Filtern
Volltext vorhanden
- ja (1) (entfernen)
Gehört zur Bibliographie
- ja (1)
Erscheinungsjahr
- 2008 (1)
Dokumenttyp
- Dissertation (1) (entfernen)
Sprache
- Englisch (1)
Schlagworte
- Bewegungssehen (1)
- Genetik (1)
- Lamina (1)
- Neurogenetik (1)
- Taufliege (1)
- Visuelles System (1)
- elementary motion detector (1)
- motion vision (1)
- optomotor response (1)
- peripheral pathways (1)
Institut
- Theodor-Boveri-Institut für Biowissenschaften (1) (entfernen)
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.