14 research outputs found
Increase then depression of locomotor activity after high temperature experience.
<p>(A-D) Walking distance of flies was recorded over 3 min using the heat-box apparatus. After two initial 30 s periods at 24Β°C the chambers were heated to 29Β°, 33Β°, 37Β° or 41Β°C for 30 s (A-D; dark gray columns). After high temperature exposure chambers were cooled down to 24Β°C. Control flies were kept at constant 24Β°C (light gray columns). Walking distance increased with high temperature exposure (F = 17.12, P< 0.00001. Newman-Keuls post-hoc tests = p β€ 0.001 = *** comparing with and without high temperature exposure). (E-F) Normalized walking distance during (E) and after (F) high temperature exposure. During high temperature exposure, flyβs locomotor activity increases. In the range of 29Β° to 41Β°C the relationship between temperature and walking distance shows a strong linear correlation (p = 0.0059 = **). After high temperature exposure of 37Β° and 41Β°C locomotion is significantly reduced compared to control flies (Newman-Keuls post-hoc tests = p β€ 0.001 = *** comparing with and without high temperature exposure). The bars represent mean values and the error bars are standard errors of the mean.</p
The role of octopamine / Tyramine and serotonin in changes of locomotor activity following high temperature exposure.
<p>(A-B) Genetically modified flies that lack the expression of octopamine and increases in tyramine ((A), TbH[M18])) or reduced serotonin function ((B) Trh-GAL4 / UAS-TeTxLC)) were exposed to a single high temperature stimulus (41Β°C, 30 s) and locomotion was recorded for 8 minutes. (A) The TbH[M18] flies had a strongly reduced response to the 41Β°C pulse but a similar reduction in walking distance after the exposure (F = 31.01, P < 0.001, Newman-Keuls post-hoc test p < 0.001 = ***). (B) Moreover, Trh-GAL4 / UAS-TeTxLC flies had a reduced initial response to 41Β°C, but showed a similar reduction in walking distance compared to genetic control flies (F = 2.1, P < 0.02, Newman-Keuls post-hoc comparison p < 0.001 = ***). The bars represent mean values and the error bars are standard errors of the mean.</p
Locomotor depression after high temperature and electric shock exposure is a long lasting change in behavior.
<p>(A-D) Extended recording of walking activity after high temperature exposure (37Β° and 41Β°C) revealed a steady change in locomotion. Activity increased with high temperature exposure (F = 22.14, P < 0.00001, Newman-Keuls post-hoc test p < 0.001 = ***). Moreover, (B, D) walking activity is strongly reduced 30 s after the 37Β°C stimulus but largely normal 8 min later (B) and is still highly significantly different for flies exposed to 41Β°C at both time points (D) when compared to control animals kept at 24Β°C (F = 33.27 and 81.78, Pβs < 0.0001; Newman-Keuls post-hoc test p<sub>37Β°C 30s</sub> < 0.001 = ***; p<sub>37Β°C 8 min</sub> = 0.47; p<sub>41Β°C 30s</sub> <0.001 = ***; p<sub>41Β°C 8 min</sub> < 0.0001 = ***). (E,F) Walking distance was depressed after exposure to high temperatures and electric shock. A significant reduction in locomotor activity was evident up to 5 hours after exposure to 41Β°C, and up to 8 hours after exposure to electric shocks (temperature: Fsβ = 0.007, 15.3, 20.9, 13.6, 7.4, 5.7, 1.5, 1.2. shock: Fβs = 0.16, 48.7, 23.8, 12.1, 5.7, 7.9, 6.6, and 1.3. Pβs < 0.001 = ***, Pβs < 0.01 = **; P < 0.05 = *). The bars represent mean values and the error bars are standard errors of the mean.</p
Mutation of the <i>rsh</i> gene reveals a major role in aversive olfactory memory (ARM) and is necessary for appetitive olfactory memory shortly after conditioning.
<p>Flies were either trained with odorants paired with electric shock or sugar reward. The training, cold-shock, retention intervals, and testing patterns (both pre and post) are diagrammed for each panel, the time axis is not to scale. (<i>A</i>) Olfactory memory tested three min after training is reduced in <i>rsh<sup>1</sup></i> flies compared to CS flies, although levels do not reach statistical significance (F(1,12) β=β3.5, Pβ=β0.09). To reveal the <i>rsh</i> function in aversive olfactory memory, wild-type CS and <i>rsh<sup>1</sup></i> flies were trained with odorant / shock pairings, then after 2 hrs were given a cold-shock, memory was tested 1 hr later. Memory performance of <i>rsh<sup>1</sup></i> flies was significantly lower than wild-type CS flies with this procedure (F(1,10) β=β5.0, * β=β Pβ=β0.04). (<i>B</i>) Appetitive olfactory short-term memory was tested at 3, 30, and 60 min after the odorant / sucrose training session. A <i>rsh<sup>1</sup></i> phenotype was evident at all tested time points after training (3 min: F(1,16) β=β29.2, *** β=β P<0.001; 30 min: F(1,14) β=β12.3, ** β=β P<0.01; 60 min: F(1,14) β=β12.1, ** β=β P<0.01). (<i>C</i>) The <i>rsh<sup>1</sup></i> appetitive short term olfactory memory phenotype is rescued with a transgenic copy of the wild-type version of the <i>rsh</i> gene (F(3,32) β=β13.0, P<0.0001; post-hoc tests: CS vs <i>rsh<sup>1</sup></i> *** β=βP<0.001, <i>rsh<sup>1</sup></i> vs. <i>rsh<sup>1</sup></i>; hs-<i>rsh-1</i> * β=βP<0.05, CS vs. <i>rsh<sup>1</sup></i>; hs-<i>rsh-1</i>, * β=βP<0.05; <i>rsh<sup>1</sup></i> vs. CS; hs-<i>rsh-1</i> * β=βP<0.05; CS vs. CS; hs-<i>rsh-1</i> * β=βP<0.05). The values are means and error bars represent s.e.m.</p
Mutation of the <i>rsh</i> gene does not influence conditioning or place memory tested directly after training.
<p>Following a 30 s pre-test period (black bars), wild-type CS and <i>rsh<sup>1</sup></i> mutant flies were trained in two equal length periods for a total of either 6 or 20 min with 41Β°C (light gray bars). A 3 min memory was tested directly following in the post-test period (dark gray bars). The training, retention intervals, and testing patterns (both pre and post) are diagrammed for each panel, the time axis is not to scale. (<i>A</i>), Conditioning and memory tests were similar between the genotypes with 6 min of training (Nβ=β331; pre-test: Uβ=β12753.5, zβ=β1.07, Pβ=β0.28; 1<sup>st</sup> training period: Uβ=β11877.0, zβ=β2.08, Pβ=β0.04; 2<sup>nd</sup> training period: Uβ=β12888.5, zβ=β0.92, Pβ=β0.36; post-test: Uβ=β13237.0, zβ=β0.51, Pβ=β0.61). (<i>B</i>) Conditioning and memory tests were also similar between the genotypes with 20 min of training (Nβ=β232; pre-test: Uβ=β6106.5, zβ=β1.22, Pβ=β0.22; 1<sup>st</sup> training period: Uβ=β5740.5, zβ=β1.93, Pβ=β0.06; 2<sup>nd</sup> training period: Uβ=β5802.0, zβ=ββ1.81, β=β0.07; post-test: Uβ=β6463.0, zβ=ββ0.52, Pβ=β0.60). (<i>C</i>) The <i>rsh</i> gene is necessary for normal short-term place memory. Flies were trained with intermittent training and then held for varying times (1 β 40 min) before being tested for memory with a short reminder training. The <i>rsh<sup>1</sup></i> flies had memory performance similar to wild-type CS levels with a 1 min delay between training and the memory test (Nβ=β447, Uβ=β24641.5, zβ=β0.24, Pβ=β0.8). Significant differences were found at several time points following training (10 min: Nβ=β295, Uβ=β8637.0, zβ=β.02, ** β=β P<0.01; 20 min: Nβ=β330, Uβ=β10074.5, zβ=β3.95, *** β=β P<0.001; 30 min: Nβ=β311, Uβ=β10926.0, zβ=β1.45, Pβ=β0.1; 40 min: Nβ=β351, Uβ=β12941.5, zβ=β2.48, ** β=β P<0.01). The values are means and error bars represent s.e.m.</p
Control behaviors of wild-type CS and <i>rsh<sup>1</sup></i> mutant flies.
<p>MCH avoidance: ANOVA F(3,32) β=β1.07, Pβ=β0.4; Oct avoidance: F(3,20) β=β1.3, Pβ=β0.3; Sugar attractiveness: ANOVA F(3,44)β=β0.75, Pβ=β0.53; Activity: F(1,561)β=β3.3, Pβ=β0.07.</p
The <i>aru<sup>8β128</sup></i> allele reduces olfactory memory performance.
<p>Wild-type CS and Berlin (B) flies, as well as <i>aru<sup>8β128</sup></i> flies in either the CS or B genetic backgrounds were trained and tested for olfactory three minute memory. The memory performance was statistically different from wild-type only in the Berlin genetic background (CS vs. <i>aru<sup>8β128</sup></i> (CS), F(1,10)β=β0.44, p>0.1, Nβ=β12; Berlin vs. <i>aru<sup>8β128</sup></i> (B), F(1,12)β=β27.5, ***β=βp<0.001, Nβ=β14). The values are means and error bars represent SEMs.</p
Control behaviors in wild-type CS, Berlin, and different <i>aru</i> EPS8L3 mutant flies.
<p>Control behaviors of wild-type and <i>aru</i> EPS8L3 mutant flies were largely similar. A) The avoidance of 41Β°C high temperature was similar between wild-type flies and all other flies with the three different <i>aru</i> EPS8L3 alleles (p's>0.1, N's between 100 and 240 for each genotype). B) Shock avoidance for flies with different <i>aru</i> EPS8L3 alleles were not statistically significantly different (CS compared to the three other <i>aru</i> EPS8L3 alleles: F(3,20)β=β0.32, p>0.1; Berlin compared to the three other <i>aru</i> EPS8L3 alleles: F(3,24)β=β1.29, p>0.1). C) Avoidance of MCH compared to ambient air was not statistically different between wild-type flies and flies with the three other <i>aru</i> EPS8L3 alleles (CS compared to the three other alleles: F(3,20)β=β0.54, p>0.1; Berlin compared to the three other alleles: F(3,22)β=β1.28, p>0.1). D) The only statistically significant difference in the different genotypes in the avoidance of octanol (OCT) was between flies from the CS and <i>aru<sup>S13</sup></i> genotypes (CS background: F(3,20)β=β3.5, pβ=β0.04, *β=βp<0.05 with Newman-Keuls <i>post-hoc</i> test with <i>aru<sup>S13</sup></i> (CS) and CS; Berlin genetic background: F(3,20)β=β0.57, p>0.1).</p
Place memory phenotypes of <i>aru<sup>8β128</sup></i>, <i>aru<sup>S8</sup></i>, and <i>aru<sup>S13</sup></i> flies.
<p>Wild-type CS and Berlin, as well as flies with a precise excision (<i>aru<sup>S8</sup></i>) and imprecise excision (<i>aru<sup>S13</sup></i>) in both genetic backgrounds, were trained in the heat-box and tested for place memory. A) The memory score of flies from wild-type, <i>aru<sup>S8</sup></i> and <i>aru<sup>S13</sup></i>genotypes are presented, where there were no statistically significant differences detected in any of the genotypes (CS with <i>aru<sup>S8</sup></i> (CS), and <i>aru<sup>S13</sup></i> (CS) p's>0.1, Nβ=β371). B) Flies with the <i>aru<sup>S8</sup></i> and <i>aru<sup>S13</sup></i>alleles in the wild-type Berlin background were also not significantly different (p's>0.1, Nβ=β341). The values are means and error bars represent SEMs.</p
The olfactory short-memory defect of <i>aru<sup>8β128</sup></i> flies is reverted to normal in flies with a precise excision allele (<i>aru<sup>S8</sup></i>) but reduced in flies with an imprecise excision allele (<i>aru<sup>S13</sup></i>).
<p>Wild-type CS and Berlin flies, as well as flies with a precise excision (<i>aru<sup>S8</sup></i>) and imprecise excision (<i>aru<sup>S13</sup></i>), were trained and tested for olfactory three minute memory. The short-term memory score of flies from wild-type, <i>aru<sup>S8</sup></i> and <i>aru<sup>S13</sup></i>genotypes are presented. A) The memory performance was statistically different in flies with the imprecise excision allele and their corresponding wild-type strain (CS with <i>aru<sup>S8</sup></i> (CS) and <i>aru<sup>S13</sup></i> (CS) F(2,15)β=β5.8, p<0.01, *β=βp<0.05 with a Newman-Keuls <i>post-hoc</i> test of CS and <i>aru<sup>S8</sup></i> (CS) with <i>aru<sup>S13</sup></i> (CS), Nβ=β18). B) Differences were also identified in flies from the wild-type Berlin backgrounds (Berlin with <i>aru<sup>S8</sup></i> (B) and <i>aru<sup>S13</sup></i> (B) F(2,29)β=β7.3, p<0.002, *β=βp<0.05 with a Newman-Keuls <i>post-hoc</i> test of Berlin and <i>aru<sup>S8</sup></i> (B) with <i>aru<sup>S13</sup></i> (B), Nβ=β32). The values are means and error bars represent SEMs.</p