DEET (N,N-diethyl-meta-toluamide) is the world's most widely used topical insect repellent, with broad effectiveness against most insects. Its mechanism of action and molecular target remain unknown. Here, we show that DEET blocks electrophysiological responses of olfactory sensory neurons to attractive odors in Anopheles gambiae and Drosophila melanogaster. DEET inhibits behavioral attraction to food odors in Drosophila, and this inhibition requires the highly conserved olfactory co-receptor OR83b. DEET inhibits odor-evoked currents mediated by the insect odorant receptor complex, comprising a ligand-binding subunit and OR83b. We conclude that DEET masks host odor by inhibiting subsets of heteromeric insect odorant receptors that require the OR83b co-receptor. The identification of candidate molecular targets for the action of DEET may aid in the design of safer and more effective insect repellents.

. Sparsening and temporal sharpening of olfactory representations in the honeybee mushroom bodies. J Neurophysiol 94: [3303][3304][3305][3306][3307][3308][3309][3310][3311][3312][3313] 2005. First published July 13, 2005; doi:10.1152/jn.00397.2005. We explored the transformations accompanying the transmission of odor information from the first-order processing area, the antennal lobe, to the mushroom body, a higherorder integration center in the insect brain. Using Ca 2ϩ imaging, we recorded activity in the dendrites of the projection neurons that connect the antennal lobe with the mushroom body. Next, we recorded the presynaptic terminals of these projection neurons. Finally, we characterized their postsynaptic partners, the intrinsic neurons of the mushroom body, the clawed Kenyon cells. We found fundamental differences in odor coding between the antennal lobe and the mushroom body. Odors evoked combinatorial activity patterns at all three processing stages, but the spatial patterns became progressively sparser along this path. Projection neuron dendrites and boutons showed similar response profiles, but the boutons were more narrowly tuned to odors. The transmission from projection neuron boutons to Kenyon cells was accompanied by a further sparsening of the population code. Activated Kenyon cells were highly odor specific. Furthermore, the onset of Kenyon cell responses to projection neurons occurred within the first 200 ms and complex temporal patterns were transformed into brief phasic responses. Thus two types of transformations occurred within the MB: sparsening of a combinatorial code, mediated by pre-and postsynaptic processing within the mushroom body microcircuits, and temporal sharpening of postsynaptic Kenyon cell responses, probably involving a broader loop of inhibitory recurrent neurons.

Odors elicit spatio-temporal patterns of activity in the olfactory bulb of vertebrates and the antennal lobe of insects. There have been several reports of changes in these patterns following olfactory learning. These studies pose a conundrum: how can an animal learn to efficiently respond to a particular odor with an adequate response, if its primary representation already changes during this process? In this study, we offer a possible solution for this problem. We measured odor-evoked calcium responses in a subpopulation of uniglomerular AL output neurons in honeybees. We show that their responses to odors are remarkably resistant to plasticity following a variety of appetitive olfactory learning paradigms. There was no significant difference in the changes of odor-evoked activity between single and multiple trial forward or backward conditioning, differential conditioning, or unrewarded successive odor stimulation. In a behavioral learning experiment we show that these neurons are necessary for conditioned odor responses. We conclude that these uniglomerular projection neurons are necessary for reliable odor coding and are not modified by learning in this paradigm. The role that other projection neurons play in olfactory learning remains to be investigated.

The brain's link between perception and action involves several steps, which include stimulus transduction, neuronal coding of the stimulus, comparison to a memory template and choice of an appropriate behavioral response. All of these need time, and many studies report that the time needed to compare two stimuli correlates inversely with the perceived distance between them. We developed a behavioral assay in which we tested the time that a honeybee needs to discriminate between odors consisting of mixtures of two components, and included both very similar and very different stimuli spanning four log-concentration ranges. Bees learned to discriminate all odors, including very similar odors and the same odor at different concentrations. Even though discriminating two very similar odors appears to be a more difficult task than discriminating two very distinct substances, we found that the time needed to make a choice for or against an odor was independent of odor similarity. Our data suggest that, irrespective of the nature of the olfactory code, the bee olfactory system evaluates odor quality after a constant interval. This may ensure that odors are only assessed after the olfactory network has optimized its representation.

We investigate the interplay of odor identity and concentration coding in the antennal lobe (AL) of the honeybee Apis mellifera. In this primary olfactory center of the honeybee brain, odors are encoded by the spatio-temporal response patterns of olfactory glomeruli. With rising odor concentration, further glomerular responses are recruited into the patterns, which affects distances between the patterns. Based on calcium-imaging recordings, we found that such pattern broadening renders distances between glomerular response patterns closer to chemical distances between the corresponding odor molecules. Our results offer an explanation for the honeybee's improved odor discrimination performance at higher odor concentrations.