Refine
Has Fulltext
- yes (22)
Year of publication
Document Type
- Doctoral Thesis (22)
Language
- English (22) (remove)
Keywords
- Lernen (22) (remove)
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.
In this thesis I studied psychological aspects in the behaviour of Drosophila, and especially Drosophila larvae. After an introduction where I present the general scientific context and describe the mechanisms of olfactory perception as well as of classical and operant conditioning, I present the different experiments that I realised during my PhD. Perception The second chapter deals with the way adult Drosophila generalise between single odours and binary mixtures of odours. I found that flies perceive a mixture of two odours as equally similar to the two elements composing it; and that the intensity as well as the physico-chemical nature of the elements composing a mixture affect the degree of generalisation between this mixture and one of its elements. These findings now call for further investigation on the physiological level, using functional imaging. Memory The third chapter presents a series of experiments in Drosophila larvae in order to define some characteristics of a new protocol for classical aversive learning which involves associating odours with mechanical disturbance as a punishment. The protocol and the first results should open new doors for the study of classical conditioning in Drosophila larvae, by allowing the comparison between two types of aversive memory (gustatory vs. mechanical reinforcement), including a comparison of their neurogenetic bases. It will also allow enquiries into the question whether these respective memories are specific for the kind of reinforcer used. Agency The fourth chapter documents our attempts to establish operant memory in Drosophila larvae. By analysing the first moments of the test, I could reveal that the larvae modified their behaviour according to their previous operant training. However, this memory seems to be quickly extinguished during the course of the test. We now aim at repeating these results and improving the protocol, in order to be able to systematically study the mechanisms allowing and underlying operant learning in Drosophila larvae. In the fifth chapter, I use the methods developed in chapter four for an analysis of larval locomotion. I determine whether larval locomotion in terms of speed or angular speed is affected by a treatment with the “cognitive enhancer” Rhodiola rosea, or by mutations in the Synapsin or SAP47 genes which are involved in the formation of olfactory memory. I also characterize the modifications induced by the presence of gustatory stimuli in the substrate on which the larvae are crawling. This thesis thus brings new elements to the current knowledge of Drosophila
An animal depends heavily on its sense of smell and its ability to form olfactory associations as this is crucial for its survival. This thesis studies in two parts about such associative olfactory learning in larval Drosophila. The first part deals with different aspects of odour processing while the second part is concerned with aspects related to memory and learning. Chapter I.1 highlights how odour intensities could be integrated into the olfactory percept of larval Drosophila. I first describe the dose-effect curves of learnability across odour intensities for different odours and then choose odour intensities from these curves such that larvae are trained at intermediate odour intensity, but are tested for retention with either that trained intermediate odour intensity, or with respectively HIGHer or LOWer intensities. I observe a specificity of retention for the trained intensity for all the odours used. Further I compare these findings with the case of adult Drosophila and propose a circuit level model of how such intensity coding comes about. Such intensity specificity of learning adds to appreciate the richness in 'content' of olfactory memory traces, and to define the demands on computational models of olfaction and olfactory learning. Chapter I.2 provides a behaviour-based estimate of odour similarity using four different types of experiments to yield a combined, task-independent estimate of perceived difference between odour-pairs. Further comparison of these perceived differences to published measures of physico- chemical difference reveals a weak correlation. Notable exceptions to this correlation are 3-octanol and benzaldehyde. Chapter I.3 shows for two odours (3-octanol and 1-octene-3-ol) that perceptual differences between these odours can either be ignored after non-discriminative training (generalization), or accentuated by odour-specific reinforcement (discrimination). Anosmic Or83b1 mutants have lost these faculties, indicating that this adaptive adjustment is taking place downstream of Or83b expressing sensory neurons. Chapter II.1 of this thesis deals with food supplementation with dried roots of Rhodiola rosea. This dose-dependently improves odour- reward associative function in larval Drosophila. Supplementing fly food with commercially available tablets or extracts, however, does not have a 'cognitive enhancing' effect, potentially enabling us to differentiate between the effective substances in the root versus these preparations. Thus Drosophila as a genetically tractable study case should now allow accelerated analyses of the molecular mechanism(s) that underlie this 'cognitive enhancement' conveyed by Rhodiola rosea. Chapter II.2 describes the role of Synapsin, an evolutionarily conserved presynaptic phosphoprotein using a combined behavioural and genetic approach and asks where and how, this protein affects functions in associative plasticity of larval Drosophila. This study shows that a Synapsin-dependent memory trace can be pinpointed to the mushroom bodies, a 'cortical' brain region of the insects. On the molecular level, data in this study assign Synapsin as a behaviourally- relevant effector of the AC-cAMP-PKA cascade.
According to a changing environment it is crucial for animals to make experience and learn about it. Sensing, integrating and learning to associate different kinds of modalities enables animals to expect future events and to adjust behavior in the way, expected as the most profitable. Complex processes as memory formation and storage make it necessary to investigate learning and memory on different levels. In this context Drosophila melanogaster represents a powerful model organism. As the adult brain of the fly is still quite complex, I chose the third instar larva as model - the more simple the system, the easier to isolate single, fundamental principles of learning. In this thesis I addressed several kinds of questions on different mechanism of olfactory associative and synaptic plasiticity in Drosophila larvae. I focused on short-term memory throughout my thesis. First, investigating larval learning on behavioral level, I developed a one-odor paradigm for olfactory associative conditioning. This enables to estimate the learnability of single odors, reduces the complexity of the task and simplify analyses of "learning mutants". It further allows to balance learnability of odors for generalization-type experiments to describe the olfactory "coding space". Furthermore I could show that innate attractiveness and learnability can be dissociated and found finally that paired presentation of a given odor with reward increase performance, whereas unpaired presentations of these two stimuli decrease performance, indicating that larva are able to learn about the presence as well as about the absence of a reward. Second, on behavioral level, together with Thomas Niewalda and colleagues we focussed on salt processing in the context of choice, feeding and learning. Salt is required in several physiological processes, but can neither be synthesized nor stored. Various salt concentrations shift the valence from attraction to repulsion in reflexive behaviour. Interestingly, the reinforcing effect of salt in learning is shifted by more than one order of magnitude toward higher concentrations. Thus, the input pathways for gustatory behavior appear to be more sensitive than the ones supporting gustatory reinforcement, which is may be due to the dissociation of the reflexive and the reinforcing signalling pathways of salt. Third, in cooperation with Michael Schleyer we performed a series of behavioral gustatory, olfactory preference tests and larval learning experiments. Based on the available neuroanatomical and behavioral data we propose a model regarding chemosensory processing, odor-tastant memory trace formation and the 'decision' like process. It incorporates putative sites of interaction between olfactory and gustatory pathways during the establishment as well as behavioral expression of odor-tastant memory. We claim that innate olfactory behavior is responsive in nature and suggest that associative conditioned behavior is not a simple substitution like process, but driven more likely by the expectation of its outcome. Fourth, together with Birgit Michels and colleagues we investigated the cellular site and molecular mode of Synapsin, an evolutionarily conserved, presynaptic vesicular phosphoprotein and its action in larval learning. We confirmed a previously described learning impairment upon loss of Synapsin. We localized this Synapsin dependent memory trace in the mushroom bodies, a third-order "cortical" brain region, and could further show on molecular level, that Synapsin is as a downstream element of the AC-cAMP-PKA signalling cascade. This study provides a comprehensive chain of explanation from the molecular level to an associative behavioral change. Fifth, in the main part of my thesis I focused on molecular level on another synaptic protein, the Synapse associated protein of 47kDa (Sap47) and its role in larval behavior. As a member of a phylogenetically conserved gene family of hitherto unknown function. It is localized throughout the whole neuropil of larval brains and associated with presynaptic vesicles. Upon loss of Sap47 larvae exhibit normal sensory detection of the to-be-associated stimuli as well as normal motor performance and basic synaptic transmission. Interestingly, short-term plasticity is distorted and odorant–tastant associative learning ability is reduced. This defect in associative function could be rescued by restoring Sap47 expression. Therefore, this report is the first to suggest a function for Sap47 and specifically argues that Sap47 is required for synaptic as well as for behavioral plasticity in Drosophila larva. This prompts the question whether its homologs are required for synaptic and behavioral plasticity also in other species. Further in the last part of my thesis I contributed to the study of Ayse Yarali. Her central topic was the role of the White protein in punishment and relief learning in adult flies. Whereas stimuli that precede shock during training are subsequently avoided as predictors for punishment, stimuli that follow shock during training are later on approached, as they predict relief. Concerning the loss of White we report that pain-relief learning as well as punishment learning is changed. My contribution was a comparison between wild type and the white1118 mutant larvae in odor-reward learning. It turned out that a loss of White has no effect on larval odorant-tastant learning. This study, regarding painrelief learning provides the very first hints concerning the genetic determinants of this form of learning.
Foraging behavior is a particularly fascinating topic within the studies of social insects. Decisions made by individuals have effects not only on the individual level, but on the colony level as well. Social information available through foraging in a group modulates individual preferences and shapes the foraging pattern of a colony. Identifying parameters influencing foraging behavior in leaf-cutting ants is especially intriguing because they do not harvest for themselves, but for their symbiotic fungus which in turn influences their plant preferences after the incorporation of the substrate. To learn about the substrates’ unsuitability for the fungus, ants need to be able to identify the incorporated substrate and associate it with detrimental effects on the fungus. Odor is an important plant characteristic known to be used as recognition key outside the nest in the context of foraging. Chapter 1 shows that foragers are able to recall information about the unsuitability of a substrate through odor alone and consequently reject the substrate, which leads to the conclusion that inside the nest, odor might be enough to indentify incorporated substrate. Identification of plant species is a key factor in the foraging success of leaf-cutting ants as they harvest a multitude of different plant species in a diverse environment and host plant availability and suitability changes throughout the year. Fixed plant preferences of individuals through innate tendencies are therefore only one factor influencing foraging decisions. On the individual as well as the colony level, foraging patterns are flexible and a result of an intricate interplay between the different members involved in the harvesting process: foragers, gardeners and the symbiotic fungus. In chapter 2 I identified several conditions necessary for naïve foragers to learn about the unsuitability of substrate inside the nest. In order to exchange of information about the unsuitability of a substrate, the plant in question must be present in the fungus garden. Foragers can learn without own foraging experience and even without experiencing the effects of the substrate on the fungus, solely through the presence of experienced gardeners. The presence of experienced foragers alone on the other hand is not enough to lower the acceptance of substrate by naïve foragers in the presence of naïve gardeners, even if experienced foragers make up the majority of the workforce inside the nest. Experienced foragers are also able to reverse their previous negative experience and start accepting the substrate again. The individual behavior of foragers and gardeners with different experiential backgrounds in the presence of suitable or unsuitable substrate inside the fungus chamber was investigated in chapter 3 to shed some light on possible mechanisms involved in the flow of information about substrate suitability from the fungus to the ants. Gardeners as well as foragers are involved in the leaf processing and treatment of the applied leaf patches on the fungus. If the plant material is unsuitable, significantly more ants treat the plant patches, but foragers are less active overall. Contacts between workers initiated by either gardeners or foragers occur significantly more frequent and last longer if the substrate is unsuitable. Even though experienced gardeners increase naïve foragers’ contact rates and duration with other workers in the presence of suitable plant patches, naïve foragers show no differences in the handling of the plant patches. This suggests that foragers gain information about plant suitability not only indirectly through the gardening workers, but might also be able to directly evaluate the effects of the substrate on the fungus themselves. Outside the nest, foragers influence each other the trail (chapter 4). Foraging in a group and the presence of social information is a decisive factor in the substrate choice of the individual and leads to a distinct and consentaneous colony response when encountering unfamiliar or unsuitable substrates. As leaf-cutting ants harvest different plant species simultaneously on several trails, foragers gain individual experiences concerning potential host plants. Preferences might vary among individuals of the same colony to the degree that foragers on the same trail perceive a certain substrate as either suitable or unsuitable. If the majority of foragers on the trail perceives one of the currently harvested substrates as unsuitable, naïve foragers lower their acceptance within 4 hours. In the absence of a cue in the fungus, naïve foragers harvesting by themselves still eventually (within 6 hours) reject the substrate as they encounter experienced gardeners during visits to the nest within foraging bouts. As foraging trails can be up to 100 m long and foragers spend a considerable amount of time away from the nest, learning indirectly from experienced foragers on the trail accelerates the distribution of information about substrate suitability. The level of rejection of a formerly unsuitable substrate after eight hours of foraging by naïve foragers correlates with the average percentage of unladen experienced foragers active on the trail. This suggests that unladen experienced foragers might actively contact laden naïve workers transmitting information about the unsuitability of the load they carry. Results from experiments were I observed individual laden foragers on their way back to the nest backed up this assumption as individuals were antennated and received bites into the leaf disk they carried. Individuals were contacted significantly more often by nestmates that perceived the carried leaf disk as unsuitable due to previous experience than by nestmates without this experience (chapter 6). Leaf-cutting ants constantly evaluate, learn and re-evaluate the suitability of harvested substrate and adjust their foraging activity accordingly. The importance of the different sources of information within the colony and their effect on the foraging pattern of the colony depend on the presence or absence of each of them as e.g. experienced foragers have a bigger influence on the plant preferences of naïve foragers in the absence of a cue in the fungus garden.
In order to survive, organisms avoid threats and seek rewards. Classical conditioning is a simple model to explain how animals and humans learn associations between events that allow them to predict threats and rewards efficiently. In the classical conditioning paradigm, a neutral stimulus is paired with a biologically significant event (the unconditioned stimulus – US). In virtue of this association, the neutral stimulus acquires affective motivational properties, and becomes a conditioned stimulus (CS+). Defensive responses emerge for pairings with an aversive US (e.g., pain), and appetitive responses emerge for pairing with an appetitive event (e.g., reward). It has been observed that animals avoid a CS+ when it precedes an aversive US during a training phase (CS+ US; forward conditioning); whereas they approach a CS+ when it follows an aversive US during the training phase (US CS+; backward conditioning). These findings indicate that the CS+ acquires aversive properties after a forward conditioning, whereas acquires appetitive properties after a backward conditioning. It is thus of interest whether event timing also modulates conditioned responses in such an opponent fashion in humans, who are capable of explicit cognition about the associations. For this purpose, four experiments were conducted in which a discriminative conditioning was applied in groups of participants that only differed in the temporal sequence between CS+ onset and US onset (i.e., the interstimulus interval – ISI). During the acquisition phase (conditioning), two simple geometrical shapes were presented as conditioned stimuli. One shape (CS+) was always associated with a mild painful electric shock (i.e., the aversive US) and the other one (CS-) was never associated with the shock. In a between-subjects design, participants underwent either forward or backward conditioning. During the test phase (extinction), emotional responses to CS+ and CS- were tested and the US was never presented. Additionally, a novel neutral shape (NEW) was presented as control stimulus. To assess cognitive components, participants had to rate both the valence (the degree of unpleasantness or pleasantness) and the arousal (the degree of calmness or excitation) associated with the shapes before and after conditioning. In the first study, startle responses, an ancestral defensive reflex consisting of a fast twitch of facial and body muscles evoked by sudden and intense stimuli, was measured as an index of stimulus implicit valence. Startle amplitude was potentiated in the presence of the forward CS+ whilst attenuated in the presence of the backward CS+. Respectively, the former response indicates an implicit negative valence of the CS+ and an activation of the defensive system; the latter indicated an implicit positive valence of the CS+ and an activation of the appetitive system. In the second study, the blood-oxygen level dependent (BOLD) response was measured by means of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to investigate neural responses after event learning. Stronger amygdala activation in response to forward CS+ and stronger striatum activation in response to backward CS+ were found in comparison to CS-. These results support the notion that the defensive motivational system is activated after forward conditioning since the amygdala plays a crucial role in fear acquisition and expression. Whilst the appetitive motivational system is activated after backward conditioning since the striatum plays a crucial role in reward processing. In the third study, attentional processes underlying event learning were observed by means of steady-state visual evoked potentials (ssVEPs). This study showed that both forward and backward CS+ caught attentional resources. More specifically, ssVEP amplitude was higher during the last seconds of forward CS+ that is just before the US, but during the first seconds of backward CS+ that is just after the US. Supposedly, attentional processes were located at the most informative part of CS+ in respect to the US. Participants of all three studies rated both forward and backward CS+ more negative and arousing compared to the CS-. This indicated that event timing did not influence verbal reports similarly as the neural and behavioral responses indicating a dissociation between the explicit and implicit responses. Accordingly, dual process theories propose that human behavior is determined by the output of two systems: (1) an impulsive implicit system that works on associative principles, and (2) a reflective explicit system that functions on the basis of knowledge about facts and values. Most importantly, these two systems can operate in a synergic or antagonistic fashion. Hence, the three studies of this thesis congruently suggest that the impulsive and the reflective systems act after backward association in an antagonistic fashion. In sum, event timing may turn punishment into reward in humans even though they subjectively rate the stimulus associated with aversive events as being aversive. This dissociation might contribute to understand psychiatric disorders, like anxiety disorders or drug addiction.
Eine der größten Herausforderungen in der Neurobiologie ist es, die neuronalen Prozesse zu verstehen, die Lernen und Gedächtnis zugrundeliegen. Welche biochemischen Pfade liegen z.B. der Koinzidenzdetektion von Reizen (klassische Konditionierung) oder einer Handlung und ihren Konsequenzen (operante Konditionierung) zugrunde? In welchen neuronalen Unterstrukturen werden diese Informationen gespeichert? Wie ähnlich sind die Stoffwechselwege, die diese beiden Arten des assoziativen Lernens vermitteln und auf welchem Niveau divergieren sie? Drosophila melanogaster ist wegen der Verfügbarkeit von Lern-Paradigmen und neurogenetischen Werkzeugen ein geeigneter Modell-Organismus, zum diese Fragen zu adressieren. Er ermöglicht eine umfangreiche Studie der Funktion des Gens S6KII, das in der Taufliege in klassischer und operanter Konditionierung unterschiedlich involviert ist (Bertolucci, 2002; Putz et al., 2004). Rettungsexperimenten zeigen, dass die olfaktorische Konditionierung in der Tully Maschine (ein klassisches, Pawlow’sches Konditionierungsparadigma) von dem Vorhandensein eines intakten S6KII Gens abhängt. Die Rettung war sowohl mit einer vollständigen, als auch einer partiellen Deletion erfolgreich und dies zeigt, dass der Verlust der phosphorylierenden Untereinheit der Kinase die Hauptursache des Funktionsdefektes war. Das GAL4/UAS System wurde benutzt, um die S6KII Expression zeitlich und räumlich zu steuern. Es wurde gezeigt, dass die Expression der Kinase während des adulten Stadiums für die Rettung hinreichend war. Dieser Befund schließt eine Entwicklungsstörung als Ursache für den mutanten Phänotyp aus. Außerdem zeigte die gezielte räumliche Rettung von S6KII die Notwendigkeit der Pilzkörper und schloss Strukturen wie das mediane Bündel, die Antennalloben und den Zentralkomplex aus. Dieses Muster ist dem vorher mit der rutabaga Mutation identifizierten sehr ähnlich (Zars et al., 2000). Experimente mit der Doppelmutante rut, ign58-1 deuten an, dass rutabaga und S6KII im gleichen Signalweg aktiv sind. Vorhergehende Studien hatten bereits gezeigt, dass die unterschiedlichen Ergebnisse bei operanter und klassischer Konditionierung auf verschiedenen Rollen für S6KII in den zwei Arten des Lernens hindeuten (Bertolucci, 2002; Putz, 2002). Diese Schlussfolgerung wurde durch den mutanten Phänotyp der transgenen Linien in der Positionskonditionierung und ihr wildtypisches Verhalten in der klassischen Konditionierung zusätzlich bekräftigt. Eine neue Art von Lern-Experiment, genannt „Idle Experiment“, wurde entworfen. Es basiert auf der Konditionierung der Laufaktivität, stellt eine operante Aufgabenstellung dar und überwindet einige der Limitationen des „Standard“ Heat-Box Experimentes. Die neue Art des Idle Experimentes erlaubt es, „gelernte Hilflosigkeit“ in Fliegen zu erforschen, dabei zeigte sich eine erstaunliche Ähnlichkeit zu den Vorgängen in komplizierteren Organismen wie Ratten, Mäusen oder Menschen. Gelernte Hilflosigkeit in der Taufliege wurde nur in den Weibchen beobachtet und wird von Antidepressiva beeinflusst.
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.
Sugar reward learning in Drosophila : neuronal circuits in Drosophila associative olfactory learning
(2006)
Genetic intervention in the fly Drosophila melanogaster has provided strong evidence that the mushroom bodies of the insect brain act as the seat of memory traces for aversive and appetitive olfactory learning (reviewed in Heisenberg, 2003). In flies, electroshock is mainly used as negative reinforcer. Unfortunately this fact complicates a comparative consideration with other inscets as most studies use sugar as positive reinforcer. For example, several lines of evidence from honeybee and moth have suggested another site, the antennal lobe, to house neuronal plasticity underlying appetitive olfactory memory (reviewed in Menzel, 2001; Daly et al., 2004). Because of this I focused my work mainly on appetitive olfactory learning. In the first part of my thesis, I used a novel genetic tool, the TARGET system (McGuire et al., 2003), which allows the temporally controlled expression of a given effector gene in a defined set of cells. Comparing effector genes which either block neurotransmission or ablate cells showed important differences, revealing that selection of the appropriate effector gene is critical for evaluating the function of neural circuits. In the second part, a new engram of olfactory memory in the Drosophila projection neurons is described by restoring Rutabaga adenlylate cyclase (rut-AC) activity specifically in these cells. Expression of wild-type rutabaga in the projection neurons fully rescued the defect in sugar reward memory, but not in aversive electric shock memory. No difference was found in the stability of the appetitive memories rescued either in projection neurons or Kenyon cells. In the third part of the thesis I tried to understand how the reinforcing signals for sugar reward are internally represented. In the bee Hammer (1993) described a single octopaminergic neuron – called VUMmx1 – that mediates the sugar stimulus in associative olfactory reward learning. Analysis of single VUM neurons in the fly (Selcho, 2006) identified a neuron with a similar morphology as the VUMmx1 neuron. As there is a mutant in Drosophila lacking the last enzymatic step in octopamine synthesis (Monastirioti et al., 1996), Tyramine beta Hydroxylase, I was able to show that local Tyramine beta Hydroxylase expression successfully rescued sugar reward learning. This allows to conclude that about 250 cells including the VUM cluster are sufficient for mediating the sugar reinforcement signal in the fly. The description of a VUMmx1 similar neuron and the involvement of the VUM cluster in mediating the octopaminergic sugar stimulus are the first steps in establishing a neuronal map for US processing in Drosophila. Based on this work several experiments are contrivable to reach this ultimate goal in the fly. Taken together, the described similiarities between Drosophila and honeybee regarding the memory organisation in MBs and PNs and the proposed internal representation of the sugar reward suggest an evolutionarily conserved mechanism for appetitive olfactory learning in insects.
It has been known for a long time that Drosophila can learn to discriminate not only between different odorants but also between different concentrations of the same odor. Olfactory associative learning has been described as a pairing between odorant and electric shock and since then, most of the experiments conducted in this respect have largely neglected the dual properties of odors: quality and intensity. For odorant-coupled short-term memory, a biochemical model has been proposed that mainly relies on the known cAMP signaling pathway. Mushroom bodies (MB) have been shown to be necessary and sufficient for this type of memory, and the MB-model of odor learning and short-term memory was established. Yet, theoretically, based on the MB-model, flies should not be able to learn concentrations if trained to the lower of the two concentrations in the test. In this thesis, I investigate the role of concentration-dependent learning, establishment of a concentration-dependent memory and their correlation to the standard two-odor learning as described by the MB-model. In order to highlight the difference between learning of quality and learning of intensity of the same odor I have tried to characterize the nature of the stimulus that is actually learned by the flies, leading to the conclusion that during the training flies learn all possible cues that are presented at the time. The type of the following test seems to govern the usage of the information available. This revealed a distinction between what flies learned and what is actually measured. Furthermore, I have shown that learning of concentration is associative and that it is symmetrical between high and low concentrations. I have also shown how the subjective quality perception of an odor changes with changing intensity, suggesting that one odor can have more than one scent. There is no proof that flies perceive a range of concentrations of one odorant as one (odor) quality. Flies display a certain level of concentration invariance that is limited and related to the particular concentration. Learning of concentration is relevant only to a limited range of concentrations within the boundaries of concentration invariance. Moreover, under certain conditions, two chemically distinct odorants could smell sufficiently similarly such, that they can be generalized between each other like if they would be of the same quality. Therefore, the abilities of the fly to identify the difference in quality or in intensity of the stimuli need to be distinguished. The way how the stimulus is analyzed and processed speaks in favor of a concept postulating the existence of two separated memories. To follow this concept, I have proposed a new form of memory called odor intensity memory (OIM), characterized it and compared it to other olfactory memories. OIM is independent of some members of the known cAMP signaling pathway and very likely forms the rutabaga-independent component of the standard two-odor memory. The rutabaga-dependent odor memory requires qualitatively different olfactory stimuli. OIM is revealed within the limits of concentration invariance where the memory test gives only sub-optimal performance for the concentration differences but discrimination of odor quality is not possible at all. Based on the available experimental tools, OIM seems to require the mushroom bodies the same as odor-quality memory but its properties are different. Flies can memorize the quality of several odorants at a given time but a newly formed memory of one odor interferes with the OIM stored before. In addition, the OIM lasts only 1 to 3 hours - much shorter than the odor-quality memory.