Odor Similarity Does Not Influence the Time Needed for Odor Processing

Ditzen, Mathias; Evers, Jan Felix; Galizia, C. Giovanni

doi:10.1093/chemse/bjg070

Cited by 61 publications

(59 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…3B). The existence of a late post-odor response is challenging, as olfactory-guided behavior has been shown to be triggered within only a few ms after odor onset (Ditzen et al, 2003;Wright et al, 2009). In contrast to a recent study in honeybees , we show odorspecific post-odor response patterns at both the OSN and the PN processing levels (Fig.…”

Section: Behavioral Correlates and Implications For Spatiotemporal Mocontrasting

confidence: 97%

“…In recent years there has been considerable interest in studying artificial odor mixtures in invertebrates in regard to network processing (Deisig et al, 2006(Deisig et al, , 2010Su et al, 2011;Silbering and Galizia, 2007;Hillier and Vickers, 2011) and olfactory-guided behavior (Ditzen et al, 2003;Riffell et al, 2009b;Smith, 1998;Reinhard et al, 2010). Other studies have also addressed AL signal modulation in response to single odors (Bhandawat et al, 2007) and its relevance for motor output .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Antennal Lobe Processing Correlates to Moth Olfactory Behavior

Kuebler

Schubert²,

Kárpáti

et al. 2012

J. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Animals typically perceive their olfactory environment as a complex blend of natural odor cues. In insects, the initial processing of odors occurs in the antennal lobe (AL). Afferent peripheral input from olfactory sensory neurons (OSNs) is modified via mostly inhibitory local interneurons (LNs) and transferred by projection neurons (PNs) to higher brain centers. Here we performed optophysiological studies in the AL of the moth, Manduca sexta, and recorded odor-evoked calcium changes in response to antennal stimulation with five monomolecular host volatiles and their artificial mixture. In a double staining approach, we simultaneously measured OSN network input in concert with PN output across the glomerular array. By comparing odor-evoked activity patterns and response intensities between the two processing levels, we show that host mixtures could generally be predicted from the linear summation of their components at the input of the AL, but output neurons established a unique, nonlinear spatial pattern separate from individual component identities. We then assessed whether particularly high levels of signal modulation correspond to behavioral relevance. One of our mixture components, phenyl acetaldehyde, evoked significant levels of nonlinear input-output modulation in observed spatiotemporal activation patterns that were unique from the other individual odorants tested. This compound also accelerated behavioral activity in subsequent wind tunnel tests, whereas another compound that did not exhibit high levels of modulation also did not affect behavior. These results suggest that the high degree of input-output modulation exhibited by the AL for specific odors can correlate to behavioral output.

show abstract

Section: Behavioral Correlates and Implications For Spatiotemporal Mocontrasting

confidence: 97%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Antennal Lobe Processing Correlates to Moth Olfactory Behavior

Kuebler

Schubert²,

Kárpáti

et al. 2012

J. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Information about odor concentration has an important ecological value for the fly and must therefore be re- tained along the olfactory pathway. Indeed, flies can learn to discriminate different odor concentrations (Borst, 1983;Xia and Tully, 2007), as has been shown for bees (Bhagavan and Smith, 1997;Pelz et al, 1997;Ditzen et al, 2003) and mammals (Cleland et al, 2007). Concentration-response curves were different for the different neuron subpopulations in the same glomerulus (Fig.…”

Section: Responses To Different Odor Concentrationssupporting

confidence: 52%

Olfactory Information Processing in theDrosophilaAntennal Lobe: Anything Goes?

Silbering¹,

Okada²,

Ito³

et al. 2008

J. Neurosci.

119

131

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When an animal smells an odor, olfactory sensory neurons generate an activity pattern across olfactory glomeruli of the first sensory neuropil, the insect antennal lobe or the vertebrate olfactory bulb. Here, several networks of local neurons interact with sensory neurons and with output neurons-insect projection neurons, or vertebrate mitral/tufted cells. The extent and form of information processing taking place in these local networks has been subject of controversy. To investigate the role of local neurons in odor information processing we have used the calcium sensor G-CaMP to perform in vivo recordings of odor-evoked spatiotemporal activity patterns in five genetically defined neuron populations of the antennal lobe of Drosophila melanogaster: three distinct populations of local neurons (two GABAergic and one cholinergic), as well as sensory neurons and projection neurons. Odor-specific and concentration dependent spatiotemporal response patterns varied among neuron populations. Activity transfer differed along the olfactory pathway for different glomerulus-odor combinations: we found cases of profile broadening and of linear and complex transfer. Moreover, the discriminability between the odors also varied across neuron populations and was maximal in projection neurons. Discriminatory power increased with higher odor concentrations over a wide dynamic range, but decreased at the highest concentration. These results show the complexity and diversity of odor information processing mechanisms across olfactory glomeruli in the fly antennal lobe.

show abstract

“…Perhaps the glomerular patterns of the lower concentrations are not completely nested in those of higher concentrations but differ as those of distinct odorants, may be caused by an inhibition between glomeruli (25). Interestingly, honey bees are able to solve this learning task only under some test conditions (26)(27)(28).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Distinct memories of odor intensity and quality in Drosophila

Mašek

Heisenberg²

2008

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Even in a simple Pavlovian memory task an animal may form several associations that can be independently assessed by the appropriate tests. Studying conditioned odor discrimination of the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster we found that animals store quality and intensity of an odor as separate memory traces. The trace of odor intensity is short-lived, decaying in <3 h. Only the last intensity value is stored. In contrast to odor-quality memory, odor-intensity memory does not require the rutabaga-dependent cAMP signaling pathway. Flies rely on their memory of intensity in a narrow concentration range in which they can generalize intensity. Larger concentration differences they treat like different qualities. This study shows that the perceptual identity of an odor is based on at least three lines of processing in the brain: (i) a memory of odor quality, (ii) a memory of odor intensity, and (iii) a range of intensities (and qualities), in which the odor is generalized.A scent is characterized by its quality and whether it is intense or faint. Quality signals chemical properties of the source; intensity serves, among others, in orientation. Yet, for some odorants quality and quantity are not fully separated: At sufficiently different concentrations the same odorant may appear as distinct qualities (1).Flies (Drosophila melanogaster) are attracted by some odors and repelled by others. They can be trained to discriminate between different odorants (ref. 2 and for review see ref.3) and also between concentrations of a single odorant (4, 5). These findings alone do not prove that flies perceive and store the quality of an odor independently of its intensity. They might distinguish between ''good'' and ''bad'' and otherwise treat qualities and intensities as one and the same (6). The strongest evidence against this latter idea stems from a generalization experiment by Borst (5). Using two-component mixtures of odorants (A and B) Borst showed that flies treated mixtures differing in the ratio of A/B as more different from mixtures in which the ratio A/B had been kept constant but concentrations were changed. Apparently, flies like humans perceive both the quality of an odor and its intensity.Surprisingly, this confounding problem has been largely neglected. Evidently, if quality and intensity are perceived separately, they are likely to also be stored as distinct memory traces with different properties. In this case, much of what we know about olfactory learning in Drosophila needs to be specified as to whether it applies to odor quality, intensity, or both.Here, we characterize (short-term) olfactory memory (7) with respect to odor intensity (OIM) and odor quality (OQM). It is experimentally difficult to present two odorants at the same (fly-subjective) intensity, whereas it is easy to present the same odorant at different intensities. Therefore, we focus on odorintensity learning and look at odor-quality learning only indirectly by comparing odor-intensity learning to two-odor learning. As flies can exploit odor gradie...

show abstract

Odor Similarity Does Not Influence the Time Needed for Odor Processing

Cited by 61 publications

References 43 publications

Antennal Lobe Processing Correlates to Moth Olfactory Behavior

Antennal Lobe Processing Correlates to Moth Olfactory Behavior

Olfactory Information Processing in theDrosophilaAntennal Lobe: Anything Goes?

Distinct memories of odor intensity and quality in Drosophila

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About