4.8 Article

Layered reward signalling through octopamine and dopamine in Drosophila

期刊

NATURE
卷 492, 期 7429, 页码 433-+

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/nature11614

关键词

-

资金

  1. EMBO Long-Term Fellowship
  2. Sir Henry Wellcome Postdoctoral Fellowship
  3. Ruth L. Kirschstein NRSA Postdoctoral Fellowship [F32EY020040]
  4. Jane Coffin Childs Postdoctoral Fellowship
  5. Wellcome Trust Senior Research Fellowship in the Basic Biomedical Sciences
  6. National Institutes of Health [MH069883, MH081982]
  7. Gatsby Charitable Foundation
  8. Oxford Martin School

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Dopamine is synonymous with reward and motivation in mammals(1,2). However, only recently has dopamine been linked to motivated behaviour and rewarding reinforcement in fruitflies(3,4). Instead, octopamine has historically been considered to be the signal for reward in insects(5-7). Here we show, using temporal control of neural function in Drosophila, that only short-term appetitive memory is reinforced by octopamine. Moreover, octopamine-dependent memory formation requires signalling through dopamine neurons. Part of the octopamine signal requires the alpha-adrenergic-like OAMB receptor in an identified subset of mushroom-body-targeted dopamine neurons. Octopamine triggers an increase in intracellular calcium in these dopamine neurons, and their direct activation can substitute for sugar to form appetitive memory, even in flies lacking octopamine. Analysis of the beta-adrenergic-like OCT beta 2R receptor reveals that octopamine-dependent reinforcement also requires an interaction with dopamine neurons that control appetitive motivation. These data indicate that sweet taste engages a distributed octopamine signal that reinforces memory through discrete subsets of mushroom-body-targeted dopamine neurons. In addition, they reconcile previous findings with octopamine and dopamine and suggest that reinforcement systems in flies are more similar to mammals than previously thought.

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

4.8
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