|
| |
|
|
|
|
||||
| Home Help Feedback Subscriptions Archive Search Table of Contents | ||||
First published online January 31, 2006
Journal of Experimental Biology 209, 766-779 (2006)
Published by The Company of Biologists 2006
doi: 10.1242/jeb.02049
Classical conditioning of activities of salivary neurones in the cockroach
Graduate School of Life Sciences, Tohoku University, Katahira 2-1-1, Sendai 980-8577, Japan
* Author for correspondence (e-mail: makoto{at}biology.tohoku.ac.jp)
Accepted 20 December 2005
 |
Summary |
|---|
 TOP Summary IntroductionMaterials and methodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
Key words: learning, memory, olfaction, taste, salivary neurones, insect
|
Introduction |
|---|
|
TOPSummaryIntroductionMaterials and methodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
).
In studying the mechanisms of digestion, Pavlov discovered that when a bell
was regularly sounded just before feeding, the sound of the bell would
eventually trigger salivation. He also showed lesions in several regions of
the cerebral cortex affect classical conditioning of salivation
(Grimsley and Windholz, 2000).
Later studies on lesions and electrical stimulations of various brain regions
in dogs and rats have suggested that many regions of the brain, including the
orbital cortex, caudate nucleus, hypothalamus and amygdala, are involved in
classical conditioning of salivation
(Lagowska and Fonberg, 1975;
Danilova, 1981;
Danilova, 1983;
Matsuo and Kusano, 1984).
However, the cellular mechanisms underlying classical conditioning of
salivation remain obscure because of the complexity of information processing
in the mammalian brain (Kandel et al.,
2000).
It has been shown that classical conditioning by repeated pairing of a
conditioning stimulus (CS), such as the sound of a bell, and an unconditioned
stimulus (US), such as food, is very common among many vertebrates
(Passe and Walker, 1985) and
invertebrates (Menzel, 1999;
Lechner et al., 2000).
However, as far as we know, classical conditioning of salivation has so far
been reported only in mammals. Since secretion of saliva to aid swallowing and
digestion is a basic physiological function found in many animals, including
flatworms (Orido et al., 1998)
and nematodes (Zunke, 1990),
the following question arises: is classical conditioning of salivation
specific to mammals that are equipped with elaborated autonomous nervous
systems?
The control of salivary secretion has been the subject of detailed study in
insects such as cockroaches and locusts
(Ali, 1997). In cockroaches,
salivation is regulated by the salivary duct nerve (SDN)
(Whitehead, 1971;
Rietdorf et al., 2003). The
SDN consists of two neurones with large-diameter (3-4 µm) axons (salivary
neurones 1 and 2; SN1 and SN2) and several neurones with small-diameter
(
1 µm) axons (Whitehead,
1971), the cell bodies of the former neurones being located in the
suboesophageal ganglion (SOG) (Gifford et
al., 1991; Ali,
1997); the latter neurones have been reported to belong to the
stomatogastric nervous system (Davis,
1985; Ali,
1997).
Immunohistochemical studies suggest that SN1 is dopaminergic
(Elia et al., 1994) and that
small-diameter neurones are serotonergic
(Davis, 1985), and in
vitro application of dopamine and serotonin to salivary glands induces
secretion of protein-free saliva and protein-rich saliva, respectively
(Just and Walz, 1996). The
neurotransmitter of SN2 has not yet been determined. In the locust, salivary
neurones exhibit activity during feeding
(Baines et al., 1989;
Schachtner and Bräunig,
1993) that is modulated by activity of the mouthpart motor pattern
generator (Rast and Bräunig,
2001). However, responses of salivary neurones to food-associated
sensory stimuli, such as taste or olfactory stimuli, have not been
studied.
Cockroaches can be trained to associate olfactory CSs with gustatory USs by
an operant (Sakura and Mizunami,
2001; Sakura et al.,
2002) or a classical conditioning procedure
(Watanabe et al., 2003). The
latter procedure is effective for both freely moving and restrained
cockroaches. Here we report that responses of salivary neurones to an odour
significantly increased after repeated pairing of the odour with sucrose
reward. Moreover, we suggest that the observed increase in odour response of
salivary neurones after conditioning (5-10 Hz) is sufficient to lead to an
increased level of saliva secretion. Our results provide a unique opportunity
to study cellular mechanisms of conditioning of activities of salivary
neurones in animals whose central nervous systems are accessible to detailed
electrophysiological analysis.
|
Materials and methods |
|---|
|
TOPSummaryIntroductionMaterials and methodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
Metal fillings of salivary neurones
Backfills and forwardfills of the SDN were made for each of 20 animals.
Each animal was anaesthetized with ice for 1-2 h. After removal of its legs
and wings, it was pinned ventral-side-up on a wax-coated dish and the cuticle
of the ventral part of the neck was removed. One SDN was cut and its proximal
or distal cut-stump was inserted into a plastic tube filled with a solution
containing 0.16 mol l-1 NiCl2 and 0.04 mol
l-1 CoCl2 (Okada et
al., 2003). The preparations were kept in a moist chamber at
4°C for 4 days.
After backfilling, the ventral cuticle of the head was removed to expose
the SOG. After forwardfilling, the ventral cuticle of the thorax was removed
to expose the salivary gland. Then one or two droplets of rubeanic acid were
applied onto the SOG or the salivary gland for 3-5 min to precipitate the
metals (Okada et al., 2003).
The SOG or the salivary gland was rinsed many times with cockroach saline
(Yamasaki and Narahashi,
1959), dissected out, fixed in 3-4% paraformaldehyde in cockroach
saline for 30-60 min, dehydrated in a graded series of ethanol, cleared in
methyl salicylate, and observed as whole mounts under a light microscope.
After observation of the specimens, they were rehydrated in an ascending
series of ethanol. Then the specimens were intensified with silver
(Bacon and Altman, 1977) and
observed as whole mounts. Digital images were taken using a digital camera
(Camedia C-3040 Zoom; Olympus, Tokyo, Japan) and were processed using Adobe
Photoshop 7.0.
Extracellular recordings of activities of salivary neurones
We used two preparations for extracellular recordings from the SDN. In one
preparation (called the semi-intact preparation), an animal was anaesthetized
with ice for 0.5-1 h, its wings were removed, and it was restrained on a
wax-coated dish ventral-side-up with thin plastic plates at the neck and
between the thorax and abdomen. Then the legs and antenna were fixed with
low-melting wax and staples, respectively. In another preparation (called the
highly dissected preparation), the oesophagus was punctured to prevent its
expansion during chronic recording, and the neck and the cerci were fixed with
low-melting point wax. The advantage of the latter preparation is that the
movement of the head and the oesophagus and also the resulting artefact in the
recording were less frequent and this facilitated reliable segregation of unit
activities. In both preparations, the restrained animal could move its
mouthparts freely.
Semi-intact preparations and highly dissected preparations were kept in a moist chamber at 26-28°C overnight and for 1-2 h, respectively, and then a small incision was made in the ventrolateral sclerite of the neck to expose the salivary duct. Since the SDN runs along the surface of the salivary duct, one SDN, as well as the salivary duct, was hooked on a pair of tungsten electrodes (Fig. 1A). To prevent drying of the SDN, the salivary duct was covered with a mixture of white Vaseline and liquid paraffin saturated with cockroach saline.
|
Effects of surgical ablation of salivary neurone 1 or 2 on activities of one SDN
To determine which of the units of the SDN reflect activities of salivary
neurones 1 and 2 (SN1 and SN2), the SOG was exposed by removing ventral parts
of the neck and labia in highly-dissected preparations, and the part of the
SOG where the cell body of SN1 or SN2 was located was surgically ablated using
a fine needle or scissors, and the resulting change in activities of one SDN
was studied. When one of the units of the SDN was removed by surgery, the SDN
was cut and backfilled with metal to confirm which of the neurons, SN1 or SN2,
had been ablated.
Taste and olfactory stimulation
The continuous airflow system used to deliver odour stimulation to an
antenna of the immobilized animal was described previously
(Nishino et al., 2003).
Briefly, air, which was passed through a small chamber containing a piece of
filter paper soaked with 40 µl of an extract of vanilla or peppermint,
could be delivered without changing the flow rate by operating a solenoid
valve. The air around the antenna was continuously sucked out of the room
through a vacuum system. For gustatory stimulation, the mouth was gently
touched with a wooden stick soaked with 10% sucrose solution, 20% sodium
chloride solution or distilled water. To avoid sensory adaptation, odour or
taste stimuli were applied with an interval of >30 s.
Classical conditioning procedures
The classical conditioning procedures used in this study were modified from
those used for cockroaches (Watanabe et
al., 2003) and crickets
(Matsumoto and Mizunami, 2002;
Matsumoto and Mizunami, 2004).
Five sets of forward or backward CS/US pairing trials were performed on
immobilized animals during recording of the activities of the SDN. One set of
`P+V-' or `V+P-' forward-pairing trial consisted of a presentation of
peppermint or vanilla odour 2 s prior to the presentation of sucrose solution
and subsequent presentation of vanilla or peppermint odour without pairing
with sucrose reward, respectively (Fig.
1B). One set of P+V- backward-pairing trial consisted of a
presentation of peppermint odour 4 s after the presentation of sucrose
solution and subsequent unpaired presentation of vanilla odour
(Fig. 1C). The interval between
trials was 5 min. In a control experiment, peppermint and vanilla odours were
alternately presented five times without pairing with sucrose solution (CS
alone, Fig. 1D). The interval
between odour stimuli was 5 min. In another control experiment, sucrose
solution was presented five times without pairing with odours (US alone,
Fig. 1E). The interval between
sucrose solution stimuli was 10 min. The duration of the odour or sucrose
stimulation was 4 s.
In experiments to study short-term retention of the conditioning effect, responses to vanilla and peppermint odours presented 3-5 times >10 min prior to conditioning or control trials were compared with responses to these odours presented at 1 or 5 min and 30 min after conditioning trials or with responses to these odours presented at 6 and 35 min after control trials (presentation of US alone). The duration of the stimulation was 2 s and the interval between stimulations was >10 s. The measurement was initiated >15 min after completing the set-up of electrophysiological recording to stabilize the preparation.
|
Measurements of salivation in response to electrical stimulation of the SDN
Secretion of saliva from a salivary duct in response to electrical
stimulation of an SDN was measured in a highly dissected preparation. One SDN
was hooked on two pairs of tungsten electrodes
(Fig. 2), the distal pair of
which was used to electrically stimulate the SDN and the proximal pair was
used to monitor the resulting spikes of salivary neurones. The salivary duct
was exposed and cut at the site where it enters the head capsule, and the
distal cut-stump was inserted into a plastic chamber that had a hole in the
upper part. The tip of the plastic chamber was covered with white Vaseline to
prevent leakage of saliva (Fig.
2). Brief (0.2 ms in duration) square-wave pulses were delivered
to the SDN by a stimulator equipped with an isolator (SEN-3301, Nihon Kohden,
Tokyo, Japan). The SDN was stimulated at 5 Hz for 2, 5, 10, 20 or 40 s with
intervals of 6 min.
Fluid secreted from the duct to the plastic chamber was drawn into a plastic capillary (inner diameter: 200 µm) every 1 min, and the length of the fluid column was measured to calculate the volume of the fluid (Fig. 2). The measurement was initiated >10 min after completing the set-up of preparation to stabilize the salivation.
Data analysis
Salivary neurones exhibited spontaneous spike discharges. The magnitude of
responses of salivary neurones to odour stimulation was measured as relative
increase in spike frequency from the spontaneous level, i.e.
100(R-Ro)/Ro (%), where
R and Ro are spike frequency during the first 2 s
of odour stimulation and that during a 2 s period before odour stimulation,
respectively.
All statistical evaluation was performed using Microsoft Excel and Excel statistics software programs (Esumi, Tokyo, Japan). In most cases, odour response data fitted to the normal distribution, and the paired t-test was used to evaluate the data. However, the distribution of data for SN1 obtained from the highly dissected preparation deviated from the normal distribution, and thus non-parametric Wilcoxon's test (WCX-test) was used for statistical evaluation. The data for secreted volume of saliva for 1-min periods before and after the onset of electrical stimulation of the SDN also deviated from the normal distribution and were thus compared using Wilcoxon's test.
|
Results |
|---|
|
TOPSummaryIntroductionMaterials and methodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
;
Elia et al., 1994). The cell
body of SN1 is located at the anteroventral surface of the SOG and that of SN2
is located posterior to that of SN1. Dendrites of SN1 are located in dorsal
and ventral parts of the mandibular and maxillary neuromere, and dendrites of
SN2 are located in the ventral part of maxillary and labial neuromeres
(Fig. 3B). Forwardfills of the
SDN revealed the existence of two large-diameter neurones
(Fig. 3C, black arrowhead) and
at least one small-diameter neurone (Fig.
3C, white arrowhead) along the salivary duct. The former two
neurones obviously correspond to SN1 and SN2, while no axons or cell bodies
corresponding to the latter were stained in the SOG, in agreement with
previous reports that small-diameter neurones belong to the stomatogastric
nervous system (Davis, 1985;
Ali, 1997).
|
|
|
Identification of unit activities corresponding to SN1 and SN2
In order to determine which units of the SDN reflect the activities of SN1
and SN2, we surgically ablated the part of the SOG where the cell body of SN1
or SN2 was located, and the resulting loss of unit activities of the SDN was
studied. After recordings, the SDN was backfilled to examine which of the
salivary neurones was ablated (Fig.
4C,D). In all preparations where the lower-frequency unit with the
largest amplitude disappeared after surgery (N=10),
post-mortem histological examination revealed that the cell body and
some dendrites of SN1 had been eliminated
(Fig. 4C). In contrast, in all
preparations where the higher frequency unit with the second-largest amplitude
disappeared after surgery (N=10), the cell body and some dendrites of
SN2 had disappeared (Fig. 4D).
In subsequent sections, we focus on two large units of the SDN and thus on two
large salivary neurones (SN1 and SN2).
Responses of salivary neurones to taste or odour stimuli
Both SN1 and SN2 exhibited a prominent increase in spike frequency when 10%
sucrose solution, 20% sodium chloride solution or distilled water was applied
to the mouth (Fig. 5), although
responses to distilled water were weaker than those to sucrose or saline
solution. Taste stimulation often induced a movement of the mouthpart and the
oesophagus, and salivary neurones exhibited an increase in spike frequency in
response to the movement of the mouthpart. In most recordings, quantitative
evaluation of taste responses of these units was difficult because of
occasional large artefacts induced by vigorous movement of the mouth and the
oesophagus (Fig. 5, small
arrow). Both salivary neurones responded very weakly to peppermint or vanilla
odour applied to an antenna (Examples of neural activities during odour
responses are shown in Fig. 6A
and averaged odour responses before training are shown in Figs
7,
8). Odour stimulation
occasionally induced a slight movement of the mouth and oesophagus, but this
usually did not prevent reliable discrimination of neural activities from
artefacts; recordings of odour responses in which there was ambiguity in
discriminating neural activities from artefacts (which represent <5% of the
total number of recordings) were excluded from data evaluation.
|
|
|
The effect of conditioning was evaluated, at first, by comparing summed responses of SN1 and SN2 to sucrose-associated odours after conditioning with those before conditioning (Fig. 7). In the P+V- conditioning group (Fig. 7A), the magnitudes of responses to peppermint odour after the first, third and fourth sets of conditioning trials were significantly greater than the magnitude of response before conditioning (t-test, N=20; trial 0 vs trial 1: P=0.035, d.f.=19, t=2.272; trial 0 vs trial 3: P=0.043, d.f.=19, t=2.167; trial 0 vs trial 4: P=0.02, d.f.=19, t=2.549), although the magnitude of responses after the second trial did not significantly differ from that before conditioning (t-test, N=20, P=0.142, d.f.=19, t=1.533). In the V+P- conditioning group (Fig. 7B), the magnitude of response to vanilla odour after the first, second, third and fourth sets of conditioning trials were significantly greater than the magnitudes of responses before conditioning (t-test, N=20; trial 0 vs trial 1: P=0.026, d.f.=19, t=2.418; trial 0 vs trial 2: P=0.004, d.f.=19, t=3.289; trial 0 vs trial 3: P=0.0002, d.f.=19, t=4.526; trial 0 vs trial 4: P=0.009, d.f.=19, t=2.905). In contrast, the magnitudes of responses to the odour presented alone after the first, second, third and fourth unpaired presentations did not significantly differ from the magnitude of initial response for both the P+V- group (Fig. 7A, t-test, N=20; trial 0 vs trial 1: P=0.619, d.f.=19, t=0.506; trial 0 vs trial 2: P=0.576, d.f.=19, t=0.572; trial 0 vs trial 3: P=0.282, d.f.=19, t=1.108; trial 0 vs trial 4: P=0.093, d.f.=19, t=1.77) and the V+P- group (Fig. 7B, t-test, N=20; trial 0 vs trial 1: P=0.288, d.f.=19, t=1.304; trial 0 vs trial 2: P=0.098, d.f.=18, t=1.743; trial 0 vs trial 3: P=0.953, d.f.=18, t=0.06; trial 0 vs trial 4: P=0.957, d.f.=18, t=0.05).
In one control group of cockroaches (CS alone group, Fig. 1D), peppermint and vanilla odours were alternately presented five times without pairing with sucrose reward (Fig. 7C). The magnitudes of responses to peppermint and vanilla odours after the first, second, third and fourth unpaired presentations did not significantly differ from the magnitude of the initial response (t-test, N=21; peppermint, trial 0 vs trial 1: P=0.419, d.f.=20, t=0.825; trial 0 vs trial 2: P=0.485, d.f.=19, t=0.711; trial 0 vs trial 3: P=0.2, d.f.=17, t=1.334; trial 0 vs trial 4: P=0.837, d.f.=19, t=0.208; vanilla, trial 0 vs trial 1: P=0794, d.f.=17, t=0.265; trial 0 vs trial 2: P=0.832, d.f.=17, t=0.215; trial 0 vs trial 3: P=0.636, d.f.=18, t=0.482; trial 0 vs trial 4: P=0.497, d.f.=18, t=0.693). Thus, presentations of odour (CS) alone had no significant effect on subsequent responses to that odour.
The conditioning effect was also evaluated by comparing the responses to sucrose-associated odour with those to the odour presented alone. Before the first set of conditioning trials, the magnitude of responses to peppermint odour did not significantly differ from that to vanilla odour in both the P+V- group (t-test, N=20, P=0.678, d.f.=19, t=0.422) and the V+P- group (t-test, N=20, P=0.157, d.f.=19, t=1.475). However, after the first, second, third, and fourth sets of P+V- conditioning trials, the magnitudes of responses to sucrose-associated peppermint odour were significantly greater than the magnitudes of responses to vanilla odour presented alone (t-test, N=20; trial 1: P=0.008, d.f.=19, t=2.988; trial 2: P=0.019, d.f.=19, t=2.571; trial 3: P=0.006 d.f.=19, t=3.091; trial 4: P=0.004, d.f.=19, t=3.307). Similarly, after the second, third and fourth sets of V+P- conditioning trials, the magnitudes of responses to sucrose-associated vanilla odour were significantly greater than the magnitudes of responses to peppermint odour presented alone (t-test, N=20; trial 2: P=0.01, d.f.=18, t=2.869; trial 3: P=0.024 d.f.=18, t=2.471; trial 4: P=0.049, d.f.=18, t=2.11). In the CS alone group, the magnitude of responses to peppermint odour did not significantly differ from that to vanilla odour (t-test, N=21; trial 0: P=0.269, d.f.=18, t=1.14; trial 1: P=0.913, d.f.=18, t=0.11; trial 2: P=0.509, d.f.=17, t=0.675; trial 3: P=0.509, d.f.=16, t=0.224; trial 4: P=0.548, d.f.=19, t=0.611). We conclude that three sets of conditioning trials are sufficient to achieve a significant level of conditioning.
Short-term retention and effects of backward pairing
Retention of the conditioning effect was tested at 1 min and 30 min after
five sets of conditioning trials in the P+V- and V+P- forward-pairing groups.
Examples of responses of salivary neurones to sucrose-associated odour
(peppermint odour) and to the odour presented alone (vanilla odour) at 30 min
after five sets of differential conditioning trials are shown in
Fig. 6. Both SN1 and SN2
exhibited responses to sucrose-associated peppermint odour, while they
exhibited much less prominent responses to the vanilla odour presented
alone.
The magnitudes of summed responses of SN1 and SN2 to sucrose-associated odour at 1 min or 30 min after conditioning were significantly greater than those before conditioning in both the P+V- (Fig. 8A; t-test, N=20; before vs 1 min after training: P=0.0003, d.f.=19, t=4.489; before vs 30 min after training: P=0.009, d.f.=19, t=2.887) and V+P- forward-conditioning groups (Fig. 8B; t-test, N=20; before vs 1 min after training: P=0.002, d.f.=19, t=3.515; before vs 30 min after training: P=0.025, d.f.=19, t=2.43). Retention of the conditioning effect was also evaluated by comparing the responses to sucrose-associated odours with those to odours presented alone. Before conditioning, the magnitude of responses to peppermint odour did not significantly differ from the magnitude of responses to vanilla odour in both the P+V- group (Fig. 8A; t-test, N=20, P=0.992, d.f.=19, t=0.01) and the V+P- group (Fig. 8B, t-test, N=20, P=0.102, d.f.=19, t=1.72). At 1 min and 30 min after conditioning, the magnitude of the responses to sucrose-associated odour were significantly greater than the magnitude of responses to the odour presented alone in the P+V- group (Fig. 8A; t-test, N=20; 1 min after training: P=0.00005, d.f.=19, t=5.2; 30 min after training: P=0.000002, d.f.=19, t=6.752) and the V+P- group (Fig. 8B; t-test, N=20; 1 min after training: P=0.0005, d.f.=19, t=4.207; 30 min after training: P=0.0003, d.f.=19, t=4.362). The results indicate that the effect of conditioning is retained for 30 min after conditioning.
The magnitude of responses to sucrose-associated peppermint odour at 30 min after conditioning was significantly less than that 1 min after conditioning (Fig. 8A; t-test, N=20, P=0.002, d.f.=19, t=3.673). By contrast, the magnitude of the responses to sucrose-associated vanilla odour at 30 min after conditioning did not significantly differ from that 1 min after conditioning (Fig. 8B; t-test, N=20, P=0.885, d.f.=19, t=0.146). It was, however, uncertain whether or not this was due to the odour-specific decay of memory, since the magnitude of responses to the odour presented alone at 30 min after conditioning was also significantly less than that before, or 1 min after, conditioning in both the P+V- group (Fig. 8A; t-test, N=20; before vs 30 min after training: P=0.004, d.f.=19, t=3.313; 1 min vs 30 min after training: P=0.007, d.f.=19, t=3.029) and the V+P- group (Fig. 8B; t-test, N=20; before vs 30 min after training: P=0.017, d.f.=19, t=2.608; 1 min vs 30 min after training: P=0.015, d.f.=19, t=2.662), while the magnitude of the responses at 1 min after conditioning did not significantly differ from that before conditioning in the P+V- group (Fig. 8A; t-test, N=20, P=0.12, d.f.=19, t=0.12) and the V+P- group (Fig. 8B; t-test, N=20, P=0.686, d.f.=19, t=0.411). Therefore, the possibility cannot be excluded that the decay of odour responses between 1 min and 30 min after conditioning is due to deterioration of the preparation.
We next studied the effect of five sets of backward CS/US pairing trials in another group of animals (Fig. 8C). One backward-pairing trial consisted of presentation of peppermint odour 4 s after the onset of presentation of sucrose reward and subsequent unpaired presentation of vanilla odour (Fig. 1C, backward pairing). The magnitude of summed responses of SN1 and SN2 to peppermint odour at 1 min or 30 min after backward-pairing trials did not significantly differ from that before trials (t-test, N=23; before vs 1 min after training: P=0.906, d.f.=22, t=0.119; before vs 30 min after training: P=0.074, d.f.=22, t=1.879; 1 min vs 30 min after training: P=0.332, d.f.=22, t=0.992). The magnitude of responses to unpaired vanilla odour at 1 min and 30 min after training did not significantly differ from that before trials (t-test, N=23; before vs 1 min after training: P=0.92, d.f.=22, t=0.102; before vs 30 min after training: P=0.055, d.f.=22, t=2.024; 1 min vs 30 min after training: P=0.143, d.f.=22, t=1.52).
The effect of backward pairing was also evaluated by comparing the responses to backward-paired odours and those to odours presented alone. The magnitudes of responses to backward-paired peppermint odour did not significantly differ from that to unpaired vanilla odours before and at 1 min and 30 min after conditioning (Fig. 8C; t-test, N=23; before training: P=0.689, d.f.=22, t=0.405; 1 min after training: P=0.866 d.f.=22, t=0.17; 30 min after training: P=0.809, d.f.=22, t=0.244). The results indicate that backward pairing is not effective in achieving conditioning of odour responses of salivary neurones.
In another control experiment, sucrose solution (US) was presented five times without pairing with odour (Fig. 8D; see also Fig. 1E). The magnitudes of summed responses of SN1 and SN2 to odour stimulation measured at 6 and 35 min after presentations of US alone did not significantly differ from those before presentations of US alone for both peppermint odour (t-test, N=19; before vs 6 min after US alone trials: P=0.504, d.f.=18, t=0.682; before vs 35 min after US alone trials: P=0.222, d.f.=18, t=1.265; 6 min vs 35 min after US alone trials: P=0.176, d.f.=18, t=1.408) and vanilla odour (t-test, N=19; before vs 6 min after US alone trials: P=0.34, d.f.=18, t=0.98; before vs 35 min after US alone trials: P=0.717, d.f.=18, t=0.368; 6 min vs 35 min after US alone trials: P=0.238, d.f.=18, t=1.221). Moreover, the magnitudes of responses to peppermint and those to vanilla did not significantly differ before and at 6 min and 35 min after presentations of sucrose solution alone (t-test, N=19; before trials: P=0.482, d.f.=18, t=0.81; 6 min after US alone trials: P=0.707 d.f.=18, t=0.381; 35 min after US alone trials: P=0.609, d.f.=18, t=0.521). Thus, presentations of sucrose solution alone had no effects on odour responses of salivary neurones.
|
24 h after conditioning, the ventral cuticle of the neck was removed and
the activity of the SDN was recorded. In the P+V- forward-pairing group, the
magnitude of summed responses of SN1 and SN2 to peppermint odour was
significantly greater than that to vanilla odour
(Fig. 9; t-test,
N=18, P=0.005, d.f.=17, t=3.211). In the
backward-pairing group, the magnitude of responses to peppermint odour did not
significantly differ from that to vanilla odour
(Fig. 9; t-test,
N=23, P=0.948, d.f.=22, t=0.066). The results
indicate that the effect of forward-pairing is retained 1 day after
conditioning.
Effects of conditioning on individual salivary neurones
We studied the effect of conditioning for each of the salivary neurones,
SN1 and SN2. In order to achieve reliable segregation of SN1 and SN2,
recordings were made in highly dissected preparations (see Materials and
methods), in which movement of the mouth or the oesophagus and the resulting
artefactual response occurred only very rarely. Recordings of odour responses
in which there was ambiguity in discriminating activities of SN1 and SN2
(which represent <5% of the total number of recordings) were excluded from
data evaluations.
Five sets of P+V- forward-pairing trials were performed. We noted that the distribution of data for SN1 deviated from the normal distribution. This was because in many, but not all cases, SN1 fired somewhat irregularly, with a spike frequency of 0-10 Hz (Fig. 4C,D left, Fig. 5). Thus, we used a non-parametric Wilcoxson's test for statistical evaluation of data for SN1.
The magnitude of responses of both SN1 (Fig. 10A) and SN2 (Fig. 10B) to sucrose-associated peppermint odour at 5 min or 30 min after P+V- conditioning was significantly greater than the magnitude of responses before conditioning (SN1, WCX-test, N=22; before vs 5 min after training: P<0.01, T=45; before vs 30 min after training: P<0.05, T=62; SN2; t-test, N=22; before vs 5 min after training: P=0.003, d.f.=21, t=3.301; before vs 30 min after training: P=0.002, d.f.=21, t=3.577). Typically, the increase of the response to sucrose-associated peppermint odour at 5 min after conditioning, compared to that before conditioning, was 5-10 Hz for both units. The magnitude of the response to sucrose-associated peppermint odour at 30 min after conditioning did not significantly differ from that at 5 min after conditioning (SN1, WCX-test, N=22, P>0.05, T=87; SN2; t-test, N=22, P=0.095, d.f.=21, t=1.749). The magnitude of the response to the odour presented alone (vanilla odour) after 5 min and 30 min did not significantly differ from that before conditioning (SN1, WCX-test, N=22; before vs 5 min after training: P>0.05, T=96; before vs 30 min after training: P>0.05, T=89; 5 min vs 30 min after training: P>0.05, T=118; SN2; t-test, N=22; before vs 5 min after training: P=0.36, d.f.=21, t=0.937; before vs 30 min after training: P=0.92, d.f.=21, t=0.102; 5 min vs 30 min after training: P=0.194, d.f.=21, t=1.342).
|
|
5 V). We deduced that spikes were not evoked in
smaller-diameter neurones of the SDN, since they should have higher threshold
for spike generation. We found that the level of saliva secretion is continuously maintained and that the level increased in response to electric stimulation of the SDN (Fig. 11). The increase was statistically significant for all 2-, 5-, 10-, 20- and 40-sec stimulations (WCX-test, N=12; 2 s stimulation: P<0.01, T=5; 5 s stimulation: P<0.05, T=8; 10 s stimulation: P<0.01, T=3; 20 s stimulation: P<0.05, T=13; 40 s stimulation: P<0.01, T=5). The results suggest that increased response of salivary neurones after conditioning is sufficient to lead to increased levels of salivation.
|
Discussion |
|---|
|
TOPSummaryIntroductionMaterials and methodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
; Miller,
1969; Harris and Brady,
1974), but, as far as we know, it has not been reported in any
non-mammalian species. In insects such as cockroaches and locusts, secretion
of saliva is controlled by salivary neurones of the SOG
(Whitehead, 1973;
Smith and House, 1977;
House and Smith, 1978;
Baines and Tyrer, 1989). Here
we reported that in cockroaches the responses of two large salivary neurones
(SN1 and SN2) to an odour significantly increases after repeated pairing of
the odour with sucrose solution. The increase in the response of both SN1 and
SN2 was 5-10 spikes s-1 for the first 2 s of odour stimulation
after conditioning, and electrical stimulation of the SDN at 5 Hz for 2 s or
longer led to significantly increased saliva secretion. The latter finding is
in accordance with results of previous reports on secretory response of the
salivary gland to electrical stimulation of the SDN, measured for salivary
glands isolated from cockroaches, Nauphoeta cinerea
(House and Smith, 1978) and
locusts (Baines and Tyrer,
1989). The results suggest that the increase in odour response of
salivary neurones as a result of conditioning is sufficient to lead to an
increase in the level of salivation. Findings in this study suggest classical conditioning of salivation in the cockroach, but direct behavioural evidence needs to be provided to prove this speculation. We are currently performing experiments to compare the amount of salivation in response to odour stimulation before and after conditioning.
Taste and odour responses of salivary neurones
Both of the two large salivary neurones exhibited spontaneous activity and
this should lead to a spontaneous level of saliva secretion. Salivary neurones
exhibited a prominent increase in spike frequency in response to sucrose or
saline solution applied to the mouth and also exhibited a very weak response
to peppermint or vanilla odour applied to an antenna. Activation of salivary
neurones in response to food-predicting odour and food-associated taste
stimulation is no doubt functionally significant for effective feeding.
We also observed that both SN1 and SN2 were active during movement of the
mouthpart. This is in accordance with an observation that activities of
salivary neurones were modulated by activity of the mouthpart motor pattern
generator in locusts (Rast and
Bräunig, 2001). The present finding, that salivary neurones
receive signals related to feeding motor activity as well as food-predicting
olfactory signals and food-associated gustatory signals, may be reflected in
the morphologies of their dendrites. The ventral part of the SOG is thought to
participate mainly in sensory processing and the dorsal part of the SOG is
thought to participate mainly in motor function
(Rehder, 1988;
Tyrer and Gregory, 1982), and
salivary neurones have dendrites in both dorsal and ventral parts of the SOG.
Notably, dendrites of SN1 are mainly located in the dorsal and ventral parts
of mandibular and maxillary neuromeres, and dendrites of SN2 are mainly
located in the ventral part of maxillary and labial neuromeres
(Fig. 3B,
Fig. 4C,D). How this different
dendritic morphology reflects different functions of SN1 and SN2 remains a
subject of future study.
Effects of conditioning on odour response of salivary neurones
We have shown that appetitive conditioning trials to associate an odour
with sucrose reward lead to an increased preference for that odour in a
dual-choice test (Watanabe et al.,
2003), and we found in the present study that the same classical
conditioning leads to an increase in response of salivary neurones to the
odour associated with sucrose reward. It should be noted, however, that
salivary neurones are activated in response to both appetitive (sucrose) and
aversive (saline) taste stimuli (Fig.
5). Moreover, the magnitude of responses of salivary neurones to
vanilla odour did not differ from that to peppermint odour before training
(Figs 7,
8,
10), although cockroaches
innately prefer vanilla odour over peppermint odour in a dual-choice test
(Sakura and Mizunami, 2001;
Watanabe et al., 2003). These
results indicate that an increase in response of salivary neurones to an odour
might not necessarily correlate with an increase in the preference for that
odour. It would be interesting to determine whether or not classical
conditioning trials to associate an odour with saline solution lead to an
increase in response of salivary neurones to that odour, although such
aversive conditioning trials have been shown to lead to a decrease in
preference for that odour in crickets
(Matsumoto and Mizunami,
2002).
Backward-pairing trials were not effective for achieving conditioning of
odour responses of salivary neurones (Fig.
8C, Fig. 9). This
is in accordance with previous findings that backward-pairing of olfactory CS
with gustatory US was not effective in achieving olfactory conditioning in
insects and mammals (honeybees: Hellstern
et al., 1997; crickets:
Matsumoto and Mizunami, 2002;
rats: Maier et al., 1976),
although backward-pairing of visual CS with olfactory US was found to be
effective for achieving conditioning in cockroaches
(Lent and Kwon, 2004).
There was a significant level of memory retention 1 day after conditioning.
This is comparable to our previous finding that altered odour preference after
three sets of classical conditioning trials was retained for 4 days after
conditioning (Watanabe et al.,
2003). The time course of memory retention after conditioning of
activities of salivary neurones was not determined in detail in this study.
The responses of salivary neurones to sucrose-associated vanilla odour did not
significantly decay from 1 to 30 min after conditioning
(Fig. 8B). The response of
salivary neurones to sucrose-associated peppermint odour, however,
significantly decayed from 1 to 30 min after conditioning in semi-intact
preparations (Fig. 8A), but it
did not significantly decay from 5 to 30 min after conditioning in highly
dissected preparations (Fig.
10). In the former experiments, the response to the odour
presented alone (vanilla) also decayed from 1 min to 30 min
(Fig. 8A). Thus, the
possibility that the observed decay of odour response was due to deterioration
of the preparation cannot be ruled out. Further improvement of preparations is
necessary to determine in detail the time course of memory retention.
Future perspective
Cockroaches may provide model systems in which to study cellular mechanisms
of classical conditioning of activities of salivary neurones. In mammals, many
studies have suggested that various brain regions participate in classical
conditioning of salivation. For example, electrical stimulations of the
orbital cortex (Danilova, 1983)
or dorsal part of the caudate nucleus
(Danilova, 1981) in dogs and
the lateral hypothalamus (Matsuo and
Kusano, 1984) in rats modulate salivation to conditioning
stimulus. Lesions of the cerebral cortex
(Grimsley and Windholz, 2000)
and dorsomedial part of the amygdala
(Lagowska and Fonberg, 1975)
decreased salivation to conditioning stimulus in dogs. The exact cellular
mechanisms of conditioning of salivation, however, remain elusive. Cockroaches
are suitable materials for the study of neural mechanisms of conditioning of
activities of salivary neurones at the level of individual neurones, since
intracellular recordings from brain neurones are feasible
(Mizunami, 1990;
Mizunami, 1996;
Li and Strausfeld, 1997;
Li and Strausfeld, 1999;
Strausfeld and Li, 1999;
Nishino et al., 2003).
Olfactory learning in insects has been used as a pertinent model in which
to study neural mechanisms underlying learning and memory
(Menzel, 1999;
Heisenberg, 2003;
Daly et al., 2004). In
honeybees, the antennal lobe (a primary olfactory centre) and the mushroom
body (a higher olfactory centre that processes multisensory signals) have been
implicated in olfactory memory processing
(Menzel, 1999). In the fruit
fly, Drosophila melanogaster, mutants with defects in structure and
function of the mushroom body exhibited impairments in olfactory learning
(Heisenberg, 2003). In moths,
Manduca sexta, olfactory conditioning produced a modulation of the
ensemble representations for odours in antennal lobe neurones
(Daly et al., 2004).
Conditioning of activities of salivary neurones should provide an excellent
model for the study of the neural basis of olfactory conditioning, since
chronic extracellular recordings from salivary neurones can be easily combined
with intracellular recordings from brain neurones, thereby allowing for the
study of activity changes in brain neurones during conditioning. One of our
next steps is to investigate whether neurones in the antennal lobe and the
mushroom body are involved in olfactory conditioning of activities of salivary
neurones and whether there is an association of olfactory CS and gustatory US
for conditioning of activities of salivary neurones in the SOG.
|
Acknowledgments |
|---|
|
References |
|---|
|
TOPSummaryIntroductionMaterials and methodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
Ali, D. (1997). The aminergic and peptidergic innervation of insect salivary glands. J. Exp. Biol. 200,1941 -1949.[Abstract]
Bacon, J. P. and Altman, J. S. (1977). A silver intensification method for cobalt-filled neurones in wholemount preparations. Brain Res. 138,359 -363.[CrossRef][Medline]
Baines, R. A. and Tyrer, N. M. (1989). The innervation of locust salivary gland. II. Physiology of excitation and modulation. J. Comp. Physiol. A 165,407 -413.[CrossRef]
Baines, R. A., Tyrer, N. M. and Mason, J. C. (1989). The innervation of locust salivary gland. I. Innervation and analysis of transmitters. J. Comp. Physiol. A 165,395 -405.[CrossRef]
Daly, K. C., Christensen, T. A., Lei, H., Smith, B. H. and
Hildebrand, J. G. (2004). Learning modulates the
ensemble representations for odors in primary olfactory networks.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
101,10476
-10481.
Danilova, L. K. (1981). Effect of prolonged electrical stimulation of the head of the caudate nucleus on secretory reflexes to food in dogs. Neurosci. Behav. Physiol. 11, 3-9.[CrossRef][Medline]
Danilova, L. K. (1983). Conditioned and unconditioned food reflexes in dogs during electrical stimulation of the orbital cortex. Neurosci. Behav. Physiol. 12,337 -343.
Davis, N. T. (1985). Serotonon-immunoreactive visceral nerves and neurohemal system in the cockroach Periplaneta americana (L.). Cell Tissue Res. 240,593 -600.[CrossRef]
Elia, A. J., Ali, D. W. and Orchard, I. (1994). Immunochemical staining of tyrosine hydroxylase (TH)-like material in the salivary glands and ventral nerve cord of the cockroach, Periplaneta americana (L.). J. Insect Physiol. 40,671 -683.[CrossRef]
Gifford, A. N., Nicholson, R. A. and Pitman, R. M.
(1991). The dopamine and 5-hydroxytryptamine content of locust
and cockroach salivary neurons. J. Exp. Biol.
161,405
-414.
Grimsley, D. L. and Windholz, G. (2000). The neurophysiological aspects of Pavlov's theory of higher nervous activity: in honor of the 150th anniversary of Pavlov's birth. J. Hist. Neurosci. 9,152 -163.[Medline]
Harris, A. H. and Brady, J. V. (1974). Animal learning. Visceral and autonomic conditioning. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 25,107 -133.[CrossRef][Medline]
Heisenberg, M. (2003). Mushroom body memoir: from maps to models. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 4, 266-274.[CrossRef][Medline]
Hellstern, F., Malaka, R. and Hammer, M. (1997). Backward inhibitory learning in honeybees: a behavioral analysis of reinforcement processing. Learn. Mem. 4, 429-444.
House, C. R. and Smith, R. K. (1978). On the
receptors involved in the nervous control of salivary secretion by
Nauphoeta clinerea Olivier. J. Physiol.
279,457
-471.
Just, F. and Walz, B. (1996). The effects of serotonin and dopamine on salivary secretion by isolated cockroach salivary glands. J. Exp. Biol. 199,407 -413.[Abstract]
Kandel, E. R., Schwartz, J. H. and Jassell, T. M. (2000). Principles of Neural Science, 4th edn, pp. 1227-1246. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Lagowska, J. and Fonberg, E. (1975). Salivary reactions in dogs with dorsomedial amygdalar lesions. Acta Neurobiol. Exp. 35,17 -26.[Medline]
Lechner, A. H., Baxter, A. D. and Byrne, J. H.
(2000). Classical conditioning of feeding in Aplysia: I.
Behavioral analysis. J. Neurosci.
20,3369
-3376.
Lent, D. D. and Kwon, H. W. (2004). Antennal
movements reveal associative learning in the American cockroach
Periplaneta americana. J. Exp. Biol.
207,369
-375.
Li, Y. and Strausfeld, N. J. (1997). Morphology and sensory modality of mushroom body extrinsic neurons in the brain of the cockroach, Periplaneta americana. J. Comp. Neurol. 387,631 -650.[CrossRef][Medline]
Li, Y. and Strausfeld, N. J. (1999). Multimodal efferent and recurrent neurons in the medial lobes of cockroach mushroom bodies. J. Comp. Neurol. 409,647 -663.[CrossRef][Medline]
Maier, S. F., Rapaport, P. and Wheatley, K. L. (1976). Conditioned inhibition and the UCS-CS interval. Anim. Learn. Behav. 4,217 -220.[Medline]
Matsumoto, Y. and Mizunami, M. (2002). Temporal
determinants of long-term retention of olfactory memory in the cricket
Gryllus bimaculatus. J. Exp. Biol.
205,1429
-1437.
Matsumoto, Y. and Mizunami, M. (2004).
Context-dependent olfactory learning in an insect. Learn.
Mem. 11,288
-293.
Matsuo, R. and Kusano, K. (1984). Lateral hypothalamic modulation of the gustatory-salivary reflex in rats. J. Neurosci. 4,1208 -1216.[Abstract]
Menzel, R. (1999). Memory dynamics in the honeybee. J. Comp. Physiol. A 185,323 -340.[CrossRef]
Miller, N. E. (1969). Learning of visceral and
glandular responses. Science
163,434
-445.
Mizunami, M. (1990). Nonlinear signal
transmission between second- and third-order neurons of cockroach ocelli.
J. Gen. Physiol. 95,297
-317.
Mizunami, M. (1996). Gain control of synaptic
transfer from second- to third-order neurons of cockroach ocelli.
J. Gen. Physiol. 107,121
-131.
Nishino, H., Yamashita, S., Yamazaki, Y., Nishikawa, M., Yokohari, F. and Mizunami, M. (2003). Projection neurons originating from thermo- and hygrosensory glomeruli in the antennal lobe of the cockroach. J. Comp. Neurol. 455, 40-55.[CrossRef][Medline]
Okada, R., Sakura, M. and Mizunami, M. (2003). Distribution of dendrites of descending neurons and its implications for the basic organization of the cockroach brain. J. Comp. Neurol. 458,158 -174.[CrossRef][Medline]
Orido, Y., Kokaze, A., Akamatsu, T., Takashima, Y. and Yoshida, M. (1998). Ultrastructure of the foregut and associated glands in the lung fluke, Paragonimus miyazakii (Digenea: Troglotrematidae), with particular reference to their functional roles. J. Morphol. 237,43 -52.[CrossRef][Medline]
Passe, D. H. and Walker, J. C. (1985). Odor psychophysics in vertebrates. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 9, 431-467.[CrossRef][Medline]
Pavlov, I. P. (1927). Conditioned Reflexes: An Investigation of the Physiological Activity of the Cerebral Cortex (trans. G. V. Anrep). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Rast, G. F. and Bräunig, P. (2001). Insect mouthpart motor patterns: central circuits modified for highly derived appendages? Neuroscience 108,167 -176.[CrossRef][Medline]
Rehder, V. (1988). A neuroanatomical map of the suboesophageal and prothoracic ganglia of the honey bee (Apis mellifera). Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 235,179 -202.
Rietdorf, K., Lang, I. and Walz, B. (2003). Saliva secretion and ionic composition of saliva in the cockroach Periplaneta americana after serotonin and dopamine stimulation, and effects of ouabain and bumetamide. J. Insect Physiol. 49,205 -215.[CrossRef][Medline]
Sakura, M. and Mizunami, M. (2001). Olfactory learning and memory in the cockroach Periplaneta americana. Zool. Sci. 18,21 -28.[CrossRef]
Sakura, M., Okada, R. and Mizunami, M. (2002). Olfactory discrimination of structurally similar alcohols by cockroaches. J. Comp. Physiol. A 188,787 -797.[Medline]
Schachtner, J. and Bräunig, P. (1993). The activity pattern of identified neurosecretory cells during feeding behaviour in the locust Locusta migratoria. J. Exp. Biol.
