Search

Summary Background 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. Results 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. Conclusions We conclude that dopamine neurons integrate different noxious signals into a general aversive reinforcement pathway.

The neural representation of a sensory stimulus evolves with time, and animals keep that representation even after stimulus cessation (i.e., a stimulus “trace”). To contrast the memories of an odor and an odor trace, we here establish a rigorous trace conditioning paradigm in the fruit fly,Drosophila melanogaster. We modify the olfactory associative learning paradigm, in which the odor and electric shock are presented with a temporal overlap (delay conditioning). Given a few-second temporal gap between the presentations of the odor and the shock in trace conditioning, the odor trace must be kept until the arrival of electric shock to form associative memory. We found that memories after trace and delay conditioning have striking similarities: both reached the same asymptotic learning level, although at different rates, and both kinds of memory have similar decay kinetics and highly correlated generalization profiles across odors. In search of the physiological correlate of the odor trace, we usedin vivocalcium imaging to characterize the odor-evoked activity of the olfactory receptor neurons in the antennal lobe. After the offset of odor presentation, the receptor neurons showed persistent, odor-specific response patterns that lasted for a few seconds and were fundamentally different from the response patterns during the stimulation. Weak correlation between the behavioral odor generalization profile in trace conditioning and the physiological odor similarity profiles in the antennal lobe suggest that the odor trace used for associative learning may be encoded downstream of the olfactory receptor neurons.

Trace conditioning is a form of associative learning that can be induced by presenting a conditioned stimulus (CS) and an unconditioned stimulus (US) following each other, but separated by a temporal gap. This gap distinguishes trace conditioning from classical delay conditioning, where the CS and US overlap. To bridge the temporal gap between both stimuli and to form an association between CS and US in trace conditioning, the brain must keep a neural representation of the CS after its termination—a stimulus trace. Behavioral and physiological studies on trace and delay conditioning revealed similarities between the two forms of learning, like similar memory decay and similar odor identity perception in invertebrates. On the other hand differences were reported also, like the requirement of distinct brain structures in vertebrates or disparities in molecular mechanisms in both vertebrates and invertebrates. For example, in commonly used vertebrate conditioning paradigms the hippocampus is necessary for trace but not for delay conditioning, and Drosophila delay conditioning requires the Rutabaga adenylyl cyclase (Rut-AC), which is dispensable in trace conditioning. It is still unknown how the brain encodes CS traces and how they are associated with a US in trace conditioning. Insects serve as powerful models to address the mechanisms underlying trace conditioning, due to their simple brain anatomy, behavioral accessibility and established methods of genetic interference. In this review we summarize the recent progress in insect trace conditioning on the behavioral and physiological level and emphasize similarities and differences compared to delay conditioning. Moreover, we examine proposed molecular and computational models and reassess different experimental approaches used for trace conditioning.