↓ Skip to main content

Roles of octopamine and dopamine in appetitive and aversive memory acquisition studied in olfactory conditioning of maxillary palpi extension response in crickets

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
35 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Roles of octopamine and dopamine in appetitive and aversive memory acquisition studied in olfactory conditioning of maxillary palpi extension response in crickets
Published in
Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, September 2015
DOI 10.3389/fnbeh.2015.00230
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yukihisa Matsumoto, Chihiro-Sato Matsumoto, Ryo Wakuda, Saori Ichihara, Makoto Mizunami

Abstract

Elucidation of reinforcing mechanisms for associative learning is an important subject in neuroscience. Based on results of our previous pharmacological studies in crickets, we suggested that octopamine and dopamine mediate reward and punishment signals, respectively, in associative learning. In fruit-flies, however, it was concluded that dopamine mediates both appetitive and aversive reinforcement, which differs from our suggestion in crickets. In our previous studies, the effect of conditioning was tested at 30 min after training or later, due to limitations of our experimental procedures, and thus the possibility that octopamine and dopamine were not needed for initial acquisition of learning was not ruled out. In this study we first established a conditioning procedure to enable us to evaluate acquisition performance in crickets. Crickets extended their maxillary palpi and vigorously swung them when they perceived some odors, and we found that crickets that received pairing of an odor with water reward or sodium chloride punishment exhibited an increase or decrease in percentages of maxillary palpi extension responses to the odor. Using this procedure, we found that octopamine and dopamine receptor antagonists impair acquisition of appetitive and aversive learning, respectively. This finding suggests that neurotransmitters mediating appetitive reinforcement differ in crickets and fruit-flies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 35 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 23%
Student > Bachelor 7 20%
Researcher 4 11%
Student > Master 4 11%
Lecturer 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 10 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 31%
Neuroscience 8 23%
Psychology 3 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 9%
Unknown 10 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 September 2015.
All research outputs
#17,772,019
of 22,826,360 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
#2,412
of 3,168 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#180,036
of 266,863 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
#73
of 86 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,826,360 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,168 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.4. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 266,863 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 86 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.