Refine
Has Fulltext
- yes (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (2)
Year of publication
- 2008 (2) (remove)
Document Type
- Doctoral Thesis (2) (remove)
Language
- English (2) (remove)
Keywords
- Neurogenetik (2) (remove)
Institute
- Theodor-Boveri-Institut für Biowissenschaften (2) (remove)
Past experience contributes to behavioural organization mainly via learning: Animals learn otherwise ordinary cues as predictors for biologically significant events. This thesis studies such predictive, associative learning, using the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster. I ask two main questions, which complement each other: One deals with the processing of those cues that are to be learned as predictors for an important event; the other one deals with the processing of the important event itself, which is to be predicted. Do fruit flies learn about combinations of olfactory and visual cues? I probe larval as well as adult fruit flies for the learning about combinations of olfactory and visual cues, using a so called ‘biconditional discrimination’ task: During training, one odour is paired with reinforcement only in light, but not in darkness; the other odour in turn is reinforced only in darkness, but not in light. Thus, neither the odours nor the visual conditions alone predict reinforcement, only combinations of both do. I find no evidence that either larval or adult fruit flies were to solve such task, speaking against a cross-talk between olfactory and visual modalities. Previous studies however suggest such cross-talk. To reconcile these results, I suggest classifying different kinds of interaction between sensory modalities, according to their site along the sensory-motor continuum: I consider an interaction ‘truly’ cross-modal, if it is between the specific features of the stimuli. I consider an interaction ’amodal’ if it instead engages the behavioural tendencies or ‘values’ elicited by each stimulus. Such reasoning brings me to conclude that different behavioural tasks require different kinds of interaction between sensory modalities; whether a given kind of interaction will be found depends on the neuronal infrastructure, which is a function of the species and the developmental stage. Predictive learning of pain-relief in fruit flies Fruit flies build two opposing kinds of memory, based on an experience with electric shock: Those odours that precede shock during training are learned as predictors for punishment and are subsequently avoided; those odours that follow shock during training on the other hand are learned as signals for relief and are subsequently approached. I focus on such relief learning. I start with a detailed parametric analysis of relief learning, testing for reproducibility as well as effects of gender, repetition of training, odour identity, odour concentration and shock intensity. I also characterize how relief memories, once formed, decay. In addition, concerning the psychological mechanisms of relief learning, first, I show that relief learning establishes genuinely associative conditioned approach behaviour and second, I report that it is most likely not mediated by context associations. These results enable the following neurobiological analysis of relief learning; further, they will form in the future the basis for a mathematical model; finally, they will guide the researchers aiming at uncovering relief learning in other experimental systems. Next, I embark upon neurogenetic analysis of relief learning. First, I report that fruit flies mutant for the so called white gene build overall more ‘negative’ memories about an experience with electric shock. That is, in the white mutants, learning about the painful onset of shock is enhanced, whereas learning about the relieving offset of shock is diminished. As they are coherently affected, these two kinds of learning should be in a balance. The molecular mechanism of the effect of white on this balance remains unresolved. Finally, as a first step towards a neuronal circuit analysis of relief learning, I compare it to reward learning and punishment learning. I find that relief learning is distinct from both in terms of the requirement for biogenic amine signaling: Reward and punishment are respectively signalled by octopamine and dopamine, for relief learning, either of these seem dispensible. Further, I find no evidence for roles for two other biogenic amines, tyramine and serotonin in relief learning. Based on these findings I give directions for further research.
Vertebrate and invertebrate visual systems exhibit similarities in early stages of visual processing. For instance, in the human brain, the modalities of color, form and motion are separately processed in parallel neuronal pathways. This basic property is also found in the fly Drosophila melanogaster which has a similar division in color- sensitive and (color blind) motion-sensitive pathways that are determined by two distinct subsets of photoreceptors (the R1-6 and the R7/8 system, respectively). Flies have a highly organized visual system that is characterized by its repetitive, retinotopic organization of four neuropils: the lamina, the medulla, the lobula and the lobula plate. Each of these consists of columns which contain the same set of neurons. In the lamina, axon bundles of six photoreceptors R1-6 that are directed towards the same point in space form columnar structures called cartridges. These are the visual sampling units and are associated with four types of first-order interneuron that receive common input from R1-6: L1, L2, L3 and the amacrine cells (amc, together with their postsynaptic partner T1). They constitute parallel pathways that have been studied in detail at the anatomical level. Little is known, however, about their functional role in processing behaviorally relevant information, e.g. for gaze stabilization, visual course control or the fixation of objects. The availability of a variety of neurogenetic tools for structure-function analysis in Drosophila allowed first steps into the genetic dissection of the neuronal circuitry mediating motion and position detection. In this respect, the choice of the effector turned out to be crucial. Surprisingly, it was found that the clostridial tetanus neurotoxin failed to block mature Drosophila photoreceptor synapses, but caused irreversible damage when expressed during their development. Therefore, the dominant-negative shibire allele shits1 which turned out to be better suited was used for blocking lamina interneurons and thereby analyzing the necessity of the respective pathways. To determine whether the latter were also sufficient for the same behavioral task, the inverse strategy was developed, based on the fact that lamina interneurons express histamine receptors encoded by the ort gene. The specific rescue of ort function in defined channels in an otherwise mutant background allowed studying their sufficiency in a given task. Combining these neurogenetic methods with the optomotor response and object induced orientation behavior as behavioral measures, the aim of the present thesis was to answer the following questions: (a) Which pathways feed into elementary motion detectors and which ones are necessary and/or sufficient for the detection of directional motion? (b) Do pathways exist which specifically mediate responses to unidirectional motion? (c) Which pathways are necessary and/or sufficient for object induced orientation behavior? Some basic properties of the visual circuitry were revealed: The two central cartridge pathways, represented by the large monopolar cells L1 and L2, are key players in motion detection. Under a broad range of stimulatory conditions, the two subsystems are redundant and are able to process motion independently of each other. To detect an impairment when only one of the pathways is intact, one has to drive the system to its operational limits. At low signal to noise ratios, i.e. at low pattern contrast or low background illumination, the L2 pathway has a higher sensitivity. At intermediate pattern contrast, both pathways are specialized in mediating responses to unidirectional motion of opposite stimulus direction. In contrast, neither the L3, nor the amc/T1 pathway is necessary or sufficient for motion detection. While the former may provide position information for orientation, the latter has a modulatory role at intermediate pattern contrast. Orientation behavior turned out to be even more robust than motion vision and may utilize a less sophisticated mechanism, as it does not require a nonlinear comparison of signals from neighboring visual sampling units. The position of objects is processed in several redundant pathways, involving both receptor subsystems. The fixation of objects does not generally require motion vision. However, motion detection improves the fixation of landmarks, especially when these are narrow or have a reduced contrast.