Three forms of nonassociative learning (habituation, dishabituation, and sensitization) have commonly been explained by a dual-process view in which a single decrementing process produces habituation and a single facilitatory process produces both dishabituation and sensitization. A key prediction of this view is that dishabituation and sensitization should always occur together. However, we show that dishabituation and sensitization, as well as an additional process, inhibition, can be behaviorally dissociated in Aplysia by (i) their differential time of onset, (ii) their differential sensitivity to stimulus intensity, and (iii) their differential emergence during development. A simple dual-process view cannot explain these results; rather, a multiprocess view appears necessary to account for nonassociative learning in Aplysia.

Recent behavioral experiments examining the siphon withdrawal reflex of Aplysia have revealed inhibitory effects of strong tail shock, a stimulus commonly used as an unconditioned stimulus in studies of associative and nonassociative learning in Aplysia. We utilized a reduced preparation to perform a cellular analysis of tail shock-induced inhibition in the siphon withdrawal reflex. First, we carried out behavioral studies that showed that the reduced preparation exhibits a siphon withdrawal reflex to water jet stimuli, and that tail shock produces inhibitory behavioral effects comparable to those in the intact animal: (1) strong shock produces transient inhibition of nonhabituated responses, and (2) a habituated response is facilitated by weak shock, but not by strong shock, suggesting that increasing tail shock intensity recruits the inhibitory process that competes with facilitation of habituated reflexes. Next, we carried out cellular studies that showed that the amplitude of the complex EPSP in siphon motor neurons elicited by water jet stimuli to the siphon also exhibits the inhibitory patterns produced by tail shock: (1) the nondecremented complex EPSP (a neural correlate of a nonhabituated siphon withdrawal reflex) is significantly inhibited 90 sec after strong tail shock and recovers to preshock levels 10 min later, and (2) the decremented complex EPSP (a neural correlate of a habituated reflex) is significantly facilitated by weak shock, but is not facilitated by strong shock. In addition to the complex EPSP, we simultaneously examined the monosynaptic connection between siphon sensory neurons and siphon motor neurons. The monosynaptic EPSP does not show the pattern of inhibitory modulation by tail shock exhibited by the siphon withdrawal reflex and the complex EPSP: (1) the nondecremented monosynaptic EPSP is not inhibited 90 sec after strong shock, but tends to be above preshock levels; and (2) the decremented monosynaptic EPSP is facilitated by weak as well as strong tail shock. Our results suggest that an important component of the inhibitory process triggered by strong tail shock is mediated by neural elements presynaptic to the siphon motor neurons. Because modulation of the monosynaptic connection between identified siphon sensory and siphon motor neurons does not parallel the tail shock-induced inhibitory patterns observed in the siphon withdrawal reflex and in the complex EPSP, other synaptic connections are likely to play an important role in mediating tail shock-induced inhibition in the siphon withdrawal reflex.

A set of fundamental issues in neuroethology concerns the neural mechanisms underlying behavior and behavioral plasticity. We have recently analyzed these issues by combining a simple systems approach in the marine mollusc Aplysia with a developmental analysis aimed at examining the emergence and maturation of different forms of behavior and learning. We have focussed on two kinds of questions: 1) How are specific neural circuits developmentally assembled to mediate different types of behaviors? and 2) how is plasticity integrated with these circuits to give rise to different forms of learning? From our analysis of the development of learning and memory in Aplysia, several themes have emerged: 1) Different forms of learning emerge according to different developmental timetables. 2) Cellular analogs of learning have the same developmental timetables as their respective forms of behavioral learning. 3) An analysis of non-decremented responses prior to the emergence of sensitization reveals a novel inhibitory process on both behavioral and cellular levels. 4) Sensitization emerges simultaneously in diverse response systems, suggesting an underlying general process. 5) A widespread proliferation of central neurons occurs in the same developmental stage as the emergence of sensitization, raising the possibility that some aspect of the trigger for neuronal proliferation may also contribute to the expression of sensitization.

No abstract