4.7 Article

Consolidated and Labile Odor Memory Are Separately Encoded within the Drosophila Brain

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE
卷 32, 期 48, 页码 17163-17171

出版社

SOC NEUROSCIENCE
DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3286-12.2012

关键词

-

资金

  1. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) [SCHW1410/1-1]
  2. DFG [TH1584/1-1]
  3. Schweizer Nationalfonds [31003A_132812/1]
  4. Zukunftskolleg of the University Konstanz
  5. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (UK) [BB/C000633/1]
  6. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council [BB/G020620/1, BB/C000633/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  7. Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) [31003A_132812] Funding Source: Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF)
  8. BBSRC [BB/G020620/1] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Memories are classified as consolidated (stable) or labile according to whether they withstand amnestic treatment, or not. In contrast to the general prevalence of this classification, its neuronal and molecular basis is poorly understood. Here, we focused on consolidated and labile memories induced after a single cycle training in the Drosophila aversive olfactory conditioning paradigm and we used mutants to define the impact of cAMP signals. At the biochemical level we report that cAMP signals misrelated in either rutabaga(rut) or dunce(dnc) mutants separate between consolidated anesthesia-resistant memory (ARM) and labile anesthesia-sensitive memory (ASM). Those functionally distinct cAMP signals act within different neuronal populations: while rut-dependent cAMP signals act within Kenyon cells (KCs) of the mushroom bodies to support ASM, dnc-sensitive cAMP signals support ARM within antennal lobe local neurons (LNs) and KCs. Collectively, different key positions along the olfactory circuitry seem to get modified during storage of ARM or ASM independently. A precise separation between those functionally distinct cAMP signals seems mandatory to allocate how they support appropriate memories.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据