@phdthesis{Knapek2010,
  author    = {Knapek, Stephan},
  title     = {Synapsin and Bruchpilot, two synaptic proteins underlying specific phases of olfactory aversive memory in Drosophila melanogaster},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-49726},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t W{\"u}rzburg},
  year      = {2010},
  abstract  = {Memory is dynamic: shortly after acquisition it is susceptible to amnesic treatments, gets gradually consolidated, and becomes resistant to retrograde amnesia (McGaugh, 2000). Associative olfactory memory of the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster also shows these features. After a single associative training where an odor is paired with electric shock (Quinn et al., 1974; Tully and Quinn, 1985), flies form an aversive odor memory that lasts for several hours, consisting of qualitatively different components. These components can be dissociated by mutations, their underlying neuronal circuitry and susceptibility to amnesic treatments (Dubnau and Tully, 1998; Isabel et al., 2004; Keene and Waddell, 2007; Masek and Heisenberg, 2008; Xia and Tully, 2007). A component that is susceptible to an amnesic treatment, i.e. anesthesia-sensitive memory (ASM), dominates early memory, but decays rapidly (Margulies et al., 2005; Quinn and Dudai, 1976). A consolidated anesthesia-resistant memory component (ARM) is built gradually within the following hours and lasts significantly longer (Margulies et al., 2005; Quinn and Dudai, 1976). I showed here that the establishment of ARM requires less intensity of shock reinforcement than ASM. ARM and ASM rely on different molecular and/or neuronal processes: ARM is selectively impaired in the radish mutant, whereas for example the amnesiac and rutabaga genes are specifically required for ASM (Dudai et al., 1988; Folkers et al., 1993; Isabel et al., 2004; Quinn and Dudai, 1976; Schwaerzel et al., 2007; Tully et al., 1994). The latter comprise the cAMP signaling pathway in the fly, with the PKA being its supposed major target (Levin et al., 1992). Here I showed that a synapsin null-mutant encoding the evolutionary conserved phosphoprotein Synapsin is selectively impaired in the labile ASM. Further experiments suggested Synapsin as a potential downstream effector of the cAMP/PKA cascade. Similar to my results, Synapsin plays a role for different learning tasks in vertebrates (Gitler et al., 2004; Silva et al., 1996). Also in Aplysia, PKA-dependent phosphorylation of Synapsin has been proposed to be involved in regulation of neurotransmitter release and short-term plasticity (Angers et al., 2002; Fiumara et al., 2004). Synapsin is associated with a reserve pool of vesicles at the presynapse and is required to maintain vesicle release specifically under sustained high frequency nerve stimulation (Akbergenova and Bykhovskaia, 2007; Li et al., 1995; Pieribone et al., 1995; Sun et al., 2006). In contrast, the requirement of Bruchpilot, which is homologous to the mammalian active zone proteins ELKS/CAST (Wagh et al., 2006), is most pronounced in immediate vesicle release (Kittel et al., 2006). Under repeated stimulation of a bruchpilot mutant motor neuron, immediate vesicle release is severely impaired whereas the following steady-state release is still possible (Kittel et al., 2006). In line with that, knockdown of the Bruchpilot protein causes impairment in clustering of Ca2+ channels to the active zones and a lack of electron-dense projections at presynaptic terminals (T-bars). Thus, less synaptic vesicles of the readily-releasable pool are accumulated to the release sites and their release probability is severely impaired (Kittel et al., 2006; Wagh et al., 2006). First, I showed that Bruchpilot is required for aversive olfactory memory and localized the requirement of Bruchpilot to the Kenyon cells of the mushroom body, the second-order olfactory interneurons in Drosophila. Furthermore, I demonstrated that Bruchpilot selectively functions for the consolidated anesthesia-resistant memory. Since Synapsin is specifically required for the labile anesthesia sensitive memory, different synaptic proteins can dissociate consolidated and labile components of olfactory memory and two different modes of neurotransmission (high- vs. low frequency dependent) might differentiate ASM and ARM.},
  subject      = {Taufliege},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{AsoHerbOguetaetal.2012,
  author    = {Aso, Yoshinori and Herb, Andrea and Ogueta, Maite and Siwanowicz, Igor and Templier, Thomas and Friedrich, Anja B. and Ito, Kei and Scholz, Henrike and Tanimoto, Hiromu},
  title     = {Three Dopamine Pathways Induce Aversive Odor Memories with Different Stability},
  series = {PLoS Genetics},
  volume    = {8},
  journal   = {PLoS Genetics},
  number    = {7},
  doi       = {10.1371/journal.pgen.1002768},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-130631},
  pages     = {e1002768},
  year      = {2012},
  abstract  = {Animals acquire predictive values of sensory stimuli through reinforcement. In the brain of Drosophila melanogaster, activation of two types of dopamine neurons in the PAM and PPL1 clusters has been shown to induce aversive odor memory. Here, we identified the third cell type and characterized aversive memories induced by these dopamine neurons. These three dopamine pathways all project to the mushroom body but terminate in the spatially segregated subdomains. To understand the functional difference of these dopamine pathways in electric shock reinforcement, we blocked each one of them during memory acquisition. We found that all three pathways partially contribute to electric shock memory. Notably, the memories mediated by these neurons differed in temporal stability. Furthermore, combinatorial activation of two of these pathways revealed significant interaction of individual memory components rather than their simple summation. These results cast light on a cellular mechanism by which a noxious event induces different dopamine signals to a single brain structure to synthesize an aversive memory.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{HuserRohwedderApostolopoulouetal.2012,
  author    = {Huser, Annina and Rohwedder, Astrid and Apostolopoulou, Anthi A. and Widmann, Annekathrin and Pfitzenmaier, Johanna E. and Maiolo, Elena M. and Selcho, Mareike and Pauls, Dennis and von Essen, Alina and Gupta, Tript and Sprecher, Simon G. and Birman, Serge and Riemensperger, Thomas and Stocker, Reinhard F. and Thum, Andreas S.},
  title     = {The Serotonergic Central Nervous System of the Drosophila Larva: Anatomy and Behavioral Function},
  series = {PLoS One},
  volume    = {7},
  journal   = {PLoS One},
  number    = {10},
  doi       = {10.1371/journal.pone.0047518},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-130437},
  pages     = {e47518},
  year      = {2012},
  abstract  = {The Drosophila larva has turned into a particularly simple model system for studying the neuronal basis of innate behaviors and higher brain functions. Neuronal networks involved in olfaction, gustation, vision and learning and memory have been described during the last decade, often up to the single-cell level. Thus, most of these sensory networks are substantially defined, from the sensory level up to third-order neurons. This is especially true for the olfactory system of the larva. Given the wealth of genetic tools in Drosophila it is now possible to address the question how modulatory systems interfere with sensory systems and affect learning and memory. Here we focus on the serotonergic system that was shown to be involved in mammalian and insect sensory perception as well as learning and memory. Larval studies suggested that the serotonergic system is involved in the modulation of olfaction, feeding, vision and heart rate regulation. In a dual anatomical and behavioral approach we describe the basic anatomy of the larval serotonergic system, down to the single-cell level. In parallel, by expressing apoptosis-inducing genes during embryonic and larval development, we ablate most of the serotonergic neurons within the larval central nervous system. When testing these animals for naive odor, sugar, salt and light perception, no profound phenotype was detectable; even appetitive and aversive learning was normal. Our results provide the first comprehensive description of the neuronal network of the larval serotonergic system. Moreover, they suggest that serotonin per se is not necessary for any of the behaviors tested. However, our data do not exclude that this system may modulate or fine-tune a wide set of behaviors, similar to its reported function in other insect species or in mammals. Based on our observations and the availability of a wide variety of genetic tools, this issue can now be addressed.},
  language  = {en}
}