Smelling, tasting, learning : Drosophila as a study case

dc.contributor.authorGerber, Bertramdeu
dc.contributor.authorStocker, Reinhard F.deu
dc.contributor.authorTanimura, T.deu
dc.contributor.authorThum, Andreas
dc.date.accessioned2011-11-29T13:41:11Zdeu
dc.date.available2011-11-29T13:41:11Zdeu
dc.date.issued2009
dc.description.abstractUnderstanding brain function is to account for how the sensory system is integrated with the organism's needs to organize behaviour. We review what is known about these processes with regard to chemosensation and chemosensory learning in Drosophila. We stress that taste and olfaction are organized rather differently. Given that, e.g., sugars are nutrients and should be eaten (irrespective of the kind of sugar) and that toxic substances should be avoided (regardless of the kind of death they eventually cause), tastants are classified into relatively few behavioural matters of concern. In contrast, what needs to be done in response to odours is less evolutionarily determined. Thus, discrimination ability is warranted between different kinds of olfactory input, as any difference between odours may potentially be or become important. Therefore, the olfactory system has a higher dimensionality than gustation, and allows for more sensory—motor flexibility to attach acquired behavioural ‘meaning’ to odours. We argue that, by and large, larval and adult Drosophila are similar in these kinds of architecture, and that additionally there are a number of similarities to vertebrates, in particular regarding the cellular architecture of the olfactory pathway, the functional slant of the taste and smell systems towards classification versus discrimination, respectively, and the higher plasticity of the olfactory sensory—motor system. From our point of view, the greatest gap in understanding smell and taste systems to date is not on the sensory side, where indeed impressive advances have been achieved; also, a satisfying account of associative odour-taste memory trace formation seems within reach. Rather, we lack an understanding as to how sensory and motor formats of processing are centrally integrated, and how adaptive motor patterns actually are selected. Such an understanding, we believe, will allow the analysis to be extended to the motivating factors of behaviour, eventually leading to a comprehensive account of those systems which make Drosophila do what Drosophila's got to do.eng
dc.description.versionpublished
dc.identifier.citationFirst publ. in: Results and Problems in Cell Differentiation ; 47 (2009). - S. 139-185deu
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/400_2008_9deu
dc.identifier.pmid19145411
dc.identifier.ppn355130424deu
dc.identifier.urihttp://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/17155
dc.language.isoengdeu
dc.legacy.dateIssued2011-11-29deu
dc.relation.ispartofseriesResults and Problems in Cell Differentiation
dc.rightsterms-of-usedeu
dc.rights.urihttps://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/deu
dc.subjectBehaviourdeu
dc.subjectDrosophiladeu
dc.subjectLearningdeu
dc.subjectOlfactiondeu
dc.subjectPunishmentdeu
dc.subjectRewarddeu
dc.subjectTastedeu
dc.subject.ddc570deu
dc.titleSmelling, tasting, learning : Drosophila as a study caseeng
dc.typeJOURNAL_ARTICLEdeu
dspace.entity.typePublication
kops.citation.bibtex
@article{Gerber2009Smell-17155,
  year={2009},
  doi={10.1007/400_2008_9},
  title={Smelling, tasting, learning : Drosophila as a study case},
  volume={47},
  issn={0080-1844},
  journal={Results and problems in cell differentiation},
  pages={187--202},
  author={Gerber, Bertram and Stocker, Reinhard F. and Tanimura, T. and Thum, Andreas}
}
kops.citation.iso690GERBER, Bertram, Reinhard F. STOCKER, T. TANIMURA, Andreas THUM, 2009. Smelling, tasting, learning : Drosophila as a study case. In: Results and problems in cell differentiation. 2009, 47, pp. 187-202. ISSN 0080-1844. Available under: doi: 10.1007/400_2008_9deu
kops.citation.iso690GERBER, Bertram, Reinhard F. STOCKER, T. TANIMURA, Andreas THUM, 2009. Smelling, tasting, learning : Drosophila as a study case. In: Results and problems in cell differentiation. 2009, 47, pp. 187-202. ISSN 0080-1844. Available under: doi: 10.1007/400_2008_9eng
kops.citation.rdf
<rdf:RDF
    xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
    xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
    xmlns:bibo="http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/"
    xmlns:dspace="http://digital-repositories.org/ontologies/dspace/0.1.0#"
    xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"
    xmlns:void="http://rdfs.org/ns/void#"
    xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#" > 
  <rdf:Description rdf:about="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/17155">
    <dc:rights>terms-of-use</dc:rights>
    <dc:creator>Thum, Andreas</dc:creator>
    <dcterms:available rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2011-11-29T13:41:11Z</dcterms:available>
    <dc:creator>Gerber, Bertram</dc:creator>
    <dspace:hasBitstream rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/17155/2/Thum.pdf"/>
    <dspace:isPartOfCollection rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/28"/>
    <dcterms:isPartOf rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/28"/>
    <dc:creator>Tanimura, T.</dc:creator>
    <dcterms:isPartOf rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/52"/>
    <foaf:homepage rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/"/>
    <dc:contributor>Tanimura, T.</dc:contributor>
    <dcterms:hasPart rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/17155/2/Thum.pdf"/>
    <dcterms:issued>2009</dcterms:issued>
    <void:sparqlEndpoint rdf:resource="http://localhost/fuseki/dspace/sparql"/>
    <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
    <dc:contributor>Stocker, Reinhard F.</dc:contributor>
    <dc:contributor>Thum, Andreas</dc:contributor>
    <dcterms:bibliographicCitation>First publ. in: Results and Problems in Cell Differentiation ; 47 (2009). - S. 139-185</dcterms:bibliographicCitation>
    <bibo:uri rdf:resource="http://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/17155"/>
    <dcterms:abstract xml:lang="eng">Understanding brain function is to account for how the sensory system is integrated with the organism's needs to organize behaviour. We review what is known about these processes with regard to chemosensation and chemosensory learning in Drosophila. We stress that taste and olfaction are organized rather differently. Given that, e.g., sugars are nutrients and should be eaten (irrespective of the kind of sugar) and that toxic substances should be avoided (regardless of the kind of death they eventually cause), tastants are classified into relatively few behavioural matters of concern. In contrast, what needs to be done in response to odours is less evolutionarily determined. Thus, discrimination ability is warranted between different kinds of olfactory input, as any difference between odours may potentially be or become important. Therefore, the olfactory system has a higher dimensionality than gustation, and allows for more sensory—motor flexibility to attach acquired behavioural ‘meaning’ to odours. We argue that, by and large, larval and adult Drosophila are similar in these kinds of architecture, and that additionally there are a number of similarities to vertebrates, in particular regarding the cellular architecture of the olfactory pathway, the functional slant of the taste and smell systems towards classification versus discrimination, respectively, and the higher plasticity of the olfactory sensory—motor system. From our point of view, the greatest gap in understanding smell and taste systems to date is not on the sensory side, where indeed impressive advances have been achieved; also, a satisfying account of associative odour-taste memory trace formation seems within reach. Rather, we lack an understanding as to how sensory and motor formats of processing are centrally integrated, and how adaptive motor patterns actually are selected. Such an understanding, we believe, will allow the analysis to be extended to the motivating factors of behaviour, eventually leading to a comprehensive account of those systems which make Drosophila do what Drosophila's got to do.</dcterms:abstract>
    <dc:date rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2011-11-29T13:41:11Z</dc:date>
    <dc:creator>Stocker, Reinhard F.</dc:creator>
    <dspace:isPartOfCollection rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/52"/>
    <dcterms:rights rdf:resource="https://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/"/>
    <dcterms:title>Smelling, tasting, learning : Drosophila as a study case</dcterms:title>
    <dc:contributor>Gerber, Bertram</dc:contributor>
  </rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>
kops.description.openAccessopenaccessgreen
kops.flag.knbibliographyfalse
kops.identifier.nbnurn:nbn:de:bsz:352-171556deu
kops.sourcefieldResults and problems in cell differentiation. 2009, <b>47</b>, pp. 187-202. ISSN 0080-1844. Available under: doi: 10.1007/400_2008_9deu
kops.sourcefield.plainResults and problems in cell differentiation. 2009, 47, pp. 187-202. ISSN 0080-1844. Available under: doi: 10.1007/400_2008_9deu
kops.sourcefield.plainResults and problems in cell differentiation. 2009, 47, pp. 187-202. ISSN 0080-1844. Available under: doi: 10.1007/400_2008_9eng
kops.submitter.emailwiebke.knop@uni-konstanz.dedeu
relation.isAuthorOfPublicationf163d976-32b4-4fb4-8ad4-b257bdcf1104
relation.isAuthorOfPublication.latestForDiscoveryf163d976-32b4-4fb4-8ad4-b257bdcf1104
source.bibliographicInfo.fromPage187
source.bibliographicInfo.toPage202
source.bibliographicInfo.volume47
source.identifier.issn0080-1844
source.periodicalTitleResults and problems in cell differentiation

Dateien

Originalbündel

Gerade angezeigt 1 - 1 von 1
Vorschaubild nicht verfügbar
Name:
Thum.pdf
Größe:
20.48 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Thum.pdf
Thum.pdfGröße: 20.48 MBDownloads: 1557

Lizenzbündel

Gerade angezeigt 1 - 1 von 1
Vorschaubild nicht verfügbar
Name:
license.txt
Größe:
1.92 KB
Format:
Plain Text
Beschreibung:
license.txt
license.txtGröße: 1.92 KBDownloads: 0