- Research article
- Open Access
Calcium-stores mediate adaptation in axon terminals of Olfactory Receptor Neurons in Drosophila
© Murmu et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2011
- Received: 15 July 2011
- Accepted: 24 October 2011
- Published: 24 October 2011
In vertebrates and invertebrates, sensory neurons adapt to variable ambient conditions, such as the duration or repetition of a stimulus, a physiological mechanism considered as a simple form of non-associative learning and neuronal plasticity. Although various signaling pathways, as cAMP, cGMP, and the inositol 1,4,5-triphosphate receptor (InsP3R) play a role in adaptation, their precise mechanisms of action at the cellular level remain incompletely understood. Recently, in Drosophila, we reported that odor-induced Ca2+-response in axon terminals of olfactory receptor neurons (ORNs) is related to odor duration. In particular, a relatively long odor stimulus (such as 5 s) triggers the induction of a second component involving intracellular Ca2+-stores.
We used a recently developed in-vivo bioluminescence imaging approach to quantify the odor-induced Ca2+-activity in the axon terminals of ORNs. Using either a genetic approach to target specific RNAs, or a pharmacological approach, we show that the second component, relying on the intracellular Ca2+-stores, is responsible for the adaptation to repetitive stimuli. In the antennal lobes (a region analogous to the vertebrate olfactory bulb) ORNs make synaptic contacts with second-order neurons, the projection neurons (PNs). These synapses are modulated by GABA, through either GABAergic local interneurons (LNs) and/or some GABAergic PNs. Application of GABAergic receptor antagonists, both GABAA or GABAB, abolishes the adaptation, while RNAi targeting the GABABR (a metabotropic receptor) within the ORNs, blocks the Ca2+-store dependent component, and consequently disrupts the adaptation. These results indicate that GABA exerts a feedback control. Finally, at the behavioral level, using an olfactory test, genetically impairing the GABABR or its signaling pathway specifically in the ORNs disrupts olfactory adapted behavior.
Taken together, our results indicate that a relatively long lasting form of adaptation occurs within the axon terminals of the ORNs in the antennal lobes, which depends on intracellular Ca2+-stores, attributable to a positive feedback through the GABAergic synapses.
- Axon Terminal
- GABAB Receptor
- Antennal Lobe
- Olfactory Response
- Odor Stimulus
Adaptation, a reduction of the response to repeated stimuli, is considered to be a simple form of non-associative learning, as well as one of the most simple and widespread forms of neuronal plasticity. Functionally, adaptation extends the operating range of sensory systems over a large range of stimulus intensities . Sensory systems are modified by experience through multiple mechanisms operating in a large variable time scale, ranging from milliseconds, seconds, minutes or even weeks, suggesting different temporal mechanisms of adaptation. Vertebrate ORNs, like other types of sensory neurons, adapt to a given stimulus, by time-dependent modification in sensitivity. Indeed, odor response declines during prolonged odor stimulation [2, 3]. In mice, exposure to an odorant over a period of weeks results in increased odorant sensitivity , while in humans, psychophysical studies have revealed that the perceived intensity of an odorant continuously decreases for minutes after odorant exposure . In invertebrates such as C. elegans, prolonged exposure to an odorant yields a diminished response to the odorant for several hours . Thus, the kinetics of the changes in adaptation depends upon the stimulus context, as well as its duration and/or its frequency of repetition.
Olfactory stimuli generate cellular responses by modifying the levels of different second messengers in both vertebrates and invertebrates. Cyclic adenosine monophosphate (cAMP) [7, 8], cGMP  and the inositol 1,4,5-trisphosphate (InsP3) signaling pathways  have been implicated, suggesting that olfactory transduction may require parallel or interacting pathways [11, 12]. However, the precise subcellular localization of each secondary messenger, for example, whether they are present in the dendrites, cell bodies or axon terminals, as well as their precise kinetics and interactions, remain largely unknown. For example, the primary response of ORNs to odor-ligands is a rapid rise in cAMP, which directly opens Ca2+-permeable cyclic nucleotide-gated (CNG) ion channels . Thus, cAMP, CNG-dependent ion channels, and Ca2+-dependent mechanisms have been proposed to mediate adaptation . However, several Ca2+-independent mechanisms have also been implicated in adaptation, including odorant receptor phosphorylation by protein kinase A  and G-protein coupled receptor kinase 3 (GRK3) . cGMP is also a likely part of the apparatus mediating adaptation, since a particular form of adaptation operating on a time scale of minutes, termed long-lasting adaptation (LLA), has been described, which is dependent on cGMP through carbon monoxide (CO) [9, 15]. Thus, based on the time scale of their kinetics, there is evidence for the coexistence of at least three different types of odor adaptation in a single ORN: short-term adaptation, desensitization and long-lasting adaptation .
In Drosophila, a mutation in the inositol 1,4,5-trisphosphate receptor (InsP3R) affects olfactory adaptation , when measured either behaviorally or physiologically (such as an electroantennogram). However, as these studies were based on mutations, which affect all cells of the organism that express the InsP3R gene, the precise mechanisms at the cellular and molecular levels, and the neurons in which adaptation occurs and particularly in the ORNs, still remains to be elucidated. Recently, taking advantage of a new in-vivo bioluminescence imaging technique , allowing continuous monitoring of neuronal Ca2+-activity over a long time range, we have shown that the odor-induced Ca2+-response in the axon terminal of ORNs is related to odor duration . A short odor-stimulus (< 1s) induces a short Ca2+-response due to the opening of the Voltage-Gated-Calcium-Channel (VGCC), while a long odor stimulus, such as 5s, generates through the InsP3R and/or the ryanodine (RyR) receptors in addition a slightly delayed second component, which relies on intracellular Ca2+-stores. Here, advancing beyond these findings, using the binary P[GAL4] expression system to specifically target in the ORNs, with the P[Or83b-GAL4]) line  different RNAi constructs concomitantly with the GFP-aequorin (GA) bioluminescent probe, complemented by a pharmacological approach, we describe a long-lasting form of adaptation. We also bring new insights into the activation of the InsP3R and RyR signaling pathways, through feedback control involving GABA in the antennal lobes.
Ca2+-response correlates with odor-duration and repetition frequency of the stimulus
Adaptation of Ca2+-response in axon terminals requires cholinergic synaptic transmission
InsP3R and RyR are required to induce the second component, which amplifies the odor-induced response
Overall, although some differences can be observed between the results obtained from the pharmacological versus a genetic approach and more specifically between ryanodine and the RyR-RNAi (although this last condition does not seems to completely block the adaptation, or solely in an odor specific manner) similar results were obtained with the two independent methods. These observations confirm that InsP3R as well as RyR, and consequently the Ca2+ released from the intracellular Ca2+-stores contribute to the olfactory response, by allowing ORNs to increase and maintain their response according to increasing odor duration, and importantly, to adapt to a prolonged and/or repeated stimulus.
Release of presynaptic Ca2+-stores within ORNs depends on GABAergic synaptic transmission in the antennal lobes
Blocking GABAergic signaling in ORNs yields functional defects in olfactory behavior
Odor-induced Ca2+-responses within ORNs adapt to long-lasting or repetitive stimuli
This study provides evidence that the bioluminescent (GFP-aequorin) Ca2+-sensor is sensitive enough to monitor the Ca2+-response following various protocols (duration and repetition-frequency) of odor application. 1 s of odor induces a response which does not significantly decrease if repeated every 5 min, whereas a longer stimulus, such as 5 s, is sufficient to induce a decrease in response following repeated odor stimulations (adaptation) (Figure 2). Similarly, using a 5 s odor stimulation and increasing the frequency of repetition to 1-min intervals also induces, in an odor specific manner, a faster adaptation (Figure 3). We also demonstrate that prolonged odor application (up to 2 min) generates a sustained Ca2+-response within the ORN axon terminals (Figure 3), indicating that the ORNs are capable of responding as long as the odor is presented, of even longer (we can observe a short tail after stopping the odor). This work also indicates that the GFP-aequorin probe is not a limiting factor for the detection of the Ca2+-activity. These physiological results (reduction of the Ca2+-activity according to prolonged/sustained odor duration and/or odor repetition) are consistent with previous studies [2, 3] which report that adaptation depends both on the duration of a stimulus and on the frequency of its repetition.
Different physiological approaches, based either on fluorescence brain imaging or electrophysiological techniques have previously reported odor-induced activity in different interconnected neurons in the antennal lobes of different invertebrate model organisms, including honeybees , locusts  and Drosophila[19, 22–24, 28, 30, 31, 41] with the goal of deciphering the neural odor code. However, except for the study of Stopfer and Laurent (1999)  performed in locusts, which indirectly described a form of adaptation, long-lasting forms of adaptation within ORNs such as that described here has not been reported. This is likely due to the experimental design of these previous studies, which either generally took into account the odor-induced signal solely after the response was stabilized (generally after about 5 successive odor applications) , or used a shorter odor stimulation duration (< = 1 s), which as demonstrated here, is not sufficient to induce detectable and reliable adaptation. Additionally, others have relied on extracellular recordings of the sensillae of the antennae [27, 30, 31, 41] which reflects the activity occurring in the cell-bodies of the ORNs. Here, monitoring the axon terminals of the ORNs, 5 s odor stimulations, repeated at 5-min intervals, induced a relatively long-lasting adaptation that resembles in term of kinetics, the long-lasting adaptation (LLA) reported by Zufall and Leinders-Zufall (1997)  in ORNs in salamanders. Indeed and interestingly, the recovery time (15 min for spearmint and octanol and 30 min for citronella) (Additional file 3) occurs over a similar time scale in salamander ORNs (which are different from the long-lasting olfactory adaptation described in C. elegans[52, 53]). However, in contrast to LLA, which was reported in isolated ORNs, the adaptation described here seems to rely on different mechanisms, since it is sensitive to a "feedback control" provided by GABAergic synaptic transmission within the antennal lobes.
Olfactory adaptation requires the recruitment of the intracellular Ca2+-stores
In Drosophila, mutants lacking InsP3R  are defective in olfactory adaptive behavior. In vertebrates, different forms of olfactory adaptation have also been reported in the ORNs [8, 9, 54]. First, we show in Drosophila that an adaptation mechanism occurs in axon terminal of the ORNs in the antennal lobes. Second, using two independent approaches, pharmacological and genetic, we show that odor-induced specific adaptation relies principally on InsP3R and RyR. When these two different receptors are blocked or knocked-down, although some difference (variability) can be observed between different conditions, overall the odor-induced Ca2+-response no longer adapts or is severely affected. More specifically, it seems that the lack of adaptation is due to the non-induction of the "second delayed and slow rising component" of the Ca2+-response, which is triggered in particular and specific conditions: when the duration of an odor stimulation is relatively long (here, in our experimental condition, 1 s does not induce it, while 5 s induces an important second component (see Murmu et al., 2010  for a detailed description of the second component). Alternatively, the second component of the response is also induced and visible particularly on the first and to a lesser extent, on the second odor applications, especially when the odor is successively repeated. This second component gradually vanishes with sequential repetition. That is, we show that adaptation is not directly due to a decrease in the response, but rather indirectly to a defect in presynaptic Ca2+-increase, due to a lack of triggering release of intracellular Ca2+-stores, normally occurring in the first and successive responses following either a sufficiently strong (long stimulus) or repeated stimuli (Figure 2 and 3). These results suggest that one of the major intracellular mechanisms of adaptation depends on internal Ca2+-stores. In brief, we have blocked the intracellular mechanism that allows the cell to adapt to long lasting or repetitive stimuli. Interestingly, in mammals, in hippocampal CA3 pyramidal neurons, intracellular Ca2+-stores, which are controlled by InsP3R and/or RyR at the presynaptic terminal, have been previously implicated in neurotransmitter release as well as in synaptic plasticity [55, 56].
GABAergic synaptic transmission in the antennal lobes is required for adaptation
In vertebrates, neuronal plasticity related to odor representation occurs at the synapse between the ORNs and the second-order neurons in the olfactory bulb glomeruli, a region analogous to the invertebrate antennal lobes. At this synapse, signal transmission is modulated presynaptically by several mechanisms, a major one being via the metabotropic GABAB receptors. This suppresses presynaptic Ca2+-influx and subsequently transmitter release from the receptor neurons terminal [57, 58]. At least two kinds of presynaptic inhibition (intra- and interglomerular) are mediated by GABAB receptors. Intraglomerular presynaptic inhibition seems to control input sensitivity [57, 58], while interglomerular presynaptic inhibition seems to increase the contrast of sensory input  (although the two studies addressing this question in-vivo show contradictory results). In Drosophila, a similar mechanism seems to occur, as interglomerular presynaptic inhibition, mediated by both ionotropic and metabotropic receptors on the same axon terminal of the ORNs, mediate gain control mechanism, serving to adjust the gain of PN in response to ORN stimulation . Yet another study has suggested that GABAB but not GABAA receptors are involved in presynaptic inhibition  yielding a contradiction. Here, by monitoring the Ca2+-release from the axon terminals of ORNs, in experimental conditions that generate a long-lasting form of adaptation, we have shown that GABAergic synaptic transmission plays a role in adaptation (Figures 7 and 8). Both ionotropic GABAAR antagonists, bicuculline and picrotoxin, block partially or completely the Ca2+-response, while, CGP54626, a metabotropic GABABR antagonist, also blocks the adaptation, albeit not completely. It should be mentioned here that application of picrotoxin per se induces a strong transient Ca2+-release within the axon terminals of the ORNs, even without odor application (Additional file 4). This "transient release effect" likely disturbs the resting state of the neurons, which probably accounts for the important reduction observed in the amplitude of the odor-induced response. Nevertheless, these results suggest that both types of GABA receptors (A and B) are involved in adaptation. Moreover, as proposed by the study of Olsen and Wilson (2008) , it cannot be ruled-out that ORNs also express different subtypes of GABAAR (homo- and/or heteromultimers), since our results showed that picrotoxin and particularly bicuculline, two distinct inhibitors of GABAAR, block adaptation. Another possibility is that the effect of the two GABAAR antagonists results from the blockage of GABAAR on other neurons in the antennal lobes, as the LNs or certain PNs (which have not yet been demonstrated). Lastly and unfortunately, this pharmacological approach does not allow distinguishing by which precise neurons this GABAergic-dependent adaptation is mediated. With the goal of clarifying precisely in which neurons GABAergic transmission acts, we blocked the metabotropic GABABR (GABABR2-RNAi) or its signaling pathway (UAS-PTX) directly within ORNs. This yields defects in long-lasting adaptation for several conditions, seemingly in an odor specific manner (Figure 8). Therefore, although GABAergic effects have been described in ORNs of both Drosophila[28, 30] and mammals [57, 58, 60], to support "feedback inhibition", we here report that in different experimental conditions such as a long odor duration (5 s) and/or repetition of the stimulus, it also participates in the adaptation process. Indeed, our results suggest that GABA signaling support a positive (excitatory) feedback control instead of an inhibitory feedback, as formerly reported by other studies [28, 30]. Though these results seem to be contradictory, some explanations can be provided. First, as aforementioned, the experimental conditions are different: we used a relatively high odor concentration with relatively long odor duration (5 s). In addition, we recorded immediately from the first odor application and the successive one, while in the experimental protocol of certain studies, the odor is generally presented several times (priming) before the beginning of recording . Consequently, it seems that these previous studies were performed on already adapted ORNs. This implies that the neuronal network in the antennal lobes was already stimulated, and therefore its dynamics was probably already modified, since as described here, an important effect occurs immediately after the first odor application. Moreover, GA allows monitoring, in continuity over a long time period, the intracellular level of calcium with high sensitivity to [Ca2+] (from ~ 10-7 to 10-3). In addition, although we can't precisely assign which glomeruli are activated, this approach allows visualizing simultaneously the odor-induced Ca2+-activity from the entire antennal lobes (the overall depth). Therefore, we are monitoring the outcome of the overall response of the antennal lobes, instead of the response from single or a few glomeruli. Finally, in vertebrates it has been reported that in certain experimental conditions, GABA could be excitatory [for a review: , although this contradiction cannot yet be precisely explained. Furthermore, it seems that a given synapse can display inhibitory effects under one protocol and an excitatory effect with another. Notably, it has been reported that a short stimulation of GABA is inhibitory, while during a long stimulation, the GABA effect can switch from inhibitory to excitatory. Interestingly, this particular "switching effect" could potentially explain the current "contradictory" situation reported here: in our experimental conditions, in which we used a relatively long odor stimulus (5 s), GABA generates an excitatory effect, whereas in previous studies [28, 30] based on short (<1 s) odor stimuli, GABA seems to be inhibitor. This difference in the duration of stimuli could perhaps account for such inverted or "switching effects".
Blocking the GABAergic pathway within the ORNs disrupts olfactory behavior
To explore the behavioral and functional consequences of disturbing the GABAergic signaling pathway, we studied flies with a GABABR2 (RNAi) ORN-specific genetic knockdown, as well those with a component of its signaling pathway, the G-protein, blocked by the pertussis toxin. Both groups of flies present strong behavioral deficits, as adaptation-disrupted flies are not able to discern between odors and air after 5-min of exposure to odor (Figure 9). Interestingly, control flies reverse their choice preferring odor after a 5-min pre-exposure (adaptation) suggesting that in these experimental conditions, the meaning of the odor changes in the fly's adapted state. These results are consistent with previous studies suggesting that adaptation could serve to extend the operating range of sensory systems over different stimulus intensities . In other terms, adaptation modifies the sensitivity (threshold) to the odor, as previously reported in different organisms, such as C. elegans and vertebrates  including humans . This phenomenon is similar to that in other sensory modalities, as in visual system, where light adaptation in photoreceptors sets the gain, allowing vision at both high and low light levels . As previously reported [18, 63], odors could be repulsive (at high concentrations) or attractive (at low concentrations). In our experimental conditions in control flies the odors are repulsive. However, after 5-min of preexposure, the flies adapt to this odor concentration, and when tested at the same concentration odors are then likely only weakly perceived and therefore might correspond to an attractive "weak-odor concentration". In a former study in similar experimental conditions, we reported that the flies are attracted by each of these three odors for a weak odor concentration (see Figure S1 in ). Interestingly, reverse odor preference has already been reported in C. elegans, resulting from presynaptic changes involving a receptor-like guanylate cyclase (GCY-28) via the diacylglycerol/protein kinase C pathway . Finally, the fact that without pre-exposure all groups of flies preferred the control arm and were repelled by the odorants indicates that the odor acuity of these flies is intact. In other words, odor-adaptation and not odor-acuity is affected in each of these groups of flies. These results strengthen the idea that odor perception and adaptation are indeed two distinct and separable processes.
Flies were maintained on standard medium at RT (24°C). P[UAS-GFP-aequorin] (GA) transgenic flies  were used in conjunction with the P[GAL4]Or83b line, to target GA to the ORNs. P[GAL4]Or83b (Bloomington Stock Center) is expressed in a large population (approximately 80%) of sensory neurons . Since both P[GAL4]Or83b and P[UAS-GA] are inserted on the 3rd chromosome, they were recombined onto the same chromosome, allowing further genetic crosses directly with the three different RNAi and UAS-PTX lines. Imaging experiments were performed on progeny of flies containing both the P[GAL4]Or83b driver and the P[UAS-GA] transgene (Or83b,GA/Canton-S) in transheterozygotes. We used specific RNAi (P[UAS-InsP3R-RNAi], P[UAS-RyR-RNAi] (R. Ueda, NIG, Japan) and P[UAS-GABABR2-RNAi] (J. Wang, San Diego, USA), to knock-down the genes investigated specifically in the ORNs. We use the P[UAS-pertussin-toxin] (UAS-PTX) provided by G. Roman (Houston, USA), to inhibit some types of G-proteins. The P[GAL4]Or22a line was generated and provided by L. Vosshall (New York, USA).
Preparation of flies for live in-vivo brain imaging was performed as previously described . In brief, a 4 day-old female fly was briefly cold (ice) anesthetized, inserted in a truncated 1 ml commercial pipette tip until the head protruded and was fixed in place with dental glue (Protemp III, ESPE™). The assembly was then placed in an acrylic block and secured with parafilm™. Ringer's solution  was deposited on the head, and a tiny window in the head capsule was cut out to expose the olfactory sensory neurons at the level of the antennal lobes. Care was taken not to damage the antennae. Then, the exposed brain was incubated in Drosophila Ringer's solution containing 5 μM native coelenterazine (Interchim, France) for 2 hours before experiments.
In-vivo brain imaging
Odor-evoked bioluminescence signals in the ORNs were monitored with an electron multiplier CCD camera (EM-CCD, Andor, iXon, cooled to -80°C) fitted onto a microscope (Nikon, Eclipse-E800). The setup is housed inside a tight dark box (Sciences Wares, Inc., USA) to avoid any undesired (ambient) light contamination. We used a 20X dry-objective lens (N.A.: 0.75, Plan Apochromat, Nikon), giving a field of view of 400 × 400 μm (512 × 512 pixels). To improve signal to noise ratio, data were acquired with a 2 second integration time (0.5 Hz), and 2 × 2 binning was used (1 pixel = 1,56 × 1,56 μm). To acquire and store data, each detected photon was assigned x,y-coordinates and a time point. Response of individual flies to three different odors: spearmint, citronella, and octanol (3-Octanol) were recorded. The laboratory-made odor delivery apparatus consists of 5 identical channels, one of which is devoted to control air (without odor). From the air pump and a moistening bottle (containing 1 liter of water), each channel comprises a 50 ml flask with on either side a solenoid activated pinch-valve (Sirai S-104) isolating those not in use. All connecting tubes were made of silicone. Air flows continuously (500 ml/min) through the control channel except when a logic command issued by the imaging software switches the flow for the predetermined odor-duration time (1, 3, 5 s or 2-min) to one of the test (odor) channels. Test flasks contain 50 μl of undiluted pure odor (all from Sigma-Aldrich), deposited on a piece of filter paper. The air stream is delivered to the fly's antennae through a small glass tube placed a few millimeters away.
To interfere with calcium-induced calcium release (CICR), thapsigargin and ryanodine were used as previously described . To investigate the roles of GABAergic synaptic transmission, GABAA-receptors antagonistic drugs such as bicuculline, picrotoxin and GABAB-receptors antagonistic drug as CGP54626 were used. Bicuculline (Fluka) was prepared as a 25 mM stock diluted further in Drosophila Ringers to 250 μM. Picrotoxin (Sigma) was prepared as 25 mM stock (50% distilled H2O: 50% ethanol) and dissolved in Drosophila Ringers up to 250 μM. CGP54626 (Tocris) was prepared as a 10 mM stock solution in 100% ethanol and diluted further in Drosophila Ringers at 10 μM final concentration. Prior to drug application, flies were stimulated once with odor to verify their responsiveness. The flies' brains were then incubated with either drug for 15-min. Afterward, the response of individual flies to repeated odor-stimulation was recorded.
Behavioral adaptation was measured by using an olfactory T-maze test . Briefly, 10 flies, starved for 6 hours beforehand, were placed in the central chamber, in an upper position. The central chamber was set to the bottom position, from which flies, given a maximum of 15 s, could choose between the two side arms (chambers). For testing adaptation, the flies were pre-exposed to the odorant for 5 min in a top chamber and then moved down, via the central chamber, to choose between the control-air and the odor-containing airstreams. In both cases, the total number of flies in each side chamber was counted. The response index [RI] was calculated by subtracting the number of flies in an odorant-containing channel from the number of flies in the control arm and dividing by the total number of flies. The RI value ranged between 1 to -1. If all flies were repelled by an odorant, the RI would equal -1.0, whereas, if all were attracted, the RI would equal 1.0. RI equals 0 if the flies were indifferent to the odorant (randomly distributed).
Quantitative and Statistical Analysis
We used the Photon Viewer (1.0) software (Sciences Wares, Inc., USA) written in LabView 7.1 (National Instruments) to analyze imaging data. Odor-evoked bioluminescence signals are presented as photons/s (within the ROI). Image recordings were obtained from 5-9 flies for each genotype. For the olfactory T-maze, 10 groups of 10 flies (100 flies) for each genotype were analyzed and averaged. All statistics were done using the Statistica (7.1) software (StatSoft, Inc.). A one-way analysis of variance was used to test adaptation (reduction in the amplitude of evoked Ca2+-responses during the repetitive odor-stimulation) in the control flies (Or83b,GA/CS) as well in all groups of flies. We used a two-way analysis of variance using treatment as the first factor and time as the second factor to determine differences in adaptation between the control (Or83b,GA/CS) and the experimental groups (Or83b,GA/InsP3R-RNAi, Or83b,GA/RyR-RNAi, Or83b,GA/GBi-RNAi, Or83b,GA/UAS-PTX and pharmacologically-treated flies). The Mann-Whitney test was used to test for significant differences in the olfactory responses of control and experimental flies in the T-maze choice test.
We are indebted to R. Ueda (Japan), for the InsP3R-RNAi and RyR-RNAi lines, J.W. Wang (San Diego, USA) for the GBi-RNAi line, G. Roman (Houston, USA) for the UAS-PTX line, and L. Vosshall (New York, USA) for the OR22a-Gal4 line. We thank P. Gongal and L. Rabinow for help with English editing. This work was supported by ANR-Neurosciences (Drosaequorin) (2005), NeRF (Neuropole: Region Ile de France), the Physique-Chimie-Biologie Interface Program of the CNRS (2009), and by the CNRS, France.
- Torre V, Ashmore JF, Lamb TD, Menini A: Transduction and adaptation in sensory receptor cells. J Neurosci. 1995, 15: 7757-7768.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Getchell TV, Shepherd GM: Adaptive properties of olfactory receptors analysed with odour pulses of varying durations. J Physiol. 1978, 282: 541-560.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Firestein S, Picco C, Menini A: The relation between stimulus and response in olfactory receptor cells of the tiger salamander. J Physiol. 1993, 468: 1-10.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Wang HW, Wysocki CJ: Gold GH Induction of olfactory receptor sensitivity in mice. Science. 1993, 260: 998-1000. 10.1126/science.8493539.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Ekman G, Berglund B, Berglund U, Lindvall T: Perceived intensity of odor as a function of time of adaptation. Scand J Psychol. 1967, 8: 177-186. 10.1111/j.1467-9450.1967.tb01392.x.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Colbert HA, Bargmann CI: Odorant-specific adaptation pathways generate olfactory plasticity in C. elegans. Neuron. 1995, 14: 803-812. 10.1016/0896-6273(95)90224-4.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Restrepo D, Teeter JH, Schild D: Second messenger signaling in olfactory transduction. J Neurobiol. 1996, 30: 37-48. 10.1002/(SICI)1097-4695(199605)30:1<37::AID-NEU4>3.0.CO;2-H.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Kurahashi T, Menini A: Mechanism of odorant adaptation in the olfactory receptor cell. Nature. 1997, 385: 725-729. 10.1038/385725a0.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Leinders-Zufall T, Shepherd GM, Zufall F: Modulation by cyclic GMP of the odour sensitivity of vertebrate olfactory receptor cells. Proc Biol Sci. 1996, 263: 803-811. 10.1098/rspb.1996.0120.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Breer H, Boekhoff I, Tareilus E: Rapid kinetics of second messenger formation in olfactory transduction. Nature. 1990, 345: 65-68. 10.1038/345065a0.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Schild D, Restrepo D: Transduction mechanisms in vertebrate olfactory receptor cells. Physiol Rev. 1998, 78: 429-466.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Zufall F, Leinders-Zufall T: The cellular and molecular basis of odor adaptation. Chem Senses. 2000, 25: 473-481. 10.1093/chemse/25.4.473.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Boekhoff I, Schleicher S, Strotmann J, Breer H: Odor-induced phosphorylation of olfactory cilia proteins. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1992, 89: 11983-11987. 10.1073/pnas.89.24.11983.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Peppel K, Boekhoff I, McDonald P, Breer H, Caron MG, Lefkowitz RJ: G protein-coupled receptor kinase 3 (GRK3) gene disruption leads to loss of odorant receptor desensitization. J Biol Chem. 1997, 272: 25425-25428. 10.1074/jbc.272.41.25425.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Zufall F, Leinders-Zufall T: Identification of a long-lasting form of odor adaptation that depends on the carbon Monoxide/cGMP second-messenger system. J Neurosci. 1997, 17: 2703-2712.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Deshpande M, Venkatesh K, Rodrigues V, Hasan G: The inositol 1,4,5-trisphosphate receptor is required for maintenance of olfactory adaptation in Drosophila antennae. J Neurobiol. 2000, 43: 282-288. 10.1002/(SICI)1097-4695(20000605)43:3<282::AID-NEU6>3.0.CO;2-T.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Martin JR, Rogers KL, Chagneau C, Brûlet P: In vivo bioluminescence imaging of Ca2+-signalling in the brain of Drosophila. PLoS ONE. 2007, 2: e275-10.1371/journal.pone.0000275.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Murmu MS, Stinnakre J, Martin JR: Presynaptic Ca2+-stores contribute to odor-induced response in Drosophila olfactory receptor neurons. J Exp Biol. 2010, 213: 4163-4173. 10.1242/jeb.046474.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Wang JW, Wong AM, Flores J, Vosshall LB, Axel R: Two-photon calcium imaging reveals an odor-evoked map of activity in the fly brain. Cell. 2003, 112: 271-282. 10.1016/S0092-8674(03)00004-7.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Baubet V, Le Mouellic H, Campbell AK, Lucas-Meunier E, Fossier P, Brulet P: Chimeric green fluorescent protein-aequorin as bioluminescent Ca2+ reporters at the single-cell level. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2000, 97: 7260-7265. 10.1073/pnas.97.13.7260.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Rogers KL, Martin JR, Renaud O, Karplus E, Nicola MA, Nguyen M, Picaud S, Shorte SL, Brûlet P: Electron-multiplying charge-coupled detector-based bioluminescence recording of single-cell Ca2+. J Biomed Opt. 2008, 13: 031211-10.1117/1.2937236.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Ng M, Roorda RD, Lima SQ, Zemelman BV, Morcillo P, Miesenböck G: Transmission of olfactory information between three populations of neurons in the antennal lobe of the fly. Neuron. 2002, 36: 463-474. 10.1016/S0896-6273(02)00975-3.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Yu D, Ponomarev A, Davis RL: Altered representation of the spatial code for odors after olfactory classical conditioning; memory trace formation by synaptic recruitment. Neuron. 2004, 42: 437-449. 10.1016/S0896-6273(04)00217-X.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Shang Y, Claridge-Chang A, Sjulson L, Pypaert M, Miesenbock G: Excitatory local circuits and their implications for olfactory processing in the fly antennal lobe. Cell. 2007, 128: 601-612. 10.1016/j.cell.2006.12.034.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Vosshall LB, Wong AM, Axel R: An olfactory sensory map in the fly brain. Cell. 2000, 102: 147-159. 10.1016/S0092-8674(00)00021-0.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Fiala A, Spall T: In vivo calcium imaging of brain activity in Drosophila by transgenic cameleon expression. Sci STKE. 2003, 174: PL6.Google Scholar
- Wilson RI, Laurent G: Role of GABAergic inhibition in shaping odor-evoked spatiotemporal patterns in the Drosophila antennal lobe. J Neurosci. 2005, 25: 9069-9079. 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2070-05.2005.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Root CM, Masuyama K, Green DS, Enell LE, Nässel DR, Lee CH, Wang JW: A presynaptic gain control mechanism fine-tunes olfactory behavior. Neuron. 2008, 59: 311-321. 10.1016/j.neuron.2008.07.003.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Su H, O'Dowd DK: Fast synaptic currents in Drosophila mushroom body Kenyon cells are mediated by alpha-bungarotoxin-sensitive nicotinic acetylcholine receptors and picrotoxin-sensitive GABA receptors. J Neurosci. 2003, 23: 9246-9253.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Olsen SR, Wilson RI: Lateral presynaptic inhibition mediates gain control in an olfactory circuit. Nature. 2008, 452: 956-960. 10.1038/nature06864.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Olsen SR, Bhandawat V, Wilson RI: Excitatory interactions between olfactory processing channels in the Drosophila antennal lobe. Neuron. 2007, 54: 89-103. 10.1016/j.neuron.2007.03.010.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Blake AD, Anthony NM, Chen HH, Harrison JB, Nathanson NM, Sattelle DB: Drosophila nervous system muscarinic acetylcholine receptor: transient functional expression and localization by immunocytochemistry. Mol Pharmacol. 1993, 44: 716-724.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Fayyazuddin A, Zaheer MA, Hiesinger PR, Bellen HJ: The nicotinic acetylcholine receptor Dalpha7 is required for an escape behavior in Drosophila. PLoS Biol. 2006, 4: e63-10.1371/journal.pbio.0040063.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Berridge MJ, Bootman MD, Roderick HL: Calcium signaling: dynamics, homeostasis and remodelling. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2003, 4: 517-529. 10.1038/nrm1155.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Rosay P, Armstrong JD, Wang Z, Kaiser K: Synchronized neural activity in the Drosophila memory centers and its modulation by amnesiac. Neuron. 2001, 30: 759-770. 10.1016/S0896-6273(01)00323-3.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Vázquez-Martínez O, Cañedo-Merino R, Díaz-Muñoz M, Riesgo-Escovar JR: Biochemical characterization, distribution and phylogenetic analysis of Drosophila melanogaster ryanodine and IP3 receptors, and thapsigargin-sensitive Ca2+ ATPase. J Cell Sci. 2003, 116: 2483-2494. 10.1242/jcs.00455.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Vosshall LB, Stocker RF: Molecular architecture of smell and taste in Drosophila. Annu Rev Neurosci. 2007, 30: 505-533. 10.1146/annurev.neuro.30.051606.094306.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Jefferis GS, Potter CJ, Chan AM, Marin EC, Rohlfing T, Maurer CR, Luo L: Comprehensive maps of Drosophila higher olfactory centers: spatially segregated fruit and pheromone representation. Cell. 2007, 128: 1187-203. 10.1016/j.cell.2007.01.040.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Okada R, Awasaki T, Ito K: Gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA)-mediated neural connections in the Drosophila antennal lobe. J Comp Neurol. 2009, 514: 74-91. 10.1002/cne.21971.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Chou YH, Spletter ML, Yaksi E, Leong JC, Wilson RI, Luo L: Diversity and wiring variability of olfactory local interneurons in the Drosophila antennal lobe. Nat Neurosci. 2010, 13: 439-449. 10.1038/nn.2489.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Wilson RI, Turner GC, Laurent G: Transformation of olfactory representations in the Drosophila antennal lobe. Science. 2004, 303: 366-370. 10.1126/science.1090782.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Huang J, Zhang W, Qiao W, Hu A, Wang Z: Functional connectivity and selective odor responses of excitatory local interneurons in Drosophila antennal lobe. Neuron. 2010, 67: 1021-1033. 10.1016/j.neuron.2010.08.025.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Yaksi E, Wilson RI: Electrical coupling between olfactory glomeruli. Neuron. 2010, 67: 1034-1047. 10.1016/j.neuron.2010.08.041.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Hosie AM, Aronstein K, Sattelle DB, ffrench-Constant RH: Molecular biology of insect neuronal GABA receptors. Trends Neurosci. 1997, 20: 578-583. 10.1016/S0166-2236(97)01127-2.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Mezler M, Müller T, Raming K: Cloning and functional expression of GABA(B) receptors from Drosophila. Eur J Neurosci. 2001, 13: 477-486. 10.1046/j.1460-9568.2001.01410.x.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Zhang HG, Lee HJ, Rocheleau T, ffrench-Constant RH, Jackson MB: Subunit composition determines picrotoxin and bicuculline sensitivity of Drosophila gamma-aminobutyric acid receptors. Mol Pharmacol. 1995, 48: 835-840.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Bettler B, Kaupmann K, Mosbacher J, Gassmann M: Molecular structure and physiological functions of GABA(B) receptors. Physiol Rev. 2004, 84: 835-867. 10.1152/physrev.00036.2003.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Ferris J, Ge H, Liu L, Roman G: G(o) signaling is required for Drosophila associative learning. Nat Neurosci. 2006, 9: 1036-1040. 10.1038/nn1738.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Störtkuhl KF, Hovemann BT, Carlson JR: Olfactory adaptation depends on the Trp Ca2+ channel in Drosophila. J Neurosci. 1999, 19: 4839-4846.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Sachse S, Galizia CG: Role of inhibition for temporal and spatial odor representation in olfactory output neurons: a calcium imaging study. J Neurophysiol. 2002, 87: 1106-1117.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Stopfer M, Laurent G: Short-term memory in olfactory network dynamics. Nature. 1999, 402: 664-668. 10.1038/45244.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- L'Etoile ND, Coburn CM, Eastham J, Kistler A, Gallegos G, Bargmann CI: The cyclic GMP-dependent protein kinase EGL-4 regulates olfactory adaptation in C. elegans. Neuron. 2002, 36: 1079-1089. 10.1016/S0896-6273(02)01066-8.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Lee JI, O'Halloran DM, Eastham-Anderson J, Juang BT, Kaye JA, Scott Hamilton O, Lesch B, Goga A, L'Etoile ND: Nuclear entry of a cGMP-dependent kinase converts transient into long-lasting olfactory adaptation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2010, 107: 6016-6021. 10.1073/pnas.1000866107.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Lecoq J, Tiret P, Charpak S: Peripheral adaptation codes for high odor concentration in glomeruli. J Neurosci. 2009, 29: 3067-3072. 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.6187-08.2009.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Unni VK, Zakharenko SS, Zablow L, DeCostanzo AJ, Siegelbaum SA: Calcium release from presynaptic ryanodine-sensitive stores is required for long-term depression at hippocampal CA3-CA3 pyramidal neuron synapses. J Neurosci. 2004, 24: 9612-9622. 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5583-03.2004.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Collin T, Marty A, Llano I: Presynaptic calcium stores and synaptic transmission. Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2005, 15: 275-281. 10.1016/j.conb.2005.05.003.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- McGann JP, Pírez N, Gainey MA, Muratore C, Elias AS, Wachowiak M: Odorant representations are modulated by intra- but not interglomerular presynaptic inhibition of olfactory sensory neurons. Neuron. 2005, 48: 1039-1053. 10.1016/j.neuron.2005.10.031.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Pírez N, Wachowiak M: In vivo modulation of sensory input to the olfactory bulb by tonic and activity-dependent presynaptic inhibition of receptor neurons. J Neurosci. 2008, 28: 6360-6371. 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0793-08.2008.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Vucinić D, Cohen LB, Kosmidis EK: Interglomerular center-surround inhibition shapes odorant-evoked input to the mouse olfactory bulb in vivo. J Neurophysiol. 2006, 95: 1881-1887. 10.1152/jn.00918.2005.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Aroniadou-Anderjaska V, Zhou FM, Priest CA, Ennis M, Shipley MT: Tonic and synaptically evoked presynaptic inhibition of sensory input to the rat olfactory bulb via GABA(B) heteroreceptors. J Neurophysiol. 2000, 84: 1194-1203.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Marty A, Llano I: Excitatory effects of GABA in established brain networks. Trends Neurosci. 2005, 28: 284-289. 10.1016/j.tins.2005.04.003.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Stryer L: Visual excitation and recovery. J Biol Chem. 1991, 266: 10711-10714.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Acebes A, Ferrús A: Increasing the number of synapses modifies olfactory perception in Drosophila. J Neurosci. 2001, 21: 6264-6273.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Tsunozaki M, Chalasani SH, Bargmann CI: A behavioral switch: cGMP and PKC signaling in olfactory neurons reverses odor preference in C. elegans. Neuron. 2008, 59: 959-971. 10.1016/j.neuron.2008.07.038.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Murphy C: Olfactory psychophysics. Neurobiology of taste and smell. Edited by: Finger TE, Silver WL. 1987, New York: Wiley, 251-273.Google Scholar
- Kain P, Chakraborty TS, Sundaram S, Siddiqi O, Rodrigues V, Hasan G: Reduced odor responses from antennal neurons of Gqα, phospholipase Cβ, and rdgA mutants in Drosophila support a role for a phospholipid intermediate in insect olfactory transduction. J Neurosci. 2008, 28: 4745-4755. 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5306-07.2008.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.