Human spatial representation derived from a honeybee compass.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Journal Article↗
Biomedical subjects
Martin Giurfa
Publications and source records attributed to Martin Giurfa.
Hydroxyurea-induced partial mushroom body ablation does not affect acquisition and retention of olfactory differential conditioning in honeybees.
The mushroom bodies (MBs), a paired structure in the insect brain, play a major role in storing and retrieving olfactory memories. We tested whether olfactory learning and odor processing is impaired in honeybees in which MB subunits were partially ablated. Using hydroxyurea (HU) to selectively kill proliferating cells, we created honeybees with varying degrees of MB lesions. Three-dimensional reconstructions of brains were generated to analyze the drug-induced morphological changes. These reconstructions show that, with few exceptions, only the MBs were affected by the drug, while other brain areas remained morphometrically intact. Typically, lesions affected only the MB in one hemisphere of the brain. To preclude HU-induced physiologic deficits in the antennal lobe (AL) affecting olfactory learning, we measured the responses to odors in the AL using an in vivo calcium imaging approach. The response patterns did not differ between the AL of intact versus ablated brain sides within respective specimens. We, therefore, carried out side-specific classical discriminative olfactory conditioning of the proboscis extension reflex (PER) with control bees and with HU-treated bees with or without MB ablations. All experimental groups learned equally to discriminate and respond to a rewarded (CS+) but not to an unrewarded (CS-) conditioned stimulus during acquisition and retention tests. Thus, our results indicate that partial MB lesions do not affect this form of elemental olfactory learning.
Animals↗
Hydroxyurea-induced partial mushroom body ablation in the honeybee Apis mellifera: volumetric analysis and quantitative protein determination.
Hydroxyurea (HU) treatment of first instar honeybee larvae was previously shown to cause mushroom body (MB) ablations. Predominantly, either one or both median MB subunits were ablated. This prompted us to analyze the effects of asymmetrical or symmetrical HU-induced MB ablation on both the morphology of the brain and on the level of three proteins (synapsin, PKA RII, and PKC), which are considered to play a role in synaptic plasticity, learning, and memory. In brains with one median MB subunit missing the volume of the overall MB calyx neuropil in the lesioned side was diminished by 35%. This strong reduction occurred although the remaining lateral MB calyx of the lesioned brain side was found to be significantly larger than that of the intact side. Accordingly, in brains with both median MB subunits missing the size of the remaining lateral calyces increased. The various types of MB ablation differentially affected the amounts of synapsin, PKA RII, and PKC expressed in the central brain. In animals with bilateral and thus symmetrical MB ablation (both median calyces ablated) the protein amount was found to be similar to that in control animals. However, unilateral MB ablation causes an increase in the amounts of the tested proteins in the intact brain side, while the levels in the ablated side were the same as in control animals. These findings not only show that HU-induced ablation of MB subunits is accompanied by volume changes and by changes in protein expression, but also suggest that these processes are highly regulated between the brain sides. The latter is of general importance in understanding the potential contribution of the MB subunits to learning and memory and their interaction between the brain sides.
Animals↗
The impact of reinforcement density on response differentiation in configural discrimination problems.
Two human Pavlovian conditioning experiments investigated the impact of reinforcement density (the number of reinforced trials divided by the total number of trials) on discrimination learning. Experiment 1 used a negative patterning problem (A+, B+, AB-) and Experiment 2 used a positive patterning problem (A-, B-, AB+). In both experiments, reinforcement density varied across four levels. Response differentiation between reinforced and non-reinforced stimuli was linearly related to the decrease in reinforcement density. Responses to nonreinforced stimuli did not differ between the four groups in either experiment. In contrast to this, responses to reinforced stimuli were considerably more pronounced in conditions with lower reinforcement density. For negative patterning, this replicates and extends similar observations from other species. For positive patterning, this is a finding that has not yet been reported in other experiments. The results are in agreement with the comparator hypothesis (Miller & Matzel, 1988) and with Wagner's (1981) "standard operating procedures" (SOP) model.
Adult↗
The effect of similarity between elemental stimuli and compounds in olfactory patterning discriminations.
We studied the ability of honeybees to discriminate between single odorants and binary olfactory mixtures. We analyzed the effect of the number of common elements between these two stimulus classes on olfactory discrimination. We used olfactory conditioning of the honeybees' proboscis extension reflex (PER), a paradigm in which odors can be associated with a reinforcement of sucrose solution. Bees were asked to discriminate reinforced from nonreinforced olfactory stimuli. They were trained with two elemental odors (A and B) versus a binary olfactory mixture. The mixture was either AB (group 2CE, two common elements), AC (group 1CE, one common element A), or CD (group 0CE, no common element). Three groups followed a positive patterning schedule (mixture reinforced and elements nonreinforced: groups 2CE+, 1CE+, and 0CE+) and three other groups a negative patterning schedule (mixture nonreinforced and elements reinforced: groups 2CE-, 1CE-, and 0CE-). We showed that a reduction of similarity (number of common elements) between elemental odors and compounds enhanced the ability to discriminate elements from compounds and that the kind of compound processing used by the bees supports theories that assume nonelemental compound processing (i.e., that exclude the mere summation of the elemental associative strengths upon compound presentation).
Animals↗
Successive olfactory reversal learning in honeybees.
Honeybees Apis mellifera can associate an originally neutral odor with a reinforcement of sucrose solution. Forward pairings of odor and reinforcement enable the odor to release the proboscis extension reflex in consecutive tests. Bees can also be conditioned differentially: They learn to respond to a reinforced odor and not to a nonreinforced one. They can also learn to reverse their choice. Here we ask whether honeybees can learn successive olfactory differential conditioning tasks involving different overlapping pairs of odors. The conditioning schedules were established in order to train the animals with 3, 2, 1, or 0 reversals previous to a last differential conditioning phase in which two additional reversals were present. We studied whether or not successive reversal learning is possible and whether or not learning olfactory discrimination reversals affects the solving of subsequent discrimination reversals. Therefore we compared the responses of bees that had experienced reversals with those of bees that had not experienced such reversals when both are confronted with a new reversal situation. In experiment 1 we showed that bees that had experienced three previous reversals were better in solving the final reversal task than bees with no previous reversal experience. In experiment 2, we showed that one reversal learning is enough for bees to perform better in the final reversal task. The successive different reversals trained in our experiments resemble the natural foraging situation in which a honeybee forager has to switch successively from an initial floral species to different ones. The fact that experiencing such changes seems to improve a bee's performance in dealing with further new exploited food sources has therefore an adaptive impact for the individual and for the colony as a whole.
Animals↗
A modified version of the unique cue theory accounts for olfactory compound processing in honeybees.
We investigated the capability of honeybees to discriminate between single odorants, binary olfactory mixtures, and ternary olfactory mixtures in olfactory conditioning of the proboscis extension reflex. In Experiment 1, three single odorants (A+, B+, and C+) and three binary mixtures of these odors (AB+, AC+, and BC+) were reinforced while the ternary compound, consisting of all three odors (ABC-), was nonreinforced. In Experiment 2, only one single odorant (A+) and one binary olfactory compound (BC+) were reinforced while the ternary compound (ABC-) consisting of the single odor and the binary compound was nonreinforced. We studied whether bees can solve these problems and whether the course of differentiation can be predicted by the unique cue theory, a modified unique cue theory, or Pearce's configural theory. Honeybees were not able to differentiate reinforced from nonreinforced stimuli in Experiment 1. However, summation to ABC observed at the beginning of training contradicts the predictions of Pearce's configural theory. In Experiment 2, differentiation between the single odorant A and the ternary compound developed more easily than between the binary compound BC and ABC. This pattern of differentiation is in line with a modified unique cue theory and Pearce's configural theory. Summation to ABC at the beginning of training, however, again was at odds with Pearce's configural theory. Thus, olfactory compound processing in honeybees can best be explained by a modified unique cue theory.
Animals↗
Associative mechanosensory conditioning of the proboscis extension reflex in honeybees.
The present work introduces a form of associative mechanosensory conditioning of the proboscis extension reflex (PER) in honeybees. In our paradigm, harnessed honeybees learn the elemental association between mechanosensory, antennal stimulation and a reward of sucrose solution delivered to the proboscis. Thereafter, bees extend their proboscis to the antennal mechanosensory stimulation alone. We show that bees can learn such an association in a side-specific manner, that is, they learn the association on the antennal side that was rewarded and not on the side that was not rewarded. Responding produced by the paired training does likely contain a substantial Pavlovian component. Responding is only elicited by mechanosensory stimulation and not by spurious cues such as olfactory, visual, and contextual ones. The interstimulus interval (ISI) affects one-trial mechanosensory learning: a bell-shaped curve with a maximum of responding approximately 4 sec ISI was obtained. Mechanosensory memory is still operative 24 h after conditioning. Apart from absolute conditioning in which mechanosensory stimulation of one antenna is paired with sucrose, differential, side-specific, mechanosensory conditioning using two mechanosensory stimulations, one rewarded and the other not, is also possible. This paradigm constitutes, therefore, a new standard procedure for further learning studies in honeybees.
Animals↗
A test of transitive inferences in free-flying honeybees: unsuccessful performance due to memory constraints.
We asked whether honeybees, Apis mellifera, could solve a transitive inference problem. Individual free-flying bees were conditioned with four overlapping premise pairs of five visual patterns in a multiple discrimination task (A+ vs. B-, B+ vs. C-, C+ vs. D-, D+ vs. E-, where + and - indicate sucrose reward or absence of it, respectively). They were then tested with the nonadjacent pairs A vs. E and B vs. D. Preference of B to D is consistent with the use of the implicit hierarchy A > B > C > D > E. Equal choice of B and D supports choice based on the associative strength of the stimuli. The bees' choice was determined by their memory constraints: experience with the last premise pair (D+ vs. E-) predominated. In the tests, bees preferred A to E and chose equally B and D. An analysis of the performance in terms of a reward/penalty ratio showed that B had a higher associative strength than D. Thus, bees do not establish transitive inferences but, rather, guide their choices by the joint action of a recency effect and the associative strength of the stimuli. The former supports choice of D, whereas the latter supports choice of B, thus determining equal choice of B and D in the tests.
Animals↗
Olfactory blocking and odorant similarity in the honeybee.
Blocking occurs when previous training with a stimulus A reduces (blocks) subsequent learning about a stimulus B, when A and B are trained in compound. The question of whether blocking exists in olfactory conditioning of proboscis extension reflex (PER) in honeybees is under debate. The last published accounts on blocking in honeybees state that blocking occurs when odors A and B are similar (the "similarity hypothesis"). We have tested this hypothesis using four odors (1-octanol, 1-nonanol, eugenol, and limonene) chosen on the basis of their chemical and physiological similarity (experiment 1). We established a generalization matrix that measured perceptual similarity. Bees in the "block group" were first trained with an odor A and, in the second phase, with the mixture AB. Bees in the "novel group" (control group) were first trained with an odor N and, in the second phase, with the mixture AB. After conditioning, bees in both groups were tested for their response to B. We assayed all 24 possible combinations for the four odors standing for A, B, and N. We found blocking in four cases, augmentation in two cases, and no difference in 18 cases; odor similarity could not account for these results. We also repeated the experiments with those six odor combinations that gave rise to the similarity hypothesis (experiment 2: 1-hexanol, 1-octanol, geraniol) and found augmentation in one and no effect in five cases. Thus, blocking is not a consistent phenomenon, nor does it depend on odor similarity.
Analysis of Variance↗