@article {49233,
	title = {Reinforcement signaling of punishment versus relief in fruit flies.},
	journal = {Learning \& Memory (Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y.)},
	volume = {25},
	year = {2018},
	month = {2018 Jun},
	pages = {247-257},
	abstract = {<p>Painful events establish opponent memories: cues that precede pain are remembered negatively, whereas cues that follow pain, thus coinciding with relief are recalled positively. How do individual reinforcement-signaling neurons contribute to this "timing-dependent valence-reversal?" We addressed this question using an optogenetic approach in the fruit fly. Two types of fly dopaminergic neuron, each comprising just one paired cell, indeed established learned avoidance of odors that preceded their photostimulation during training, and learned approach to odors that followed the photostimulation. This is in striking parallel to punishment versus relief memories reinforced by a real noxious event. For only one of these neuron types, both effects were strong enough for further analyses. Notably, interfering with dopamine biosynthesis in these neurons partially impaired the punishing effect, but not the relieving after-effect of their photostimulation. We discuss how this finding constraints existing computational models of punishment versus relief memories and introduce a new model, which also incorporates findings from mammals. Furthermore, whether using dopaminergic neuron photostimulation or a real noxious event, more prolonged punishment led to stronger relief. This parametric feature of relief may also apply to other animals and may explain particular aspects of related behavioral dysfunction in humans.</p>
},
	issn = {1549-5485},
	doi = {10.1101/lm.047308.118},
	author = {K{\"o}nig, Christian and Khalili, Afshin and Ganesan, Mathangi and Nishu, Amrita P and Garza, Alejandra P and Niewalda, Thomas and Gerber, Bertram and Aso, Yoshinori and Yarali, Ayse}
}
@article {48642,
	title = {The Ol1mpiad: concordance of behavioural faculties of stage 1 and stage 3 Drosophila larvae.},
	journal = {The Journal of Experimental Biology},
	volume = {220},
	year = {2017},
	month = {2017 Jul 01},
	pages = {2452-2475},
	abstract = {<p>Mapping brain function to brain structure is a fundamental task for neuroscience. For such an endeavour, the Drosophila larva is simple enough to be tractable, yet complex enough to be interesting. It features about 10,000 neurons and is capable of various taxes, kineses and Pavlovian conditioning. All its neurons are currently being mapped into a light-microscopical atlas, and Gal4 strains are being generated to experimentally access neurons one at a time. In addition, an electron microscopic reconstruction of its nervous system seems within reach. Notably, this electron microscope-based connectome is being drafted for a stage 1 larva - because stage 1 larvae are much smaller than stage 3 larvae. However, most behaviour analyses have been performed for stage 3 larvae because their larger size makes them easier to handle and observe. It is therefore warranted to either redo the electron microscopic reconstruction for a stage 3 larva or to survey the behavioural faculties of stage 1 larvae. We provide the latter. In a community-based approach we called the Ol1mpiad, we probed stage 1 Drosophila larvae for free locomotion, feeding, responsiveness to substrate vibration, gentle and nociceptive touch, burrowing, olfactory preference and thermotaxis, light avoidance, gustatory choice of various tastants plus odour-taste associative learning, as well as light/dark-electric shock associative learning. Quantitatively, stage 1 larvae show lower scores in most tasks, arguably because of their smaller size and lower speed. Qualitatively, however, stage 1 larvae perform strikingly similar to stage 3 larvae in almost all cases. These results bolster confidence in mapping brain structure and behaviour across developmental stages.</p>
},
	issn = {1477-9145},
	doi = {10.1242/jeb.156646},
	author = {Almeida-Carvalho, Maria J and Berh, Dimitri and Braun, Andreas and Chen, Yi-chun and Eichler, Katharina and Eschbach, Claire and Fritsch, Pauline M J and Gerber, Bertram and Hoyer, Nina and Jiang, Xiaoyi and Kleber, J{\"o}rg and Kl{\"a}mbt, Christian and K{\"o}nig, Christian and Louis, Matthieu and Michels, Birgit and Miroschnikow, Anton and Mirth, Christen and Miura, Daisuke and Niewalda, Thomas and Otto, Nils and Paisios, Emmanouil and Pankratz, Michael J and Petersen, Meike and Ramsperger, Noel and Randel, Nadine and Risse, Benjamin and Saumweber, Timo and Schlegel, Philipp and Schleyer, Michael and Soba, Peter and Sprecher, Simon G and Tanimura, Teiichi and Thum, Andreas S and Toshima, Naoko and Truman, Jim W and Yarali, Ayse and Zlatic, Marta}
}
