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 used in vivo calcium 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.

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

Cancer cells and non-cancer cells differ in their metabolism and they emit distinct volatile compound profiles, allowing to recognise cancer cells by their scent. Insect odorant receptors are excellent chemosensors with high sensitivity and a broad receptive range unmatched by current gas sensors. We thus investigated the potential of utilising the fruit fly's olfactory system to detect cancer cells. Using in vivo calcium imaging, we recorded an array of olfactory receptor neurons on the fruit fly's antenna. We performed multidimensional analysis of antenna responses, finding that cell volatiles from different cell types lead to characteristic response vectors. The distances between these response vectors are conserved across flies and can be used to discriminate healthy mammary epithelial cells from different types of breast cancer cells. This may expand the repertoire of clinical diagnostics, and it is the first step towards electronic noses equipped with biological sensors, integrating artificial and biological olfaction.

The Drosophila larva has a simple peripheral nervous system with a comparably small number of sensory neurons located externally at the head or internally along the pharynx to assess its chemical environment. It is assumed that larval taste coding occurs mainly via external organs (the dorsal, terminal, and ventral organ). However, the contribution of the internal pharyngeal sensory organs has not been explored. Here we find that larvae require a single pharyngeal gustatory receptor neuron pair called D1, which is located in the dorsal pharyngeal sensilla, in order to avoid caffeine and to associate an odor with caffeine punishment. In contrast, caffeine-driven reduction in feeding in non-choice situations does not require D1. Hence, this work provides data on taste coding via different receptor neurons, depending on the behavioral context. Furthermore, we show that the larval pharyngeal system is involved in bitter tasting. Using ectopic expressions, we show that the caffeine receptor in neuron D1 requires the function of at least four receptor genes: the putative co-receptors Gr33a, Gr66a, the putative caffeine-specific receptor Gr93a, and yet unknown additional molecular component(s). This suggests that larval taste perception is more complex than previously assumed already at the sensory level. Taste information from different sensory organs located outside at the head or inside along the pharynx of the larva is assembled to trigger taste guided behaviors.

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.