Central Gustatory Neurons Integrate Taste Quality Information From Four Appendages in the Moth Heliothis virescens

Kvello, Pål; Jørgensen, Kari; Mustaparta, Hanna

doi:10.1152/jn.00985.2009

Cited by 34 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The effect of pre-exposure to both sucrose and quinine on sucrose responses was highly similar, in spite of quinine being a feeding deterrent (i.e. an aversive signal) in phytophagous insects [26], [37]–[39], whereas sucrose is an appetitive stimulus. To our knowledge, this is the first time that a brief exposure to tastants is shown to increase behavioural responses to the same or even a different chemical stimulus after one whole day.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Brief Exposure to Sensory Cues Elicits Stimulus-Nonspecific General Sensitization in an Insect

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effect of repeated exposure to sensory stimuli, with or without reward is well known to induce stimulus-specific modifications of behaviour, described as different forms of learning. In recent studies we showed that a brief single pre-exposure to the female-produced sex pheromone or even a predator sound can increase the behavioural and central nervous responses to this pheromone in males of the noctuid moth Spodoptera littoralis. To investigate if this increase in sensitivity might be restricted to the pheromone system or is a form of general sensitization, we studied here if a brief pre-exposure to stimuli of different modalities can reciprocally change behavioural and physiological responses to olfactory and gustatory stimuli. Olfactory and gustatory pre-exposure and subsequent behavioural tests were carried out to reveal possible intra- and cross-modal effects. Attraction to pheromone, monitored with a locomotion compensator, increased after exposure to olfactory and gustatory stimuli. Behavioural responses to sucrose, investigated using the proboscis extension reflex, increased equally after pre-exposure to olfactory and gustatory cues. Pheromone-specific neurons in the brain and antennal gustatory neurons did, however, not change their sensitivity after sucrose exposure. The observed intra- and reciprocal cross-modal effects of pre-exposure may represent a new form of stimulus-nonspecific general sensitization originating from modifications at higher sensory processing levels.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Brief Exposure to Sensory Cues Elicits Stimulus-Nonspecific General Sensitization in an Insect

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…All of our analyses involve calculating response firing rates within particular time periods, extending the large multi-species corpus of studies in which concentration- and palatability-related information has been found in firing rates (Ganchrow and Erickson, 1970; Di Lorenzo and Schwartzbaum, 1982; Yamamoto, 1984; Spector et al, 1988; Scott et al, 1991; Chalansonnet and Chaput, 1998; McCaughey and Scott, 1998; Nishijo et al, 1998; Boughter et al, 1999; Duchamp-Viret et al, 2000; Katz et al, 2001; Rogers and Newland, 2002; Wachowiak et al, 2002; Taha and Fields, 2005; Tindell et al, 2006; Grossman et al, 2008; Chandrashekar et al, 2010; Haddad et al, 2010; Kvello et al, 2010). Here, we analyze the presence and timing of both properties in cortical and amygdalar taste responses, bringing an identical battery of tests to bear on responses of each region.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sodium Concentration Coding Gives Way to Evaluative Coding in Cortex and Amygdala

Sadacca¹,

Rothwax²,

Katz³

2012

Journal of Neuroscience

123

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Typically, stimulus batteries used to characterize sensory neural coding span physical parameter spaces (e.g., concentration: from low to high). For awake animals, however, psychological variables (e.g., pleasantnesss/palatability) with complicated relationships to the physical often dominate neural responses. Here we pit physical and psychological axes against one another, presenting awake rats with a stimulus set including 4 NaCl concentrations (0.01M, 0.1M, 0.3M, 1.0M) plus palatable (0.3M sucrose) and aversive (0.001M quinine) benchmarks, while recording the activity of neurons in two sites vital for NaCl taste processing, gustatory cortex (GC) and central amygdala (CeA). Since NaCl palatability (i. e., preference) follows a non-monotonic, ‘inverted-U-shaped’ curve while concentration increases monotonically, this stimulus battery allowed us to test whether GC and CeA responses better reflect external or internal variables. As predicted, GC single-neuron and population responses reflected both parameters in separate response epochs: sodium concentration-related information appeared with the earliest taste-specific responses, giving way to palatability-related information, in an overlapping subset of neurons, several hundred milliseconds later. CeA single-neuron and population responses, meanwhile, contained only a brief period of concentration specificity, occurring just before palatability-related information emerged (simultaneously with, or slightly later than, in GC). Thus, cortex and amygdala both prominently reflect NaCl palatability late in their responses; CeA neurons largely respond to either palatable or aversive stimuli, while GC responses tend to reflect the entire palatability spectrum in a graded fashion.

show abstract

“…Feeding in Drosophila larvae has been shown to make use of a CPG in the SEZ (Schoofs et al 2010(Schoofs et al , H€ uckesfeld et al 2015. In the SEZ of an adult moth, an interneuron was recorded that showed phasic activity to a tonic sugar stimulus (Kvello et al 2010), making it a good candidate for a component of a CPG. Since proboscis extension and pumping can be uncoupled, they might make use of two CPGs; it is thought that pumping can only be elicited by stimulation of the proboscis, whereas proboscis extension can be triggered by stimulating either the leg or proboscis (Dethier 1976, Vosshall and.…”

Section: Interneuronsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Motor control of fly feeding

McKellar¹

2016

Journal of Neurogenetics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Following considerable progress on the molecular and cellular basis of taste perception in fly sensory neurons, the time is now ripe to explore how taste information, integrated with hunger and satiety, undergo a sensorimotor transformation to lead to the motor actions of feeding behavior. I examine what is known of feeding circuitry in adult flies from more than 250 years of work in larger flies and from newer work in Drosophila. I review the anatomy of the proboscis, its muscles and their functions (where known), its motor neurons, interneurons known to receive taste inputs, interneurons that diverge from taste circuitry to provide information to other circuits, interneurons from other circuits that converge on feeding circuits, proprioceptors that influence the motor control of feeding, and sites of integration of hunger and satiety on feeding circuits. In spite of the several neuron types now known, a connected pathway from taste inputs to feeding motor outputs has yet to be found. We are on the threshold of an era where these individual components will be assembled into circuits, revealing how nervous system architecture leads to the control of behavior.

show abstract

Central Gustatory Neurons Integrate Taste Quality Information From Four Appendages in the Moth Heliothis virescens

Cited by 34 publications

References 51 publications

Brief Exposure to Sensory Cues Elicits Stimulus-Nonspecific General Sensitization in an Insect

Brief Exposure to Sensory Cues Elicits Stimulus-Nonspecific General Sensitization in an Insect

Sodium Concentration Coding Gives Way to Evaluative Coding in Cortex and Amygdala

Motor control of fly feeding

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About