1 1 Symposium Chemosensory Receptors Satellite DEVELOPMENT ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

405 Poster Central Taste and Chemosensory BehaviorDIFFERENTIAL INTERACTIONS BETWEEN AMYGDALA,INSULA, CAUDOMEDIAL AND CAUDOLATERALORBITOFRONTAL CORTEX DEPEND UPON THE NATUREOF STIMULUS PERCEIVED OR TASK PERFORMEDBender G. 1 , Gitelman D.R. 2 , Small D.M. 3 1 InterdepartmentalNeuroscience, Yale University and J.B. Pierce Laboratory, New Haven,CT; 2 Neurology, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL; 3 Psychology,Yale University, New Haven, CTPreviously we used fMRI and identified a region of anteriorinsula/frontal operculum (AIFO) that responded during perception of ataste but not a tasteless solution, irrespective of the nature of the task(detecting its presence, judging its pleasantness or its quality, orpassively tasting). In contrast, a region of caudolateral orbitofrontalcortex (OFC) responded preferentially when Ss judged pleasantness,irrespective of whether they received a taste or a tasteless solution. Herewe used effective connectivity analyses (ECA) to assess potentialdifferential connectivity between regions depending on the nature of thestimulus or the task. ECA showed greater connectivity between theAIFO and bilateral amygdala when the Ss tasted passively compared towhen they evaluated a taste, suggesting that even though BOLDresponse in the AIFO is not affected by task, information transferbetween it and the amygdala differs depending on whether anevaluation is made or not. We also found greater connectivity betweencaudolateral and caudomedial OFC when Ss received a taste versus atasteless solution, indicating that connectivity between these OFC tasteregions is dependent on sensory stimulation. This finding is inaccordance with work by Pritchard et al. (2005) highlighting theimportance of the caudomedial OFC in gustatory processing. (supportedby NIH/IDCD R03 DC006169)407 Poster Central Taste and Chemosensory BehaviorTASTE GUIDED BEHAVIOR IN DROSOPHILAMELANOGASTER TO TRADITIONAL PSYCHOPHYSICALTEST SOLUTIONSGordesky-Gold B. 1 , Rivers N. 1 , Ahmed O. 1 , Breslin P. 1 1 MonellChemical Senses Center, Philadelphia, PAThe ability to perceive the taste quality of a food source is critical forthe survival of an organism. Flies are omnivores and have very similartaste sensitivities as humans with regard to attractants and repellents.Like humans, they are attracted to and ingest many sugars and dilutesalts and avoid ingesting toxins and acids. We have tested flies from thewildtype laboratory strain Canton-S (CS) for their taste responses to avariety of compounds considered sweet or bitter by humans. Many ofthese compounds have never before been tested in Drosophila. Fliesresponded to and rejected many stimuli that humans find bitter. Fliesreject quinine, caffeine, denatonium, and MgSO 4 . On the other hand,flies appear insensitive to PROP, PTC, SOA, limonin, cyclo-LeuTrp,epicatichin, and naringin at the concentrations tested. When testingartificial sweeteners flies have, so far, found all tested compounds to beappetitive. The intensive sweeteners tested thus far included sodiumcyclamate, sodium saccharin, sucralose, aspartame, neohesperidindihydrochalcone (NHDC), glycyrrhizic acid, and thaumatin. Some ofthese sweeteners do not elicit a positive sweet response from rodents;sodium cyclamate, aspartame, NHDC and thaumatin taste sweet only tohumans and old world monkeys. New world monkeys and rodents donot respond to these sweeteners. We conclude that Drosophila tasteresponses are often more similar to human responses than are rodentsand those of many primates. The strength of Drosophila as a behavioralgenetic model make these data especially useful for taste gene discoverypurposes.406 Poster Central Taste and Chemosensory BehaviorCHANGE OF SERUM AND LEPTIN RECEPTORIMMUNOREACTIVITY IN THE AMYGDALA OF RATSFOLLOWING INTRAORAL INFUSION OF SWEET TASTANTYan J. 1 , Han Z. 1 , Jiang E. 1 1 Physiology and Pathaphysiology, Xi'anJiaotong University Medical Center, Xi'an, Shaanxi, ChinaTo determine whether the level of the leptin and the leptin receptor(OB-R) expression in amygdala changes following sweet taste stimuli,the serum leptin concentration was measured by using rat leptin RIAkit, long form of leptin receptor (OB-Rb) mRNA in the brain sectionswas examined by in situ hybridisation (ISH) and the expression of OB-R was assessed by immunohistochemistry ABC method with a highlyspecific goat anti-OB-R antibody. Comparing with the control group(intraoral infusion of distilled water), the level of serum leptin increasedin the sweet group (sucrose and saccharin) (p < 0.05). Many neuronalbodies and dendritic processes in amygdala, which have intensiverelationship with taste and feeding, showed leptin receptorimmunoreativity (LR-IR). But the count of positive-stained cells inamygdala showed no significant difference between the tastestimulation group and the control group. The level of OB-Rb mRNAexpression increased in the basolateral part of the amygdala (BLA),while no different expression was found in the central nucleus ofamygdala (CeA) after sweet tastant intraoral infusion. These findingslead us to study possible effects of leptin on taste responses. Probably,leptin influences food intake by means of the sense of taste. supportedby China NSF grants iNo.30270454 and 30300111 j.408 Poster Central Taste and Chemosensory BehaviorDOES LEARNING SHAPE OLFACTORY ACUITY IN THEMOTH MANDUCA SEXTA?Sprouse R.A. 1 , Cassis J.J. 1 , Daly K.C. 1 1 Biology, West VirginiaUniversity, Morgantown, WVLearning changes the neural processing of odor in primary olfactorycenters. These changes are manifest as evolving spatial and temporalrepresentations. The functional role of these changes, however, remainsa mystery. One model predicts that olfactory acuity is learningdependentand sharpens with experience. To test this prediction, we firstconditioned M. sexta moths to respond to 1-octanol using a Pavlovianolfactory-learning paradigm. Moths were placed into one of 4 groupsreceiving 1, 2, 4 or 8 conditioning trials. Twenty four hours aftertraining, moths were tested with a homologous series of alcohols in apseudo-randomized sequence. Results indicated that there was asharpening of the generalization slope only between groups receivingone verses two conditioning trials. However, as the number ofconditioning trials increased, only a general increase in responsivenesswas observed, suggesting higher acquisition and not acuity per se. Tofurther explore this result we performed two more experiments. First,we replicated the above methods but tested with molecularly distinctodorants to assess whether changing gradients are related to taskdifficulty. In a final experiment, moths received 2 blocks of 8conditioning trials, each block separated by 24 h. Following each blockand again 24 h after the last block, moths were tested with thehomologous series of alcohols. This procedure assessed whether acuitymight be short-term and whether additional conditioning trials enhancesacuity. Results of these experiments will be discussed. This work wassupported by NIH-NIDCD DC05535 to KCD & NIH-NCRR RR015574to GS & KCD.102
409 Poster Central Taste and Chemosensory BehaviorCORRELATING BEHAVIORAL AND PHYSIOLOGICALMEASURES OF ODOR DETECTION IN THE MOTHMANDUCA SEXTACarrell L.A. 1 , Mwilaria E. 1 , Daly K.C. 1 1 Biology, West VirginiaUniversity, Morgantown, WVOlfactory systems must detect and discriminate odors whilemaintaining a degree of perceptual invariance of identity in a highlyvariable environment. The goals of this study were to measureconditioned response (CR) probabilities to odors as a function of odorconcentration and to correlate these measures to physiological measuresof antennal input. Using Pavlovian olfactory-learning, we characterizeddetection thresholds in the moth M. sexta. Moths were conditioned torespond to an odor (CS) at neat concentration and then post tested at 24and 48 h, first with a blank and then with the CS across a 5 log stepmineral oil dilution series. Stimuli were presented from low to high(starting at 5 µg/µl) to prevent extinction. Detection thresholds weredefined as the lowest concentration at which the CR probability wassignificantly greater than that elicited by the blank. Results indicatedodor specific thresholds. Analysis of variance indicated that CRprobability varied by; sex, test day, conditioning odor andconcentration. Furthermore, there was a significant interaction betweenconcentration and odor indicating odor specific dose response functions.Next, we measured electroantennogram responses to the same odorantsacross the same concentration series in order to correlate our behavioralmeasures with physiological evidence of detection. Results of theseexperiments indicate a close correspondence between the two measuressuggesting that behavioral measures accurately reflect underlyingphysiological evidence of sensory detection. This work was supportedby NIH-DC05535 to KCD & NIH-RR015574 to GS & KCD.411 Poster Central Taste and Chemosensory BehaviorMORE TIME MEANS BETTER DETECTION ANDDISCRIMINATION OF ODORANTS IN THE HONEYBEE (APISMELLIFERA)Smith B.H. 1 , Wright G. 2 , Carlton M. 3 1 Life Sciences, Arizona StateUniversity, Tempe, AZ; 2 School of Biology, University of Newcastleupon Tyne, Newcastle, United Kingdom; 3 Entomology, Ohio StateUniversity, Columbus, OHPhysiological studies of the Antennal Lobe (AL) and Olfactory Bulb(OB) have revealed that sensory input to these neuropils is transformedover a short time period during and after odor stimulation. The temporalnature of this transformation is likely to arise from processing by localneural networks. Yet, the role of this transformation in olfactory codingremains controversial. If time is important for the production of thecode for odor identity, we hypothesize that both stimulus duration andstimulus concentration will affect odor recognition. Here, we testwhether these parameters of odor stimuli affect odor recognition byhoneybees using Proboscis Extension Response conditioning. We firstevaluated the effect of different stimulus durations (200, 500, 800, 1000and 2000 ms) and three different stimulus concentrations (0.0002, 0.02,2.0 M) on detectability and discriminability of odorants. We thenevaluated the effect of two training durations (200 and 1000 ms) onresponse at the five durations and three stimulus concentrations listedabove of the same odor. In general, increasing stimulus durationincreased both detectability and discriminability of odorants. However,increasing the concentration of the stimulus improved detection anddiscrimination at shorter stimulus durations. Response latencies wereapproximately 500 ms, but animals continued to sample odor beyondthe initiation of a response. This work was supported by an award fromNIH-NIDCD (DC007997).410 Poster Central Taste and Chemosensory BehaviorTHE EFFECT OF INTENSITY ON DISCRIMINATIONLEARNING AND PERFORMANCE IN THE MOTH MANDUCASEXTAMwilaria E. 1 , Carrell L.A. 1 , Daly K.C. 1 1 Biology, West VirginiaUniversity, Morgantown, WVUnderlying the ability to discriminate olfactory stimuli are neuralresponses with both spatial and temporal components. Our goals wereto behaviorally characterize the effect of stimulus concentration on bothdiscrimination learning and discrimination performance. Groups of M.sexta moths were differentially conditioned to respond to one odorant(CS+) but not another (CS-) using a Pavlovian paradigm. Moths wereconditioned with neat odorants to control for salience-dependentlearning effects. At 24 and 48 h post conditioning, moths were testedwith a blank then the CS+ and CS- (pseudo-randomly) across a 5 logstep series of increasing concentration (starting at 5 µg/µl) to avoidextinction. ANOVA indicated that differential conditioned responses tothe CS+ and CS- were both concentration-dependent and dependent onwhich odorant of a pair was reinforced. Subsequent comparison ofdifferences in detection thresholds between odorant pairs accuratelypredicted this odor-dependent effect. To assess the effect of salience ondiscrimination learning, as well as cross validate the above odordependenteffect, groups of moths were differentially conditioned atlower concentrations in the dilution series. These groups were tested atthe conditioning and at neat concentrations 24 and 48 h afterconditioning. ANOVA results confirmed the odor-dependent effect andindicated that conditioning at lower concentrations had a minor effecton discrimination performance. These results provide a behavioral basisfor future matched neurophysiological studies.This work was supportedby NIH-DC05535 to KCD & NIH-RR015574 to GS & KCD.412 Poster Central Taste and Chemosensory BehaviorANATOMICAL AND BEHAVIORAL INVESTIGATIONS OF INOVO ODOR SENSITIVITY AND ODOR IMPRINTING INCHICK EMBRYOSCelii A. 1 , De Jesus S. 1 , Gomez G. 1 1 Biology., University of Scranton,Scranton, PAThe chick olfactory system begins development at embryonic day 8(E8) and is known to be functional by E15. Studies have shown thatchick embryos exposed to odorants in ovo prefer these odorants afterhatching, suggesting that the olfactory system perceives and decodesodor stimuli during development. This in ovo experience may shape theanimals´ behavior post-hatching, presumably to make them more welladaptedto their immediate surroundings. We employed anatomical andbehavioral approaches to study the timecourse of development of theolfactory system in ovo. Chick embryos were exposed to amyl acetateor phenylethyl alcohol for 3 day periods from E12 through E21. Uponhatching and for two days after birth, chicks were tested for theirpreference for “familiar” versus “unfamiliar” odorants using a T-maze.A subset of chick embryos were taken at E20 and their olfactory bulbswere fixed and tested for cFos immunoreactivity to determine olfactorybulb activation as a result of odorant exposure. Preliminary resultsshow that chicks prefer familiar odorants that were given during, but notprior, to E15 through E18. Anatomical staining patterns suggestdifferences in odorant-elicited bulbar activation corresponding to thistime window. These results collectively suggest that the critical periodfor odor imprinting occurs between E15 and E18, highlighting theimportance of the sensory environment in shaping the developmentalpathways of the olfactory system. This work is part of theundergraduate Honors research of AC and SJ and is supported byinternal research funds from the University of Scranton.103
Page 1 and 2:
1 Symposium Chemosensory Receptors
Page 3 and 4:
9 Symposium Chemosensory Receptors
Page 5 and 6:
17 Givaudan LectureFISHING FOR NOVE
Page 7 and 8:
25 Symposium Impact of Odorant Meta
Page 10 and 11:
37 Poster Peripheral Olfaction and
Page 12 and 13:
Page 14 and 15:
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
93 Poster Chemosensory Coding and C
Page 26 and 27:
101 Poster Chemosensory Coding and
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
sniffing behavior. Furthermore, we
Page 38 and 39:
149 Slide Chemosensory Coding and C
Page 40 and 41:
157 Slide Taste ChemoreceptionHTAS2
Page 42 and 43:
165 Poster Multimodal, Chemosensory
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53: 205 Poster Multimodal, Chemosensory
Page 58 and 59: 229 Slide Molecular Genetic Approac
Page 60 and 61: 237 Poster Central Olfaction and Ch
Page 76 and 77: 301 Slide Central OlfactionOLFACTOR
Page 78 and 79: 309 Poster Chemosensory Molecular G
Page 94 and 95: 373 Symposium Olfactory Bulb Comput
Page 96 and 97: 381 Symposium Presidential: Why Hav
Page 98 and 99: 389 Poster Central Taste and Chemos
Page 110 and 111: 437 Symposium Neural Dynamics and C
Page 112 and 113: 445 Poster Developmental, Neurogene
Page 128 and 129: Brody, Carlos, 438Brown, R. Lane, 3
Page 130 and 131: Gilbertson, Timothy Allan, 63, 64,
Page 132 and 133: Klouckova, Iveta, 150Klyuchnikova,
Page 134 and 135: Ni, Daofeng, 93Nichols, Zachary, 35
Page 136 and 137: Sorensen, Peter W., 23, 288, 289Sou
Page 138: Zeng, Musheng, 466Zeng, Shaoqun, 26
show all

1 1 Symposium Chemosensory Receptors Satellite DEVELOPMENT ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?