Appetitive and Aversive Learning in Spodoptera littoralis Larvae

Salloum, A.; Colson, Violaine; Marion‐Poll, Frédéric

doi:10.1093/chemse/bjr041

Cited by 29 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We note, however, that in this paradigm odor and punishment are presented not only in very close temporal but also in very close spatial proximity, potentially prompting the odor to stand in for the punishment, rather than becoming a signal for punishment. A similar argument may apply to odor-taste learning in Spodoptera littoralis larvae (Salloum et al 2011).…”

Section: Generality?mentioning

confidence: 67%

A behavior-based circuit model of how outcome expectations organize learned behavior in larval Drosophila

Schleyer

Saumweber²,

Nahrendorf³

et al. 2011

Learn. Mem.

117

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Drosophila larvae combine a numerically simple brain, a correspondingly moderate behavioral complexity, and the availability of a rich toolbox for transgenic manipulation. This makes them attractive as a study case when trying to achieve a circuit-level understanding of behavior organization. From a series of behavioral experiments, we suggest a circuitry of chemosensory processing, odor -tastant memory trace formation, and the "decision" process to behaviorally express these memory traces-or not. The model incorporates statements about the neuronal organization of innate vs. conditioned chemosensory behavior, and the types of interaction between olfactory and gustatory pathways during the establishment as well as the behavioral expression of odor -tastant memory traces. It in particular suggests that innate olfactory behavior is responsive in nature, whereas conditioned olfactory behavior is captured better when seen as an action in pursuit of its outcome. It incorporates the available neuroanatomical and behavioral data and thus should be useful as scaffold for the ongoing investigations of the chemo-behavioral system in larval Drosophila.

show abstract

Section: Generality?mentioning

confidence: 67%

A behavior-based circuit model of how outcome expectations organize learned behavior in larval Drosophila

Schleyer

Saumweber²,

Nahrendorf³

et al. 2011

Learn. Mem.

117

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It allows the discrimination of edible from non-edible items because the latter have usually a bitter taste (Yamamoto et al, 1994;Scott, 2004;Reilly and Schachtman, 2008;Yarmolinsky et al, 2009). Animals rapidly learn to avoid bitter substances and, as a consequence, numerous learning protocols use aversive tastes as reinforcers to promote robust learning and memory (Darling and Slotnick, 1994;Laska and Metzker, 1998;Ito et al, 1999;Gerber and Hendel, 2006;Kemenes et al, 2011;Salloum et al, 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Learning context modulates aversive taste strength in honey bees

Sanchez

Serre

Avarguès‐Weber

et al. 2015

Journal of Experimental Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The capacity of honey bees (Apis mellifera) to detect bitter substances is controversial because they ingest without reluctance different kinds of bitter solutions in the laboratory, whereas free-flying bees avoid them in visual discrimination tasks. Here, we asked whether the gustatory perception of bees changes with the behavioral context so that tastes that are less effective as negative reinforcements in a given context become more effective in a different context. We trained bees to discriminate an odorant paired with 1 mol l −1 sucrose solution from another odorant paired with either distilled water, 3 mol l −1 NaCl or 60 mmol l −1 quinine. Training was either Pavlovian [olfactory conditioning of the proboscis extension reflex (PER) in harnessed bees], or mainly operant (olfactory conditioning of free-walking bees in a Y-maze). PER-trained and maze-trained bees were subsequently tested both in their original context and in the alternative context. Whereas PER-trained bees transferred their choice to the Y-maze situation, Y-maze-trained bees did not respond with a PER to odors when subsequently harnessed. In both conditioning protocols, NaCl and distilled water were the strongest and the weakest aversive reinforcement, respectively. A significant variation was found for quinine, which had an intermediate aversive effect in PER conditioning but a more powerful effect in the Y-maze, similar to that of NaCl. These results thus show that the aversive strength of quinine varies with the learning context, and reveal the plasticity of the bee's gustatory system. We discuss the experimental constraints of both learning contexts and focus on stress as a key modulator of taste in the honey bee. Further explorations of bee taste are proposed to understand the physiology of taste modulation in bees.

show abstract

“…Although insects can associate colors with food (Salloum et al 2011), our only interest was to determine if these compounds (dyes) increased feeding. Our finding that larvae preferred to feed on blends containing chlorophyll was not surprising, because it is a compound normally consumed by larvae.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%