Side-specificity of olfactory learning in the honeybee: US input side

Foraging task specialization in honey bees (Apis mellifera): the contribution of floral rewards to the learning performance of pollen and nectar foragers

Social insects live in communities where cooperative actions heavily rely on the individual cognitive abilities of their members. In the honey bee (Apis mellifera), the specialization in nectar or pollen collection is associated with variations in gustatory sensitivity, affecting both associative and non-associative learning. Gustatory sensitivity fluctuates as a function of changes in motivation for the specific floral resource throughout the foraging cycle, yet differences in learning between nectar and pollen foragers at the onset of food collection remain unexplored. Here, we examined nectar and pollen foragers captured upon arrival at food sources. We subjected them to an olfactory proboscis extension reflex (PER) conditioning using a 10% sucrose solution paired (S10%+P) or unpaired (S10%) with pollen as a co-reinforcement. For non-associative learning, we habituated foragers with S10%+P or S10%, followed by dishabituation tests with either a 50% sucrose solution paired (S50%+P) or unpaired (S50%) with pollen. Our results indicate that pollen foragers show lower performance than nectar foragers when conditioned with S10%. Interestingly, performance improves to levels similar to those of nectar foragers when pollen is included as a rewarding stimulus (S10%+P). In non-associative learning, pollen foragers tested with S10%+P displayed a lower degree of habituation than nectar foragers and a higher degree of dishabituation when pollen was used as the dishabituating stimulus (S10%+P). Altogether, our results support the idea that pollen and nectar honey bee foragers differ in their responsiveness to rewards, leading to inter-individual differences in learning that contribute to foraging specialization.

In Search for the Retrievable Memory Trace in an Insect Brain

The search strategy for the memory trace and its semantics is exemplified for the case of olfactory learning in the honeybee brain. The logic of associative learning is used to guide the experimental approach into the brain by identifying the anatomical and functional convergence sites of the conditioned stimulus and unconditioned stimulus pathways. Two of the several convergence sites are examined in detail, the antennal lobe as the first-order sensory coding area, and the input region of the mushroom body as a higher order integration center. The memory trace is identified as the pattern of associative changes on the level of synapses. The synapses are recruited, drop out, and change the transmission properties for both specifically associated stimulus and the non-associated stimulus. Several rules extracted from behavioral studies are found to be mirrored in the patterns of synaptic change. The strengths and the weaknesses of the honeybee as a model for the search for the memory trace are addressed in a comparison with Drosophila. The question is discussed whether the memory trace exists as a hidden pattern of change if it is not retrieved and whether an external reading of the content of the memory trace may ever be possible. Doubts are raised on the basis that the retrieval circuits are part of the memory trace. The concept of a memory trace existing beyond retrieval is defended by referring to two well-documented processes also in the honeybee, memory consolidation during sleep, and transfer of memory across brain areas.

Temporal and structural neural asymmetries in insects

Neural asymmetries of the bilateral parts of the nervous system are found throughout the animal kingdom. The relative low complexity and experimental accessibility of the insect nervous system makes it well suited for studying the functions of neural asymmetries and their underlying mechanisms. Recent findings in insects reveal hardwired asymmetries in their peripheral and central nervous systems, which affect sensory perception, motor behaviours and cognitive-related tasks. Together, these findings underscore the tendency of the nervous system to segregate between the activities of its right and left sides either transiently or as permanent lateralized specializations.

Pollen reinforces learning in honey bee pollen foragers but not in nectar foragers

Searching for reward motivates and drives behaviour. In honey bees Apis mellifera, specialized pollen foragers are attracted to and learn odours with pollen. However, the role of pollen as a reward remains poorly understood. Unlike nectar, pollen is not ingested during collection. We hypothesized that pollen (but not nectar) foragers could learn pollen by sole antennal or tarsal stimulation. Then, we tested how pairing of pollen (either hand- or bee-collected) and a neutral odour during a pre-conditioning affects performance of both pollen and nectar foragers during the classical conditioning of the proboscis extension response. Secondly, we tested whether nectar and pollen foragers perceive the simultaneous presentation of pollen (on the tarsi) and sugar (on the antennae) as a better reinforcement than sucrose alone. Finally, we searched for differences in learning of the pollen and nectar foragers when they were prevented from ingesting the reward during the conditioning. Differences in pollen-reinforced learning correlate with division of labour between pollen and nectar foragers. Results show that pollen foragers performed better than nectar foragers during the conditioning phase after being pre-conditioned with pollen. Pollen foragers also performed better than nectar foragers in both the acquisition and extinction phases of the conditioning, when reinforced with the dual reward. Consistently, pollen foragers showed improved abilities to learn cues reinforced without sugar ingestion. We discussed that differences in how pollen and nectar foragers respond to a cue associated with pollen greatly contribute to the physiological mechanism that underlies foraging specialization in the honeybee.

A matter of taste: the adverse effect of pollen compounds on the pre-ingestive gustatory experience of sugar solutions for honeybees

In addition to sugars, nectar contains multiple nutrient compounds in varying concentrations, yet little is known of their effect on the reward properties of nectar and the resulting implications for insect behaviour. We examined the pre-ingestive responses of honeybees to sucrose solutions containing a mix of pollen compounds, the amino acids proline or phenylalanine, or known distasteful substances, quinine and salt. We predicted that in taste and learning assays, bees would respond positively to the presence of nutrient compounds in a sucrose solution. However, bees’ proboscis extension responses decreased when their antennae were stimulated with pollen- or amino acid-supplemented sucrose solutions. Compared to pure sucrose, bees exhibited worse acquisition when conditioned to an odour with pollen-supplemented sucrose as the unconditioned stimulus. Such learning impairment was also observed with quinine-containing sucrose solutions. Our results suggest that bees can use their antennae to detect pollen compounds in floral nectars. Depending on the type and concentrations of compounds present, this may result in nectar being perceived as distasteful by bees, making it less effective in reinforcing the learning of floral cues. Such reward devaluation might be adaptive in cases where plants benefit from regulating the frequency of bee visitation.

Lateralization of Sucrose Responsiveness and Non-associative Learning in Honeybees

Lateralization is a fundamental property of the human brain that affects perceptual, motor, and cognitive processes. It is now acknowledged that left–right laterality is widespread across vertebrates and even some invertebrates such as fruit flies and bees. Honeybees, which learn to associate an odorant (the conditioned stimulus, CS) with sucrose solution (the unconditioned stimulus, US), recall this association better when trained using their right antenna than they do when using their left antenna. Correspondingly, olfactory sensilla are more abundant on the right antenna and odor encoding by projection neurons of the right antennal lobe results in better odor differentiation than those of the left one. Thus, lateralization arises from asymmetries both in the peripheral and central olfactory system, responsible for detecting the CS. Here, we focused on the US component and studied if lateralization exists in the gustatory system of Apis mellifera. We investigated whether sucrose sensitivity is lateralized both at the level of the antennae and the fore-tarsi in two independent groups of bees. Sucrose sensitivity was assessed by presenting bees with a series of increasing concentrations of sucrose solution delivered either to the left or the right antenna/tarsus and measuring the proboscis extension response to these stimuli. Bees experienced two series of stimulations, one on the left and the other on the right antenna/tarsus. We found that tarsal responsiveness was similar on both sides and that the order of testing affects sucrose responsiveness. On the contrary, antennal responsiveness to sucrose was higher on the right than on the left side, and this effect was independent of the order of antennal stimulation. Given this asymmetry, we also investigated antennal lateralization of habituation to sucrose. We found that the right antenna was more resistant to habituation, which is consistent with its higher sucrose sensitivity. Our results reveal that the gustatory system presents a peripheral lateralization that affects stimulus detection and non-associative learning. Contrary to the olfactory system, which is organized in two distinct brain hemispheres, gustatory receptor neurons converge into a single central region termed the subesophagic zone (SEZ). Whether the SEZ presents lateralized gustatory processing remains to be determined.

Neural correlates of side-specific odour memory in mushroom body output neurons

Humans and other mammals as well as honeybees learn a unilateral association between an olfactory stimulus presented to one side and a reward. In all of them, the learned association can be behaviourally retrieved via contralateral stimulation, suggesting inter-hemispheric communication. However, the underlying neuronal circuits are largely unknown and neural correlates of across-brain-side plasticity have yet not been demonstrated. We report neural plasticity that reflects lateral integration after side-specific odour reward conditioning. Mushroom body output neurons that did not respond initially to contralateral olfactory stimulation developed a unique and stable representation of the rewarded compound stimulus (side and odour) predicting its value during memory retention. The encoding of the reward-associated compound stimulus is delayed by about 40 ms compared with unrewarded neural activity, indicating an increased computation time for the read-out after lateral integration.

Parallel Olfactory Processing in the Honey Bee Brain: Odor Learning and Generalization under Selective Lesion of a Projection Neuron Tract

The function of parallel neural processing is a fundamental problem in Neuroscience, as it is found across sensory modalities and evolutionary lineages, from insects to humans. Recently, parallel processing has attracted increased attention in the olfactory domain, with the demonstration in both insects and mammals that different populations of second-order neurons encode and/or process odorant information differently. Among insects, Hymenoptera present a striking olfactory system with a clear neural dichotomy from the periphery to higher-order centers, based on two main tracts of second-order (projection) neurons: the medial and lateral antennal lobe tracts (m-ALT and l-ALT). To unravel the functional role of these two pathways, we combined specific lesions of the m-ALT tract with behavioral experiments, using the classical conditioning of the proboscis extension response (PER conditioning). Lesioned and intact bees had to learn to associate an odorant (1-nonanol) with sucrose. Then the bees were subjected to a generalization procedure with a range of odorants differing in terms of their carbon chain length or functional group. We show that m-ALT lesion strongly affects acquisition of an odor-sucrose association. However, lesioned bees that still learned the association showed a normal gradient of decreasing generalization responses to increasingly dissimilar odorants. Generalization responses could be predicted to some extent by in vivo calcium imaging recordings of l-ALT neurons. The m-ALT pathway therefore seems necessary for normal classical olfactory conditioning performance.

Heat Perception and Aversive Learning in Honey Bees: Putative Involvement of the Thermal/Chemical Sensor AmHsTRPA

The recent development of the olfactory conditioning of the sting extension response (SER) has provided new insights into the mechanisms of aversive learning in honeybees. Until now, very little information has been gained concerning US detection and perception. In the initial version of SER conditioning, bees learned to associate an odor CS with an electric shock US. Recently, we proposed a modified version of SER conditioning, in which thermal stimulation with a heated probe is used as US. This procedure has the advantage of allowing topical US applications virtually everywhere on the honeybee body. In this study, we made use of this possibility and mapped thermal responsiveness on the honeybee body, by measuring workers' SER after applying heat on 41 different structures. We then show that bees can learn the CS-US association even when the heat US is applied on body structures that are not prominent sensory organs, here the vertex (back of the head) and the ventral abdomen. Next, we used a neuropharmalogical approach to evaluate the potential role of a recently described Transient Receptor Potential (TRP) channel, HsTRPA, on peripheral heat detection by bees. First, we applied HsTRPA activators to assess if such activation is sufficient for triggering SER. Second, we injected HsTRPA inhibitors to ask whether interfering with this TRP channel affects SER triggered by heat. These experiments suggest that HsTRPA may be involved in heat detection by bees, and represent a potential peripheral detection system in thermal SER conditioning.

CaMKII knockdown affects both early and late phases of olfactory long-term memory in the honeybee

Honeybees are able to solve complex learning tasks and memorize learned information for long time periods. The molecular mechanisms mediating long-term memory (LTM) in the honeybee Apis mellifera are, to a large part, still unknown. We approached this question by investigating the potential function of the calcium/calmodulin-dependent protein kinase II (CaMKII), an enzyme known as a 'molecular memory switch' in vertebrates. CaMKII is able to switch to a calcium-independent constitutively active state, providing a mechanism for a molecular memory and has further been shown to play an essential role in structural synaptic plasticity. Using a combination of knockdown by RNA interference and pharmacological manipulation, we disrupted the function of CaMKII during olfactory learning and memory formation. We found that learning, memory acquisition and mid-term memory were not affected, but all manipulations consistently resulted in an impaired LTM. Both early LTM (24 h after learning) and late LTM (72 h after learning) were significantly disrupted, indicating the necessity of CaMKII in two successive stages of LTM formation in the honeybee.

Differences in color learning between pollen- and sucrose-rewarded bees

What bees learn during pollen collection, and how they might discriminate between flowers on the basis of the quality of this reward, is not well understood. Recently we showed that bees learn to associate colors with differences in pollen rewards. Extending these findings, we present here additional evidence to suggest that the strength and time-course of memory formation may differ between pollen- and sucrose-rewarded bees. Color-naïve honeybees, trained with pollen or sucrose rewards to discriminate colored stimuli, were found to differ in their responses when recalling learnt information after reversal training. Such differences could affect the decision-making and foraging dynamics of individual bees when collecting different types of floral rewards.

Duration of the unconditioned stimulus in appetitive conditioning of honeybees differentially impacts learning, long-term memory strength, and the underlying protein synthesis

This study examines the role of stimulus duration in learning and memory formation of honeybees (Apis mellifera). In classical appetitive conditioning honeybees learn the association between an initially neutral, conditioned stimulus (CS) and the occurrence of a meaningful stimulus, the unconditioned stimulus (US). Thereby the CS becomes a predictor for the US eliciting a conditioned response (CR). Here we study the role of US duration in classical conditioning by examining honeybees conditioned with different US durations. We quantify the CR during acquisition, memory retention, and extinction of the early long-term memory (eLTM), and examine the molecular mechanisms of eLTM by interfering with protein synthesis. We find that the US duration affects neither the probability nor the strength of the CR during acquisition, eLTM retention, and extinction 24 h after conditioning. However, we find that the resistance to extinction 24 h after conditioning is susceptible to protein synthesis inhibition depending on the US duration. We conclude that the US duration does not affect the predictability of the US but modulates the protein synthesis underlying the eLTM's strength. Thus, the US duration differentially impacts learning, eLTM strength, and its underlying protein synthesis.

The Bee as a Model to Investigate Brain and Behavioural Asymmetries

The honeybee Apis mellifera, with a brain of only 960,000 neurons and the ability to perform sophisticated cognitive tasks, has become an excellent model in life sciences and in particular in cognitive neurosciences. It has been used in our laboratories to investigate brain and behavioural asymmetries, i.e., the different functional specializations of the right and the left sides of the brain. It is well known that bees can learn to associate an odour stimulus with a sugar reward, as demonstrated by extension of the proboscis when presented with the trained odour in the so-called Proboscis Extension Reflex (PER) paradigm. Bees recall this association better when trained using their right antenna than they do when using their left antenna. They also retrieve short-term memory of this task better when using the right antenna. On the other hand, when tested for long-term memory recall, bees respond better when using their left antenna. Here we review a series of behavioural studies investigating bees’ lateralization, integrated with electrophysiological measurements to study asymmetries of olfactory sensitivity, and discuss the possible evolutionary origins of these asymmetries. We also present morphological data obtained by scanning electron microscopy and two-photon microscopy. Finally, a behavioural study conducted in a social context is summarised, showing that honeybees control context-appropriate social interactions using their right antenna, rather than the left, thus suggesting that lateral biases in behaviour might be associated with requirements of social life.

Pollen Elicits Proboscis Extension but Does not Reinforce PER Learning in Honeybees

The function of pollen as a reward for foraging bees is little understood, though there is evidence to suggest that it can reinforce associations with visual and olfactory floral cues. Foraging bees do not feed on pollen, thus one could argue that it cannot serve as an appetitive reinforcer in the same way as sucrose. However, ingestion is not a critical parameter for sucrose reinforcement, since olfactory proboscis extension (PER) learning can be conditioned through antennal stimulation only. During pollen collection, the antennae and mouthparts come into contact with pollen, thus it is possible that pollen reinforces associative learning through similar gustatory pathways as sucrose. Here pollen was presented as the unconditioned stimulus (US), either in its natural state or in a 30% pollen-water solution, and was found to elicit proboscis extension following antennal stimulation. Control groups were exposed to either sucrose or a clean sponge as the US, or an unpaired presentation of the conditioned stimulus (CS) and pollen US. Despite steady levels of responding to the US, bees did not learn to associate a neutral odour with the delivery of a pollen reward, thus whilst pollen has a proboscis extension releasing function, it does not reinforce olfactory PER learning.

Octopamine improves learning in newly emerged bees but not in old foragers

Honey bees (Apis mellifera) are well known for their excellent learning abilities. Although most age groups learn quickly to associate an odor with a sucrose reward, newly emerged bees and old foragers often perform poorly. For a long time, the reason for the poor learning performance of these age groups was unclear. We show that reduced sensitivity for sucrose is the cause for poor associative learning in newly emerged bees but not in old foragers. By increasing the sensitivity for sucrose through octopamine, we selectively improved the learning performance of insensitive newly emerged bees. Interestingly, the learning performance of foragers experiencing the same treatment remained low, despite the observed increase in sensitivity for the reward. We thus demonstrate that increasing sensitivity for the reward can improve the associative learning performance of bees when they are young but not when they had foraged for a long time. Importantly, octopamine can have very different effects on bees, depending on their initial sensory sensitivity. These differential effects of octopamine have important consequences for interpreting the action of biogenic amines on insect behavior.

Reward expectations in honeybees

The study of expectations of reward helps to understand rules controlling goal-directed behavior as well as decision making and planning. I shall review a series of recent studies focusing on how the food gathering behavior of honeybees depends upon reward expectations. These studies document that free-flying honeybees develop long-term expectations of reward and use them to regulate their investment of energy/time during foraging. Also, they present a laboratory procedure suitable for analysis of neural substrates of reward expectations in the honeybee brain. I discuss these findings in the context of individual and collective foraging, on the one hand, and neurobiology of learning and memory of reward.

Lack of prediction for high-temperature exposures enhances Drosophila place learning

Animals receive rewards and punishments in different patterns. Sometimes stimuli or behaviors can become predictors of future good or bad events. Through learning, experienced animals can then avoid new but similar bad situations, or actively seek those conditions that give rise to good results. Not all good or bad events, however, can be accurately predicted. Interestingly, unpredicted exposure to presumed rewards or punishments can inhibit or enhance later learning, thus linking the two types of experiences. In Drosophila, place memories can be readily formed; indeed, memory was enhanced by exposing flies to high temperatures that are unpaired from place or behavioral contingencies. Whether it is the exposure to high temperatures per se or the lack of prediction about the exposure that is crucial for memory enhancement is unknown. Through yoking experiments, we show that the uncertainty about exposure to high temperatures positively biases later place memory. However, the unpredicted exposures to high temperature do not alter thermosensitivity. Thus, the uncertainty bias does not alter thermosensory processes. An unidentified system is proposed to buffer the high-temperature reinforcement information to influence place learning when accurate predictions can be identified.

Rapid decision-making with side-specific perceptual discrimination in ants

Background

Timely decision making is crucial for survival and reproduction. Organisms often face a speed-accuracy trade-off, as fully informed, accurate decisions require time-consuming gathering and treatment of information. Optimal strategies for decision-making should therefore vary depending on the context. In mammals, there is mounting evidence that multiple systems of perceptual discrimination based on different neural circuits emphasize either fast responses or accurate treatment of stimuli depending on the context.

Methodology/Principal Findings

We used the ant Camponotus aethiops to test the prediction that fast information processing achieved through direct neural pathways should be favored in situations where quick reactions are adaptive. Social insects discriminate readily between harmless group-members and dangerous strangers using easily accessible cuticular hydrocarbons as nestmate recognition cues. We show that i) tethered ants display rapid aggressive reactions upon presentation of non-nestmate odor (120 to 160 ms); ii) ants' aggressiveness towards non-nestmates can be specifically reduced by exposure to non-nestmate odor only, showing that social interactions are not required to alter responses towards non-nestmates; iii) decision-making by ants does not require information transfer between brain hemispheres, but relies on side-specific decision rules.

Conclusions/Significance

Our results strongly suggest that first-order olfactory processing centers (up to the antennal lobes) are likely to play a key role in ant nestmate recognition. We hypothesize that the coarse level of discrimination achieved in the antennal lobes early in odor processing provides enough information to determine appropriate behavioral responses towards non-nestmates. This asks for a reappraisal of the mechanisms underlying social recognition in insects.

Effect of fipronil on side-specific antennal tactile learning in the honeybee

In the honeybee, the conditioning of the proboscis extension response using tactile antennal stimulations is well suited for studying the side-specificity of learning including the possible bilateral transfer of memory traces in the brain, and the role of inhibitory networks. A tactile stimulus was presented to one antenna in association with a sucrose reward to the proboscis. The other antenna was either not stimulated (A+/0 training), stimulated with a non-reinforced tactile stimulus B (A+/B- training) or stimulated with B reinforced with sucrose to the proboscis (A+/B+ training). Memory tests performed 3 and 24h after training showed in all situations that a tactile stimulus learnt on one side was only retrieved ipsilaterally, indicating no bilateral transfer of information. In all these groups, we investigated the effect of the phenylpyrazole insecticide fipronil by applying a sublethal dose (0.5 ng/bee) on the thorax 15 min before training. This treatment decreased acquisition success and the subsequent memory performances were lowered but the distribution of responses to the tactile stimuli between sides was not affected. These results underline the role of the inhibitory networks targeted by fipronil on tactile learning and memory processes.

Spatial orientation in Drosophila

Spatial orientation is critical for many behaviors. Intrinsic to the oriented state is the knowledge of past, present, and future spatial location relative to one or more landmarks. How do animals so fluidly solve this problem? Determining mechanisms of orientation may benefit from investigation of relatively simple organisms. Two behaviors that presumably use path integration as a major input to orientation--place learning and persistent target selection--allow for the examination of cellular and neural circuit mechanisms in Drosophila. Although our understanding of these processes is still relatively immature, some recent findings provide insights into the mechanisms supporting orientation. First, place learning provides good access to the past, present, and future aspects of orientation, but currently is less open to understanding how a fly establishes a relationship to landmarks. The change in behavior after learning is orientation away from, and avoiding, a place predicted to punish a fly, incorporating all temporal aspects of orientation, and can last for minutes to hours. This conclusion is supported by several learning phenomena. Second, persistent target selection provides the best access to the processes determining relationships to landmarks. Using a disappearing visual-landmark paradigm, persistent target selection was shown to require parts of the central complex for a seconds-long "path integration memory." How the path integration memory, on this short time scale, is related to longer lasting place memories is, as yet, unknown. Nevertheless, studies of place learning and persistent target selection may provide insights into orientation mechanisms in a simple brain.

Olfactory interference during inhibitory backward pairing in honey bees

BACKGROUND

Restrained worker honey bees are a valuable model for studying the behavioral and neural bases of olfactory plasticity. The proboscis extension response (PER; the proboscis is the mouthpart of honey bees) is released in response to sucrose stimulation. If sucrose stimulation is preceded one or a few times by an odor (forward pairing), the bee will form a memory for this association, and subsequent presentations of the odor alone are sufficient to elicit the PER. However, backward pairing between the two stimuli (sucrose, then odor) has not been studied to any great extent in bees, although the vertebrate literature indicates that it elicits a form of inhibitory plasticity.

METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

If hungry bees are fed with sucrose, they will release a long lasting PER; however, this PER can be interrupted if an odor is presented 15 seconds (but not 7 or 30 seconds) after the sucrose (backward pairing). We refer to this previously unreported process as olfactory interference. Bees receiving this 15 second backward pairing show reduced performance after a subsequent single forward pairing (excitatory conditioning) trial. Analysis of the results supported a relationship between olfactory interference and a form of backward pairing-induced inhibitory learning/memory. Injecting the drug cimetidine into the deutocerebrum impaired olfactory interference.

CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE

Olfactory interference depends on the associative link between odor and PER, rather than between odor and sucrose. Furthermore, pairing an odor with sucrose can lead either to association of this odor to PER or to the inhibition of PER by this odor. Olfactory interference may provide insight into processes that gate how excitatory and inhibitory memories for odor-PER associations are formed.

Behavioral studies on tarsal gustation in honeybees: sucrose responsiveness and sucrose-mediated olfactory conditioning

Although the forelegs of honeybees are one of their main gustatory appendages, tarsal gustation in bees has never been systematically studied. To provide a more extensive account on honeybee tarsal gustation, we performed a series of behavioral experiments aimed at characterizing (1) tarsal sucrose sensitivity under different experimental conditions and (2) the capacity of tarsal sucrose stimulation to support olfactory conditioning. We quantified the proboscis extension reflex to tarsal sucrose stimulation and to odors paired with tarsal sucrose stimulation, respectively. Our experiments show that tarsal sucrose sensitivity is lower than antennal sucrose sensitivity and can be increased by starvation time. In contrast, antennae amputation decreases tarsal sucrose sensitivity. Furthermore, we show that tarsal sucrose stimulation can support olfactory learning and memory even if the acquisition level reached is relatively low (40%).

From antenna to antenna: lateral shift of olfactory memory recall by honeybees

Honeybees, Apis mellifera, readily learn to associate odours with sugar rewards and we show here that recall of the olfactory memory, as demonstrated by the bee extending its proboscis when presented with the trained odour, involves first the right and then the left antenna. At 1–2 hour after training using both antennae, recall is possible mainly when the bee uses its right antenna but by 6 hours after training a lateral shift has occurred and the memory can now be recalled mainly when the left antenna is in use. Long-term memory one day after training is also accessed mainly via the left antenna. This time-dependent shift from right to left antenna is also seen as side biases in responding to odour presented to the bee's left or right side. Hence, not only are the cellular events of memory formation similar in bees and vertebrate species but also the lateralized networks involved may be similar. These findings therefore seem to call for remarkable parallel evolution and suggest that the proper functioning of memory formation in a bilateral animal, either vertebrate or invertebrate, requires lateralization of processing.

Olfactory memory formation and the influence of reward pathway during appetitive learning by honey bees

Animals possess the ability to assess food quality via taste and via changes in state that occur after ingestion. Here, we investigate the extent to which a honey bee's ability to assess food quality affected the formation of association with an odor stimulus and the retention of olfactory memories associated with reward. We used three different conditioning protocols in which the unconditioned stimulus (food) was delivered as sucrose stimulation to the proboscis (mouthparts), the antennae or to both proboscis and antennae. All means of delivery of the unconditioned stimulus produced robust associative conditioning with an odor. However, the memory of a conditioned odor decayed at a significantly greater rate for subjects experiencing antennal-only stimulation after either multiple- or single-trial conditioning. Finally, to test whether the act of feeding on a reward containing sucrose during conditioning affected olfactory memory formation, we conditioned honey bees to associate an odor with antennal stimulation with sucrose followed by feeding on a water droplet. We observed that a honey bee's ability to recall the conditioned odor was not significantly different from that of subjects conditioned with an antennal-only sucrose stimulus. Our results show that stimulation of the sensory receptors on the proboscis and/or ingestion of the sucrose reward during appetitive olfactory conditioning are necessary for long-term memory formation.

Reinforcement pre-exposure enhances spatial memory formation in Drosophila

Apparently unpaired exposure to appetitive or aversive stimuli can suppress or enhance later associative learning. While the suppressive effect has been found in both vertebrate and invertebrate animals, it is not clear if the enhancing effect is restricted to the vertebrates. Additionally, whether Drosophila associative learning can be influenced in either direction is open. To address these questions, we examined the effects of pre-exposing flies to a high temperature negative reinforcer in the heat-box place-learning paradigm. We found that pre-exposing flies to an unavoidable high temperature enhanced later associative conditioning that uses mild increases in temperature. This enhancement lasts at least 20 min, does not depend on changes in the straightforward avoidance behavior of a high temperature source, and is independent of the antennal thermosensor. We thus provide an example of enhanced associative learning after unpaired exposure to a typical reinforcer in an invertebrate animal, suggesting the conservation of this component of learning.

Central gustatory projections and side-specificity of operant antennal muscle conditioning in the honeybee

Gustatory stimuli to the antennae, especially sucrose, are important for bees and are employed in learning paradigms as unconditioned stimulus. The present study identified primary antennal gustatory projections in the bee brain and determined the impact of stimulation of the antennal tip on antennal muscle activity and its plasticity. Central projections of antennal taste hairs contained axons of two morphologies projecting into the dorsal lobe, which is also the antennal motor centre. Putative mechanosensory axons arborised in a dorso-lateral area. Putative gustatory axons projected to a ventro-medial area. Bees scan gustatory and mechanical stimuli with their antennae using variable strategies but sensory input to the motor system has not been investigated in detail. Mechanical, gustatory, and electrical stimulation of the ipsilateral antennal tip were found to evoke short-latency responses in an antennal muscle, the fast flagellum flexor. Contralateral gustatory stimulation induced smaller responses with longer latency. The activity of the fast flagellum flexor was conditioned operantly by pairing high muscle activity with ipsilateral antennal sucrose stimulation. A proboscis reward was unnecessary for learning. With contralateral antennal sucrose stimulation, conditioning was unsuccessful. Thus, muscle activity induced by gustatory stimulation was important for learning success and conditioning was side-specific.

Innervation pattern of suboesophageal ventral unpaired median neurones in the honeybee brain

In honeybees (Apis mellifera), the biogenic amine octopamine has been shown to play a role in associative and non-associative learning and in the division of labour in the hive. Immunohistochemical studies indicate that the ventral unpaired median (VUM) neurones in the suboesophageal ganglion (SOG) are putatively octopaminergic and therefore might be involved in the octopaminergic modulation of behaviour. In contrast to our knowledge about the behavioural effects of octopamine, only one neurone (VUMmx1) has been related to a behavioural effect (the reward function during olfactory learning). In this study, we have investigated suboesophageal VUM neurones with fluorescent dye-tracing techniques and intracellular recordings combined with intracellular staining. Ten different VUM neurones have been found including six VUM neurones innervating neuropile regions of the brain and the SOG exclusively (central VUM neurones) and four VUM neurones with axons in peripheral nerves (peripheral VUM neurones). The central VUM neurones innervate the antennal lobes, the protocerebral lobes (including the lateral horn) and the mushroom body calyces. Of these, a novel mandibular VUM neurone, VUMmd1, exhibits the same branching pattern in the brain as VUMmx1 and responds to sucrose and odours in a similar way. The peripheral VUM neurones innervate the antennal and the mandibular nerves. In addition, we describe one labial unpaired median neurone with a dorsal cell body, DUMlb1. The possible homology between the honeybee VUM neurones and the unpaired median neurones in other insects is discussed.

Lateralization of olfaction in the honeybee Apis mellifera

Lateralization of function is a well-known phenomenon in humans. The two hemispheres of the human brain are functionally specialized such that certain cognitive skills, such as language or musical ability, conspecific recognition, and even emotional responses, are mediated by one hemisphere more than the other [1, 2]. Studies over the past 30 years suggest that lateralization occurs in other vertebrate species as well [3-11]. In general, lateralization is observed in different sensory modalities in humans as well as vertebrates, and there are interesting parallels (reviewed in [12]). However, little is known about functional asymmetry in invertebrates [13, 14] and there is only one investigation in insects [15]. Here we show, for the first time, that the honeybee Apis mellifera displays a clear laterality in responding to learned odors. By training honeybees on two different versions of the well-known proboscis extension reflex (PER) paradigm [16, 17], we demonstrate that bees respond to odors better when they are trained through their right antenna. To our knowledge, this is the first demonstration of asymmetrical learning performance in an insect.

Olfactory conditioning of proboscis activity in Drosophila melanogaster

Olfactory learning and memory processes in Drosophila have been well investigated with aversive conditioning, but appetitive conditioning has rarely been documented. Here, we report for the first time individual olfactory conditioning of proboscis activity in restrained Drosophila melanogaster. The protocol was adapted from those developed for proboscis extension conditioning in the honeybee Apis mellifera. After establishing a scale of small proboscis movements necessary to characterize responses to olfactory stimulation, we applied Pavlovian conditioning, with five trials consisting of paired presentation of a banana odour and a sucrose reward. Drosophila showed conditioned proboscis activity to the odour, with a twofold increase of percentage of responses after the first trial. No change occurred in flies experiencing unpaired presentations of the stimuli, confirming an associative basis for this form of olfactory learning. The adenylyl cyclase mutant rutabaga did not exhibit learning in this paradigm. This protocol generated at least a short-term memory of 15 min, but no significant associative memory was detected at 1 h. We also showed that learning performance was dependent on food motivation, by comparing flies subjected to different starvation regimes.

Spontaneous recovery after extinction of the conditioned proboscis extension response in the honeybee

In honeybees, the proboscis extension response (PER) can be conditioned by associating an odor stimulus (CS) to a sucrose reward (US). Conditioned responses to the CS, which are acquired by most bees after a single CS-US pairing, disappear after repeated unrewarded presentations of the CS, a process called extinction. Extinction is usually thought to be based either on (1) the disruption of the stored CS-US association, or (2) the formation of an inhibitory "CS-no US" association that is better retrieved than the initial CS-US association. The observation of spontaneous recovery, i.e., the reappearance of responses to the CS after time passes following extinction, is traditionally interpreted as a proof for the formation of a transient inhibitory association. To provide a better understanding of extinction in honeybees, we examined whether time intervals during training and extinction or the number of conditioning and extinction trials have an effect on the occurrence of spontaneous recovery. We found that spontaneous recovery mostly occurs when conditioning and testing took place in a massed fashion (1-min intertrial intervals). Moreover, spontaneous recovery depended on the time elapsed since extinction, 1 h being an optimum. Increasing the number of conditioning trials improved the spontaneous recovery level, whereas increasing the number of extinction trials reduced it. Lastly, we show that after single-trial conditioning, spontaneous recovery appears only once after extinction. These elements suggest that in honeybees extinction of the PER actually reflects the impairment of the CS-US association, but that depending on training parameters different memory substrates are affected.

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.

Non-elemental processing in olfactory discrimination tasks needs bilateral input in honeybees

In patterning discriminations, animals have to differentiate a compound stimulus AB from each of its elements A and B. In positive patterning (PP), the compound is reinforced whilst the single elements are non-reinforced. In negative patterning (NP), single elements are reinforced whilst the compound is non-reinforced. Using olfactory conditioning of the proboscis extension response (PER), we asked whether honeybees (Apis mellifera) can solve these patterning problems when odorants are given unilaterally as well as bilaterally to the antennae. Separating the olfactory input space of bees into two independent zones using plastic walls placed between the antennae, we conditioned bees in PP and NP procedures, with input on one side, on both sides, or in an ambiguous problem where bees had to solve PP on one side and NP on the other side. We found that bees with simultaneous bilateral input solve both patterning tasks efficiently. In contrast, PP but not NP was learned by bees receiving unilateral olfactory input. Bees subjected to the ambiguous NP/PP problem only solved PP. As PP can be solved through mere elemental processes, but NP is critically dependent on the use of non-elemental learning processes, our results suggest that bilateral olfactory input is necessary for non-elemental processing to take place in the bee brain.