not be deduced. A different paradigm would be needed to test these mutants. Not only can attention be guided through external cues, it can also be shifted endogenously (covert attention). Experiments with the windows having oscillating stripes nicely demonstrated the phenomenon of covert attention due to the production of a characteristic yaw torque pattern by the flies. However, the results were not easily quantifiable and reproducible thereby calling for a more systematic approach. Experiments with simultaneous opposing displacements of two stripes provide a promising avenue as the results from these experiments showed that the flies had a higher tendency to deliver one type of response than when the responses would be produced stochastically suggesting that attention increased this tendency. Further experiments and analysis of such experiments could shed more light on the mechanisms of covert attention in flies.},
  subject      = {Visuelle Aufmerksamkeit},
  language  = {en}
}
@phdthesis{Batsching2016,
  author    = {Batsching, Sophie Johanna},
  title     = {Behavior under uncontrollable stress in \(Drosophila\) \(melanogaster\) - Learned Helplessness revisited},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-145416},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t W{\"u}rzburg},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {In order to select the appropriate behavior, it is important to choose the right behavior at the right time out of many options. It still remains unclear nowadays how exactly this is managed. To address this question, I expose flies (Drosophila melanogaster) to uncontrollable stress to study their behavior under restrictive circumstances by using the so-called shock box. Exposing animals to uncontrollable stress may have an impact on subsequent behavior and can last for some time. The animal learns that whatever it does, it cannot change the situation and therefore can develop something called learned helplessness. The term was first conceptualized by two American psychologists Maier and Seligman (1967), who discovered this phenomenon while doing experiments with dogs. They found out that dogs which are exposed to inescapable stress, later fail in a learning task ('shuttle box'). In this work the walking patterns of three different types of experimental flies, walking in a small dark chamber, were evaluated. Using the triadic design (Seligman and Maier, 1967), flies were either exposed to electric shock randomly (yoked), could turn it off by being active (master) or did not receive punishment at all (control). Master flies were shocked whenever they sat for more than 0.9 seconds. At the same time yoked flies received a shock as well independent of what they were doing, to ensure the same amount of shocks received and to create random punishment pattern for the yoked group. With this so-called no-idleness paradigm flies were conditioned either 10 minutes, which resulted in a short (3 minutes) after-effect, or 20 minutes that turned out to be more stable (10 minutes). In a second part, the behavior during the 20 minute conditioning and a 10 minutes post-test was described in detail. Female flies of the yoked group developed lower activity levels, longer pauses and walked more slowly than master and control flies during conditioning. In the time after the shocks while still in the box, the yoked flies also reduced the frequency and duration of walking bouts as well as their walking speed. Additionally, they took more time to resume walking after the onset of an electric shock than master flies (escape latency) and turned out to make less pauses lasting between 1-1.5 seconds which supports the finding concerning the escape latency. Male flies, tested under the same conditions, showed a slightly weaker after-effect regarding the difference between master and yoked during conditioning and post-test when compared to female flies. When comparing the 20 minutes conditioning with subsequent 10 minutes test in the heat and the shock box in parallel, one finds the same effect: Flies which do not have control over the shocks, lower their activity, make less but longer pauses and walk more slowly than their respective master flies. Despite the similar effect of heat and shock on the flies, some differences between the devices occurred, which can partly be explained by different humidity conditions as well as by different surfaces within the chambers. When the control over the shocks is given back to the yoked flies, it takes them about seven minutes to realize it. One could also show that dopamine levels in the brain were reduced in comparison to flies which did not receive shocks. Yoked flies also were impaired in a place learning task (place learning) and their reaction to light (exit from the box towards the light) directly after conditioning. After characterizing the walking behavior in the chambers, the study deals with the question whether the effects observed in the chambers transfer to different environments. In free walk they only differed from flies which did not receive electric shocks and no effect of uncontrollability was transferred to courtship behavior. Handling as the cause could be excluded. Since handling could be exclude to be the cause of losing the effect, I assumed that the behavior shown in the boxes are context depend. Not only were the after-effects of inescapable shock subject of the current research also the impact of the rearing situation on the response to electric shock was investigated in the present study. Flies which grew up in a single-reared situation turned out to be less affected by inescapable stress in both sexes. In the next part, the first steps to unravel the neuronal underpinning were taken. A mutant - fumin - which is defective in the dopamine re-uptake transporter showed less reaction to inescapable foot shocks, while a mutant for the gene which encodes an adenylate cyclase (rutabaga2080) resulted in a good score during conditioning, but showed no stable after-effect. Downregulating the expression of the adenylate cyclase gene (rutabaga) in different parts of the mushroom bodies showed, that rutabaga is necessary in the α'β'-lobes for expressing the differences between master and yoked flies in the no-idleness paradigm. The study further confirmed previous findings, that rutabaga is needed in operant but not in classical conditioning. As a result, the study could show that not the stimulus itself causes the state of uncontrollability but the fact that the fly learned that it was not in control of the stimulus. This state turned out to be context and time dependent.},
  subject      = {Taufliege},
  language  = {en}
}