Aversive Olfactory Conditioning Research Articles

Aversive smell associations shape social judgment

Once associating another person with an unpleasant smell, how do we perceive and judge this person from that moment on? Here, we used aversive olfactory conditioning followed by a social attribution task during functional magnetic resonance imaging to address this question. After conditioning, where one of two faces was repeatedly paired with an aversive smell, the participants reported negative affect when viewing the smell-conditioned but not the neutral face. When subsequently confronted with the smell-conditioned face (without any smell), the participants tended to judge both positive and negative behaviors as indicative of personality traits rather than related to the situation. This effect was predicted by the degree of the preceding olfactory evaluative conditioning. Whole brain analysis of stimulus by stage interaction indicated differential activation of the ventromedial prefrontal cortex and right angular gyrus to the conditioned versus the neutral person during the attribution phase only. These results suggest that negative smell associations do not simply induce a negative perception of the target person but rather bias the attribution style towards trait attributions. The fact that this bias was evident regardless of behavior valence suggests it may reflect enhanced psychological distance. Thus, the known observation of social rejection triggered by aversive smell may be driven by a shift in social attribution style.

Genetic Dissection of Aversive Associative Olfactory Learning and Memory in Drosophila Larvae.

Memory formation is a highly complex and dynamic process. It consists of different phases, which depend on various neuronal and molecular mechanisms. In adult Drosophila it was shown that memory formation after aversive Pavlovian conditioning includes—besides other forms—a labile short-term component that consolidates within hours to a longer-lasting memory. Accordingly, memory formation requires the timely controlled action of different neuronal circuits, neurotransmitters, neuromodulators and molecules that were initially identified by classical forward genetic approaches. Compared to adult Drosophila, memory formation was only sporadically analyzed at its larval stage. Here we deconstruct the larval mnemonic organization after aversive olfactory conditioning. We show that after odor-high salt conditioning larvae form two parallel memory phases; a short lasting component that depends on cyclic adenosine 3’5’-monophosphate (cAMP) signaling and synapsin gene function. In addition, we show for the first time for Drosophila larvae an anesthesia resistant component, which relies on radish and bruchpilot gene function, protein kinase C activity, requires presynaptic output of mushroom body Kenyon cells and dopamine function. Given the numerical simplicity of the larval nervous system this work offers a unique prospect for studying memory formation of defined specifications, at full-brain scope with single-cell, and single-synapse resolution.

Appetitive but not aversive olfactory conditioning modifies antennal movements in honeybees.

In honeybees, two olfactory conditioning protocols allow the study of appetitive and aversive Pavlovian associations. Appetitive conditioning of the proboscis extension response (PER) involves associating an odor, the conditioned stimulus (CS) with a sucrose solution, the unconditioned stimulus (US). Conversely, aversive conditioning of the sting extension response (SER) involves associating the odor CS with an electric or thermal shock US. Each protocol is based on the measure of a different behavioral response (proboscis versus sting) and both only provide binary responses (extension or not of the proboscis or sting). These limitations render the measure of the acquired valence of an odor CS difficult without testing the animals in a freely moving situation. Here, we studied the effects of both olfactory conditioning protocols on the movements of the antennae, which are crucial sensory organs for bees. As bees’ antennae are highly mobile, we asked whether their movements in response to an odorant change following appetitive or aversive conditioning and if so, do odor-evoked antennal movements contain information about the acquired valence of the CS? We implemented a tracking system for harnessed bees’ antennal movements based on a motion capture principle at a high frequency rate. We observed that differential appetitive conditioning had a strong effect on antennal movements. Bees responded to the reinforced odorant with a marked forward motion of the antennae and a strong velocity increase. Conversely, differential aversive conditioning had no associative effect on antennal movements. Rather than revealing the acquired valence of an odorant, antennal movements may represent a novel conditioned response taking place during appetitive conditioning and may provide a possible advantage to bees when foraging in natural situations.

Commentary: Olfactory aversive conditioning during sleep reduces cigarette-smoking behavior.

Commentary: Olfactory aversive conditioning during sleep reduces cigarette-smoking behavior.

Activity of Defined Mushroom Body Output Neurons Underlies Learned Olfactory Behavior in Drosophila

SummaryDuring olfactory learning in fruit flies, dopaminergic neurons assign value to odor representations in the mushroom body Kenyon cells. Here we identify a class of downstream glutamatergic mushroom body output neurons (MBONs) called M4/6, or MBON-β2β′2a, MBON-β′2mp, and MBON-γ5β′2a, whose dendritic fields overlap with dopaminergic neuron projections in the tips of the β, β′, and γ lobes. This anatomy and their odor tuning suggests that M4/6 neurons pool odor-driven Kenyon cell synaptic outputs. Like that of mushroom body neurons, M4/6 output is required for expression of appetitive and aversive memory performance. Moreover, appetitive and aversive olfactory conditioning bidirectionally alters the relative odor-drive of M4β′ neurons (MBON-β′2mp). Direct block of M4/6 neurons in naive flies mimics appetitive conditioning, being sufficient to convert odor-driven avoidance into approach, while optogenetically activating these neurons induces avoidance behavior. We therefore propose that drive to the M4/6 neurons reflects odor-directed behavioral choice.

Converging Circuits Mediate Temperature and Shock Aversive Olfactory Conditioning in Drosophila

Drosophila learn to avoid odors that are paired with aversive stimuli. Electric shock is a potent aversive stimulus that acts via dopamine neurons to elicit avoidance of the associated odor. While dopamine signaling has been demonstrated to mediate olfactory electric shock conditioning, it remains unclear how this pathway is involved in other types of behavioral reinforcement, such as in learned avoidance of odors paired with increased temperature. To better understand the neural mechanisms of distinct aversive reinforcement signals, we here established an olfactory temperature conditioning assay comparable to olfactory electric shock conditioning. We show that the AC neurons, which are internal thermal receptors expressing dTrpA1, are selectively required for odor-temperature but not for odor-shock memory. Furthermore, these separate sensory pathways for increased temperature and shock converge onto overlapping populations of dopamine neurons that signal aversive reinforcement. Temperature conditioning appears to require a subset of the dopamine neurons required for electric shock conditioning. We conclude that dopamine neurons integrate different noxious signals into a general aversive reinforcement pathway.

Learning to smell danger: acquired associative representation of threat in the olfactory cortex.

Neuroscience research over the past few decades has reached a strong consensus that the amygdala plays a key role in emotion processing. However, many questions remain unanswered, especially concerning emotion perception. Based on mnemonic theories of olfactory perception and in light of the highly associative nature of olfactory cortical processing, here I propose a sensory cortical model of olfactory threat perception (i.e., sensory-cortex-based threat perception): the olfactory cortex stores threat codes as acquired associative representations (AARs) formed via aversive life experiences, thereby enabling encoding of threat cues during sensory processing. Rodent and human research in olfactory aversive conditioning was reviewed, indicating learning-induced plasticity in the amygdala and the olfactory piriform cortex. In addition, as aversive learning becomes consolidated in the amygdala, the associative olfactory (piriform) cortex may undergo (long-term) plastic changes, resulting in modified neural response patterns that underpin threat AARs. This proposal thus brings forward a sensory cortical pathway to threat processing (in addition to amygdala-based processes), potentially accounting for an alternative mechanism underlying the pathophysiology of anxiety and depression.

An Octopamine-Mushroom Body Circuit Modulates the Formation of Anesthesia-Resistant Memory in Drosophila

Drosophila olfactory aversive conditioning produces two components of intermediate-term memory: anesthesia-sensitive memory (ASM) and anesthesia-resistant memory (ARM). Recently, the anterior paired lateral (APL) neuron innervating the whole mushroom body (MB) has been shown to modulate ASM via gap-junctional communication in olfactory conditioning. Octopamine (OA), an invertebrate analog of norepinephrine, is involved in appetitive conditioning, but its role in aversive memory remains uncertain. Here, we show that chemical neurotransmission from the APL neuron, after conditioning but before testing, is necessary for aversive ARM formation. The APL neurons are tyramine, Tβh, and OA immunopositive. An adult-stage-specific RNAi knockdown of Tβh in the APL neurons or Octβ2R OA receptors in the MB α'β' Kenyon cells (KCs) impaired ARM. Importantly, an additive ARM deficit occurred when Tβh knockdown in the APL neurons was in the radish mutant flies or in the wild-type flies with inhibited serotonin synthesis. OA released from the APL neurons acts on α'β' KCs via Octβ2R receptor to modulate Drosophila ARM formation. Additive effects suggest that two parallel ARM pathways, serotoninergic DPM-αβ KCs and octopaminergic APL-α'β' KCs, exist in the MB.

Appetitive and aversive olfactory learning induce similar generalization rates in the honey bee

Appetitive and aversive learning drive an animal toward or away from stimuli predicting reinforcement, respectively. The specificity of these memories may vary due to differences in cost–benefit relationships associated with appetitive and aversive contexts. As a consequence, generalization performances may differ after appetitive and aversive training. Here, we determined whether honey bees show different rates of olfactory generalization following appetitive olfactory conditioning of the proboscis extension response, or aversive olfactory conditioning of the sting extension response. In both cases, we performed differential conditioning, which improves discrimination learning between a reinforced odor (CS?) and a non-reinforced odor (CS-) and evaluated generalization to two novel odors whose similarity to the CS? and the CS- was different. We show, given the same level of discriminatory performance, that rates of generalization are similar between the two conditioning protocols and discuss the possible causes for this phenomenon.

Dissociation of rugose‐dependent short‐term memory component from memory consolidation in Drosophila

Extensive investigations show several molecular and neuroanatomical mechanisms underlying short-lived and long-lasting memory in Drosophila. At the molecular level, the genetic pathway of memory formation, which was obtained through mutant research, seems to occur sequentially. So far, studies of Drosophila mutants appear to support the idea that mutants defective in short-term memory (STM) are always associated with long-term memory (LTM) impairment. At the neuroanatomical level, distinct memory traces are partially independently distributed. However, whether memory phase dissociation also exists at the molecular level remains unclear. Here, we report on molecular separation of STM and consolidated memory through genetic dissection of rugose mutants. Mutants in the rugose gene, which encodes an evolutionarily conserved A-kinase anchor protein, show immediate memory defects as assayed through aversive olfactory conditioning. Intriguingly, two well-defined consolidated memory components, anesthesia-resistant memory and protein synthesis-dependent LTM, are both normal in spite of the defective immediate memory after 10-session massed and spaced training. Moreover, rugose genetically interacts with cyclic AMP-protein kinase A signaling during STM formation. Considering our previous study that AKAP Yu specifically participates in LTM formation, these results suggest that there exists a molecular level of memory phase dissociation with distinct AKAPs in Drosophila.

Big answers from a small fly with a cultured brain

Anyone who has swatted flies buzzing over their food knows how deftly they manoeuvre their bodies in the air, and how quickly they learn, forcing you to readjust your striking strategy. Their intelligence is almost humbling for humans. Flies display their learning abilities in various contexts, and a well-studied example is their memory linking odours to noxious stimuli. The fruit fly Drosophila can associate conditioned stimuli (such as odour) with unconditioned stimuli (a foot shock) and learn to increase avoidance with the presentation of odour. The association between odour and shock can be retained over a long period. In order to understand how such memories in a classical conditioning paradigm are formed at the cellular level, delineating the neural networks responsible is critical. Over the years, the anatomical basis of such learning processes has been studied, and the critical role of the brain structure known as the mushroom body has been established (de Belle & Heisenberg, 1994). In this issue of The Journal of Physiology, an article by Ueno et al. (2012), using an innovative, state of the art technique, examined how information is integrated at synapses in the mushroom body. The authors isolated fly brains and cultured them in vitro, even over a week in some experiments. Using genetically encoded Ca2+ indicators in the cultured brain preparation, the authors showed that information encoding odour and shock, transmitted through distinct pathways, is integrated in specific areas of the mushroom body. The pathways for odour and shock are antennal lobes (AL) and ascending fibres of the ventral nerve cord (AFV), respectively. The use of cultured brains enabled the direct stimulation of AL and AFV in a mechanically stable condition, emulating odour and shock input. Simultaneous stimulation of both pathways led to long-term enhancement of the odour-induced response, persisting over 2 h. The authors went further and elucidated the neurotransmitters and their receptors playing roles in the memory formation. The input of odour information to the mushroom body is mediated by nicotinic acetylcholine receptors, while that of shock information is mediated by NMDA receptors. Moreover, D1 dopamine receptors, which are not required for individual AL- or AFV-mediated Ca2+ responses, are necessary during the simultaneous stimulation for establishing long-term enhancement. Importantly, the properties of long-term enhancement, both in terms of physiology and genetics, resembled those of memory formation at the behavioural level, suggesting that the revealed network underlies the behaviour. An intriguing aspect of Drosophila neurons, highlighted in the cultured brain preparation, is the surprisingly high concentration of Mg2+, above 20 mm, in the haemolymph. In a paper recently published in Neuron, the same group reported that the Mg2+ block of NMDA receptors, which occurs only in high Mg2+ concentrations, plays a critical role in the formation of long-term memory (Miyashita et al. 2012). Twenty millimolar Mg2+ in the semi-intact cultured brain system revealed physiologically relevant areas in the mushroom body for signal transduction. The synaptic basis of olfactory aversive conditioning and the receptors involved in the process pose interesting questions for synapse physiology. In particular, interactions of the dopaminergic and cholinergic systems have been implicated in the mushroom body (Tsydzik & Wright, 2009), and the role of D1 dopamine receptors in the memory circuit is highly intriguing. The region-specific rescue experiment suggests that dopamine receptors expressed in the mushroom body are critical. Do they modify postsynaptic nicotinic acetylcholine receptors, or do they regulate release of acetylcholine vesicles in a retrograde fashion? How are they activated and modified in the learning process? The mechanism of memory formation is a hotly studied area of neuroscience, and researchers use different models. Thanks to a plethora of available genetic tools, Drosophila provides valuable information to advance the field. With newly developed experimental techniques, Drosophila neuroscientists will continue to explore the physiological basis of memory. In the meantime, based on their efforts, we can envision a neural circuit taking shape in the brains of tiny insects the next time we narrowly miss a fly hovering over our meal!

A Permissive Role of Mushroom Body α/β Core Neurons in Long-Term Memory Consolidation in Drosophila

Memories are not created equally strong or persistent for different experiences. In Drosophila, induction of long-term memory (LTM) for aversive olfactory conditioning requires ten spaced repetitive training trials, whereas a single trial is sufficient for LTM generation in appetitive olfactory conditioning. Although, with the ease of genetic manipulation, many genes and brain structures have been related to LTM formation, it is still an important task to identify new components and reveal the mechanisms underlying LTM regulation. Here we show that single-trial induction of LTM can also be achieved for aversive olfactory conditioning through inhibition of highwire (hiw)-encoded E3 ubiquitin ligase activity or activation of its targeted proteins in a cluster of neurons, localized within the α/β core region of the mushroom body. Moreover, the synaptic output of these neurons is critical within a limited posttraining interval for permitting consolidation of both aversive and appetitive LTM. We propose that these α/β core neurons serve as a "gate" to keep LTM from being formed, whereas any experience capable of "opening" the gate is given permit to be consolidated into LTM.

Slow oscillations in two pairs of dopaminergic neurons gate long-term memory formation in Drosophila

A fundamental duty of any efficient memory system is to prevent long-lasting storage of poorly relevant information. However, little is known about dedicated mechanisms that appropriately trigger production of long-term memory (LTM). We examined the role of Drosophila dopaminergic neurons in the control of LTM formation and found that they act as a switch between two exclusive consolidation pathways leading to LTM or anesthesia-resistant memory (ARM). Blockade, after aversive olfactory conditioning, of three pairs of dopaminergic neurons projecting on mushroom bodies, the olfactory memory center, enhanced ARM, whereas their overactivation conversely impaired ARM. Notably, blockade of these neurons during the intertrial intervals of a spaced training precluded LTM formation. Two pairs of these dopaminergic neurons displayed sustained calcium oscillations in naive flies. Oscillations were weakened by ARM-inducing massed training and were enhanced during LTM formation. Our results indicate that oscillations of two pairs of dopaminergic neurons control ARM levels and gate LTM.

Drosophila PQBP1 regulates learning acquisition at projection neurons in aversive olfactory conditioning.

Polyglutamine tract-binding protein-1 (PQBP1) is involved in the transcription-splicing coupling, and its mutations cause a group of human mental retardation syndromes. We generated a fly model in which the Drosophila homolog of PQBP1 (dPQBP1) is repressed by insertion of piggyBac. In classical odor conditioning, learning acquisition was significantly impaired in homozygous piggyBac-inserted flies, whereas the following memory retention was completely normal. Mushroom bodies (MBs) and antennal lobes were morphologically normal in dPQBP1-mutant flies. Projection neurons (PNs) were not reduced in number and their fiber connections were not changed, whereas gene expressions including NMDA receptor subunit 1 (NR1) were decreased in PNs. Targeted double-stranded RNA-mediated silencing of dPQBP1 in PNs, but not in MBs, similarly disrupted learning acquisition. NR1 overexpression in PNs rescued the learning disturbance of dPQBP1 mutants. HDAC (histone deacetylase) inhibitors, SAHA (suberoylanilide hydroxamic acid) and PBA (phenylbutyrate), that upregulated NR1 partially rescued the learning disturbance. Collectively, these findings identify dPQBP1 as a novel gene regulating learning acquisition at PNs.

Optimizing Drosophila olfactory learning with a semi-automated training device

Drosophila olfactory aversive conditioning has served as a powerful model system with which to elucidate the molecular and neuronal mechanisms underlying memory formation. In the typical protocol, flies are exposed to a constant odor stream while receiving a pulsed electric shock in the conditioning tube of a manual apparatus. We have devised a simple, low-cost semi-automated conditioning apparatus that computationally controls the delivery of odor and shock. A semiconductor-based odor sensor is employed to monitor the change of odor concentration in the training tube. The system thus allows electric shocks to be precisely matched with odor concentration in the training tube. We found that short-term memory performance was improved with a pulsed odor flow protocol, in which odor is presented in short pulses, each paired with electric shock, rather than as a constant flow. The effect of pulsed odor flow might be ascribed to the phenomenon of ‘conditioned approach’, where approach toward an odor is induced when the electric shock is presented before odor pulse ends. Our data shows that the system is applicable to the study of olfactory memory formation and to the examination of conditioning parameters at a level of detail not practical with a manual apparatus.

Behavioral Characterization of Individual Olfactory Memory Retrieval in Drosophila Melanogaster

Memory performance depends not only on effective learning and storage of information, but also on its efficient retrieval. In Drosophila, aversive olfactory conditioning generates qualitatively different forms of memory depending on the number and spacing of conditioning trials. However, it is not known how these differences are reflected at the retrieval level, in the behavior of individual flies during testing. We analyzed conditioned behaviors after one conditioning trial and after massed and spaced repeated trials. The single conditioning produces an early memory that was tested at 1.5 h. Tested at 24 h after training, the spaced and the massed protocols generate two different forms of consolidated memory, dependent, or independent of de novo protein-synthesis. We found clearly distinct patterns of locomotor activity in flies trained with either spaced or massed conditioning protocols. Spaced-trained flies exhibited immediate and dynamic choices between punished and unpunished odors during the test, whereas massed-trained flies made a delayed choice and showed earlier disappearance of the conditioned response. Flies trained with single and spaced trials responded to the punished odor by decreasing their resting time, but not massed-trained flies. These findings demonstrate that genetically and pharmacologically distinct forms of memory drive characteristically different forms of locomotor behavior during retrieval, and they may shed light on our previous observation that memory retrieval in massed-trained flies is socially facilitated. Social interactions would enhance exploratory activity, and then reduce the latency of their conditioned choice and delay its extinction.

Searching for learning-dependent changes in the antennal lobe: simultaneous recording of neural activity and aversive olfactory learning in honeybees

Plasticity in the honeybee brain has been studied using the appetitive olfactory conditioning of the proboscis extension reflex, in which a bee learns the association between an odor and a sucrose reward. In this framework, coupling behavioral measurements of proboscis extension and invasive recordings of neural activity has been difficult because proboscis movements usually introduce brain movements that affect physiological preparations. Here we took advantage of a new conditioning protocol, the aversive olfactory conditioning of the sting extension reflex, which does not generate this problem. We achieved the first simultaneous recordings of conditioned sting extension responses and calcium imaging of antennal lobe activity, thus revealing on-line processing of olfactory information during conditioning trials. Based on behavioral output we distinguished learners and non-learners and analyzed possible learning-dependent changes in antennal lobe activity. We did not find differences between glomerular responses to the CS+ and the CS− in learners. Unexpectedly, we found that during conditioning trials non-learners exhibited a progressive decrease in physiological responses to odors, irrespective of their valence. This effect could neither be attributed to a fitness problem nor to abnormal dye bleaching. We discuss the absence of learning-induced changes in the antennal lobe of learners and the decrease in calcium responses found in non-learners. Further studies will have to extend the search for functional plasticity related to aversive learning to other brain areas and to look on a broader range of temporal scales.

A Neural Circuit Mechanism Integrating Motivational State with Memory Expression in Drosophila

Behavioral expression of food-associated memory in fruit flies is constrained by satiety and promoted by hunger, suggesting an influence of motivational state. Here, we identify a neural mechanism that integrates the internal state of hunger and appetitive memory. We show that stimulation of neurons that express neuropeptide F (dNPF), an ortholog of mammalian NPY, mimics food deprivation and promotes memory performance in satiated flies. Robust appetitive memory performance requires the dNPF receptor in six dopaminergic neurons that innervate a distinct region of the mushroom bodies. Blocking these dopaminergic neurons releases memory performance in satiated flies, whereas stimulation suppresses memory performance in hungry flies. Therefore, dNPF and dopamine provide a motivational switch in the mushroom body that controls the output of appetitive memory.

Social Facilitation of Long-Lasting Memory Retrieval in Drosophila

Recent studies demonstrate that social interactions can have a profound influence on Drosophila melanogaster behavior and cuticular pheromone patterns. Olfactory memory performance has mostly been investigated in groups, and previous studies have reported that grouped flies do not interact with each other and behave in the same way as individual flies during short-term memory retrieval. However, the influence of social effects on the two known forms of Drosophila long-lasting associative memory, anesthesia-resistant memory (ARM) and long-term memory (LTM), has never been reported. We show here that ARM is displayed by individual flies but is socially facilitated; flies trained for ARM interact within a group to improve their conditioned performance. In contrast, testing shows LTM improvement in individual flies rather than in a group. We show that the social facilitation of ARM during group testing is independent of the social context of training and does not involve nonspecific aggregation. Furthermore, we demonstrate that social interactions facilitate ARM retrieval. We also show that social interactions necessary for this facilitation are specifically generated by trained flies: when single flies trained for ARM are mixed with groups of naive flies, they display poor retrieval, whereas mixing with groups trained either for ARM or LTM enhances performance.

Reappraising Social Insect Behavior through Aversive Responsiveness and Learning

BackgroundThe success of social insects can be in part attributed to their division of labor, which has been explained by a response threshold model. This model posits that individuals differ in their response thresholds to task-associated stimuli, so that individuals with lower thresholds specialize in this task. This model is at odds with findings on honeybee behavior as nectar and pollen foragers exhibit different responsiveness to sucrose, with nectar foragers having higher response thresholds to sucrose concentration. Moreover, it has been suggested that sucrose responsiveness correlates with responsiveness to most if not all other stimuli. If this is the case, explaining task specialization and the origins of division of labor on the basis of differences in response thresholds is difficult.MethodologyTo compare responsiveness to stimuli presenting clear-cut differences in hedonic value and behavioral contexts, we measured appetitive and aversive responsiveness in the same bees in the laboratory. We quantified proboscis extension responses to increasing sucrose concentrations and sting extension responses to electric shocks of increasing voltage. We analyzed the relationship between aversive responsiveness and aversive olfactory conditioning of the sting extension reflex, and determined how this relationship relates to division of labor.Principal FindingsSucrose and shock responsiveness measured in the same bees did not correlate, thus suggesting that they correspond to independent behavioral syndromes, a foraging and a defensive one. Bees which were more responsive to shock learned and memorized better aversive associations. Finally, guards were less responsive than nectar foragers to electric shocks, exhibiting higher tolerance to low voltage shocks. Consequently, foragers, which are more sensitive, were the ones learning and memorizing better in aversive conditioning.ConclusionsOur results constitute the first integrative study on how aversive responsiveness affects learning, memory and social organization in honeybees. We suggest that parallel behavioral modules (e.g. appetitive, aversive) coexist within each individual bee and determine its tendency to adopt a given task. This conclusion, which is at odds with a simple threshold model, should open new opportunities for exploring the division of labor in social insects.