两个新近分化的果蝇物种在学习味觉和视觉刺激方面的物种差异

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS ACS Applied Bio Materials Pub Date : 2024-08-03 DOI:10.1016/j.anbehav.2024.07.009
Madeline P. Burns , Julia B. Saltz
{"title":"两个新近分化的果蝇物种在学习味觉和视觉刺激方面的物种差异","authors":"Madeline P. Burns ,&nbsp;Julia B. Saltz","doi":"10.1016/j.anbehav.2024.07.009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Learning is central to our understanding of how behaviour is shaped by the environment. A key open question is whether learning across contexts evolves as an integrated process, or whether learning in each context is free to evolve separately. Here, we measured learning in two sensory contexts in multiple genotypes and both sexes of two closely related, but ecologically divergent, species of fruit flies, <em>Drosophila simulans</em> and <em>Drosophila sechellia</em>. These species are morphologically very similar but differ dramatically in ecology and population biology. We tested how flies from each genotype, sex and species responded to and learned about different gustatory and visual cues. This approach allowed us to test whether species differences in learning were independent or correlated across contexts. Surprisingly, we found no evidence that <em>D. simulans</em> learned in any of our treatments. In contrast, <em>D. sechellia</em> learned to avoid gustatory stimuli that were paired with an aversive stimulus, as predicted, but unexpectedly learned to approach visual stimuli that were paired with the aversive stimulus. At the genotype level, genotypes, but not species, differed in their naïve responses to stimuli, but genotypes did not differ in learning in either species. Our results demonstrate that <em>D. sechellia</em> indeed differs from <em>D. simulans</em> in both learning contexts, but in a stimulus-dependent way. We suggest that studies of additional species or population pairs that employ this framework will be critical for evaluating the dimensionality of learning and its evolution.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Species differences in learning about gustatory and visual stimuli in two recently diverged species of Drosophila\",\"authors\":\"Madeline P. Burns ,&nbsp;Julia B. Saltz\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.anbehav.2024.07.009\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Learning is central to our understanding of how behaviour is shaped by the environment. A key open question is whether learning across contexts evolves as an integrated process, or whether learning in each context is free to evolve separately. Here, we measured learning in two sensory contexts in multiple genotypes and both sexes of two closely related, but ecologically divergent, species of fruit flies, <em>Drosophila simulans</em> and <em>Drosophila sechellia</em>. These species are morphologically very similar but differ dramatically in ecology and population biology. We tested how flies from each genotype, sex and species responded to and learned about different gustatory and visual cues. This approach allowed us to test whether species differences in learning were independent or correlated across contexts. Surprisingly, we found no evidence that <em>D. simulans</em> learned in any of our treatments. In contrast, <em>D. sechellia</em> learned to avoid gustatory stimuli that were paired with an aversive stimulus, as predicted, but unexpectedly learned to approach visual stimuli that were paired with the aversive stimulus. At the genotype level, genotypes, but not species, differed in their naïve responses to stimuli, but genotypes did not differ in learning in either species. Our results demonstrate that <em>D. sechellia</em> indeed differs from <em>D. simulans</em> in both learning contexts, but in a stimulus-dependent way. We suggest that studies of additional species or population pairs that employ this framework will be critical for evaluating the dimensionality of learning and its evolution.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":2,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"99\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0003347224001957\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0003347224001957","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

学习是我们理解行为如何受环境影响的核心。一个关键的悬而未决的问题是,不同情境下的学习是作为一个综合过程进化的,还是每个情境下的学习可以自由地单独进化。在这里,我们测量了两种密切相关但在生态学上存在差异的果蝇--模拟果蝇和壳果蝇--的多基因型和雌雄个体在两种感官环境中的学习能力。这两个物种在形态上非常相似,但在生态学和种群生物学上却有很大差异。我们测试了每种基因型、性别和物种的果蝇如何对不同的味觉和视觉线索做出反应和学习。通过这种方法,我们可以检验不同物种在不同环境下的学习差异是独立的还是相关的。令人惊讶的是,我们没有发现任何证据表明D. simulans在我们的任何处理中进行了学习。相反,D. sechellia学会了避开与厌恶刺激配对的味觉刺激,但却意外地学会了接近与厌恶刺激配对的视觉刺激。在基因型水平上,基因型(而非物种)在对刺激的幼稚反应方面存在差异,但基因型在两个物种的学习方面没有差异。我们的研究结果表明,D. sechellia与D. simulans在两种学习情境中确实存在差异,但这种差异取决于刺激。我们建议,利用这一框架对更多物种或种群对进行研究,对于评估学习及其进化的维度至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Species differences in learning about gustatory and visual stimuli in two recently diverged species of Drosophila

Learning is central to our understanding of how behaviour is shaped by the environment. A key open question is whether learning across contexts evolves as an integrated process, or whether learning in each context is free to evolve separately. Here, we measured learning in two sensory contexts in multiple genotypes and both sexes of two closely related, but ecologically divergent, species of fruit flies, Drosophila simulans and Drosophila sechellia. These species are morphologically very similar but differ dramatically in ecology and population biology. We tested how flies from each genotype, sex and species responded to and learned about different gustatory and visual cues. This approach allowed us to test whether species differences in learning were independent or correlated across contexts. Surprisingly, we found no evidence that D. simulans learned in any of our treatments. In contrast, D. sechellia learned to avoid gustatory stimuli that were paired with an aversive stimulus, as predicted, but unexpectedly learned to approach visual stimuli that were paired with the aversive stimulus. At the genotype level, genotypes, but not species, differed in their naïve responses to stimuli, but genotypes did not differ in learning in either species. Our results demonstrate that D. sechellia indeed differs from D. simulans in both learning contexts, but in a stimulus-dependent way. We suggest that studies of additional species or population pairs that employ this framework will be critical for evaluating the dimensionality of learning and its evolution.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
期刊最新文献
A Systematic Review of Sleep Disturbance in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension. Advancing Patient Education in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension: The Promise of Large Language Models. Anti-Myelin-Associated Glycoprotein Neuropathy: Recent Developments. Approach to Managing the Initial Presentation of Multiple Sclerosis: A Worldwide Practice Survey. Association Between LACE+ Index Risk Category and 90-Day Mortality After Stroke.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1