@article{ElKeredySchleyerKoenigetal.2012, author = {El-Keredy, Amira and Schleyer, Michael and K{\"o}nig, Christian and Ekim, Aslihan and Gerber, Bertram}, title = {Behavioural Analyses of Quinine Processing in Choice, Feeding and Learning of Larval Drosophila}, series = {PLoS One}, volume = {7}, journal = {PLoS One}, number = {7}, doi = {10.1371/journal.pone.0040525}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-130811}, pages = {e40525}, year = {2012}, abstract = {Gustatory stimuli can support both immediate reflexive behaviour, such as choice and feeding, and can drive internal reinforcement in associative learning. For larval Drosophila, we here provide a first systematic behavioural analysis of these functions with respect to quinine as a study case of a substance which humans report as "tasting bitter". We describe the dose-effect functions for these different kinds of behaviour and find that a half-maximal effect of quinine to suppress feeding needs substantially higher quinine concentrations (2.0 mM) than is the case for internal reinforcement (0.6 mM). Interestingly, in previous studies (Niewalda et al. 2008, Schipanski et al 2008) we had found the reverse for sodium chloride and fructose/sucrose, such that dose-effect functions for those tastants were shifted towards lower concentrations for feeding as compared to reinforcement, arguing that the differences in dose-effect function between these behaviours do not reflect artefacts of the types of assay used. The current results regarding quinine thus provide a starting point to investigate how the gustatory system is organized on the cellular and/or molecular level to result in different behavioural tuning curves towards a bitter tastant.}, language = {en} } @phdthesis{Schleyer2012, author = {Schleyer, Michael}, title = {Integrating past, present and future: mechanisms of a simple decision in larval Drosophila}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-78923}, school = {Universit{\"a}t W{\"u}rzburg}, year = {2012}, abstract = {Is behaviour response or action? In this Thesis I study this question regarding a rather simple organism, the larva of the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster. Despite its numerically simple brain and limited behavioural repertoire, it is nevertheless capable to accomplish surprisingly complex tasks. After association of an odour and a rewarding or punishing reinforcement signal, the learnt odour is able to retrieve the formed memory trace. However, the activated memory trace is not automatically turned into learned behaviour: Appetitive memory traces are behaviourally expressed only in absence of the rewarding tastant whereas aversive memory traces are behaviourally expressed in the presence of the punishing tastant. The 'decision' whether to behaviourally express a memory trace or not relies on a quantitive comparison between memory trace and current situation: only if the memory trace (after odour-sugar training) predicts a stronger sugar reward than currently present, animals show appetitive conditioned behaviour. Learned appetitive behaviour is best seen as active search for food - being pointless in the presence of (enough) food. Learned aversive behaviour, in turn, can be seen as escape from a punishment - being pointless in absence of punishment. Importantly, appetitive and aversive memory traces can be formed and retrieved independent from each other but also can, under appriate circumstances, summate to jointly organise conditioned behaviour. In contrast to learned behaviour, innate olfactory behaviour is not influenced by gustatory processing and vice versa. Thus, innate olfactory and gustatory behaviour is rather rigid and reflexive in nature, being executed almost regardless of other environmental cues. I suggest a behavioural circuit-model of chemosensory behaviour and the 'decision' process whether to behaviourally express a memory trace or not. This model reflects known components of the larval chemobehavioural circuit and provides clear hypotheses about the kinds of architecture to look for in the currently unknown parts of this circuit. The second chapter deals with gustatory perception and processing (especially of bitter substances). Quinine, the bitter tastant in tonic water and bitter lemon, is aversive for larvae, suppresses feeding behaviour and can act as aversive reinforcer in learning experiments. However, all three examined behaviours differ in their dose-effect dynamics, suggesting different molecular and cellular processing streams at some level. Innate choice behaviour, thought to be relatively reflexive and hard-wired, nevertheless can be influenced by the gustatory context. That is, attraction toward sweet tastants is decreased in presence of bitter tastants. The extent of this inhibitory effect depends on the concentration of both sweet and bitter tastant. Importantly, sweet tastants differ in their sensitivity to bitter interference, indicating a stimulus-specific mechanism. The molecular and cellular processes underlying the inhibitory effect of bitter tastants are unknown, but the behavioural results presented here provide a framework to further investigate interactions of gustatory processing streams.}, subject = {Lernen}, language = {en} } @article{KleberChenMichelsetal.2016, author = {Kleber, J{\"o}rg and Chen, Yi-Chun and Michels, Birgit and Saumweber, Timo and Schleyer, Michael and K{\"a}hne, Thilo and Buchner, Erich and Gerber, Bertram}, title = {Synapsin is required to "boost" memory strength for highly salient events}, series = {Learning and Memory}, volume = {23}, journal = {Learning and Memory}, number = {1}, doi = {10.1101/lm.039685.115}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-191440}, pages = {9-20}, year = {2016}, abstract = {Synapsin is an evolutionarily conserved presynaptic phosphoprotein. It is encoded by only one gene in the Drosophila genome and is expressed throughout the nervous system. It regulates the balance between reserve and releasable vesicles, is required to maintain transmission upon heavy demand, and is essential for proper memory function at the behavioral level. Task-relevant sensorimotor functions, however, remain intact in the absence of Synapsin. Using an odor-sugar reward associative learning paradigm in larval Drosophila, we show that memory scores in mutants lacking Synapsin (syn\(^{97}\)) are lower than in wild-type animals only when more salient, higher concentrations of odor or of the sugar reward are used. Furthermore, we show that Synapsin is selectively required for larval short-term memory. Thus, without Synapsin Drosophila larvae can learn and remember, but Synapsin is required to form memories that match in strength to event salience-in particular to a high saliency of odors, of rewards, or the salient recency of an event. We further show that the residual memory scores upon a lack of Synapsin are not further decreased by an additional lack of the Sap47 protein. In combination with mass spectrometry data showing an up-regulated phosphorylation of Synapsin in the larval nervous system upon a lack of Sap47, this is suggestive of a functional interdependence of Synapsin and Sap47.}, language = {en} }