QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s):
Home     Help     Feedback     Subscriptions     Archive     Search     Table of Contents

First published online February 13, 2009
Journal of Experimental Biology 212, 620-626 (2009)
Published by The Company of Biologists 2009
doi: 10.1242/jeb.026641

This Article Summary Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Carcaud, J. Articles by Sandoz, J.-C. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Carcaud, J. Articles by Sandoz, J.-C. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Odour aversion after olfactory conditioning of the sting extension reflex in honeybees

Julie Carcaud, Edith Roussel, Martin Giurfa and Jean-Christophe Sandoz^*

Research Centre for Animal Cognition, CNRS–University Paul-Sabatier (UMR 5169), 31062 Toulouse cedex 09, France

View larger version (19K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 1. The Y-maze for testing honeybees' choice behaviour. Top view of the acrylic Y-maze. Each bee was placed in the entrance channel of the maze, where it was released. The bee moved towards the decision area, where it had to choose between the two arms containing the odours (delimited by dashed lines). The airflows ensured odour diffusion. The first choice of the bee for one of the arms, and the time spent in each arm were recorded.

View larger version (7K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 2. Associative olfactory conditioning in honeybees. (A) Conditioning of the proboscis extension reflex (PER). Percentage of PER in bees trained with an odorant explicitly reinforced with sucrose solution [CS+ (positive conditioned stimulus), black circles; N=142] and with a non-reinforced odorant (CS–, white circles). Bees learned to differentiate between CS+ and CS– in the course of training (***P<0.001). (B) Conditioning of the sting extension reflex (SER) in bees trained with an odorant explicitly reinforced with an electric shock (black circles, N=238) and with an odorant explicitly non-reinforced (white circles). Bees learned to differentiate between CS+ and CS– in the course of training (***P<0.001).

View larger version (9K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 3. Orientation of honeybees in the Y-maze, 1 h after associative olfactory conditioning. (A) First choice towards the arm containing the CS+, after PER conditioning (N=79) and SER conditioning (N=72). The dashed line at 50% indicates random choice between the CS+ and CS– arms. After PER conditioning, honeybees significantly chose the CS+. By contrast, after SER conditioning, honeybees significantly avoided the CS+ (*P<0.05). (B) Amount of time spent in each Y-maze arm, after PER conditioning (N=79) and SER conditioning (N=72). After PER conditioning, honeybees spent significantly more time in the CS+ arm. By contrast, after SER conditioning, honeybees spent significantly more time in the CS– arm than in the CS+ arm (*P<0.05; ***P<0.001).

View larger version (3K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 4. Proboscis extensions in the Y-maze arms after PER conditioning. Honeybees (N=79) that learned an odour–sucrose association, showed significantly more proboscis extensions in the CS+ than in the CS– arm (***P<0.001).

CiteULike

Complore

Connotea

Del.icio.us

Digg

Reddit

Technorati

Twitter