König Christian, Schleyer Michael, Leibiger Judith, El-Keredy Amira, Gerber Bertram
Department of Genetics, Institute of Biology, University of Leipzig, Talstr. 33, 04103 Leipzig, Germany, Research Group Molecular Systems Biology of Learning, Leibniz Institute for Neurobiology, Brenneckestr. 6, 39118 Magdeburg, Germany.
Department of Genetics, Institute of Biology, University of Leipzig, Talstr. 33, 04103 Leipzig, Germany, Department of Genetics of Learning and Memory, Leibniz Institute for Neurobiology, Brenneckestr. 6, 39118 Magdeburg, Germany.
Chem Senses. 2014 Jul;39(6):489-505. doi: 10.1093/chemse/bju016. Epub 2014 May 14.
"Sweet-" and "bitter-" tasting substances distinctively support attractive and aversive choice behavior, respectively, and therefore are thought to be processed by distinct pathways. Interestingly, electrophysiological recordings in adult Drosophila suggest that bitter and salty tastants, in addition to activating bitter, salt, or bitter/salt sensory neurons, can also inhibit sweet-sensory neurons. However, the behavioral significance of such a potential for combinatorial coding is little understood. Using larval Drosophila as a study case, we find that the preference towards fructose is inhibited when assayed in the background of the bitter tastant quinine. When testing the influence of quinine on the preference to other, equally preferred sweet tastants, we find that these sweet tastants differ in their susceptibility to be inhibited by quinine. Such stimulus specificity argues that the inhibitory effect of quinine is not due to general effects on locomotion or nausea. In turn, not all bitter tastants have the same potency to inhibit sweet preference; notably, their inhibitory potency is not determined by the strength of the avoidance of them. Likewise, equally avoided concentrations of sodium chloride differ in their potency to inhibit sugar preference. Furthermore, Gr33a-Gal4-positive neurons, while being necessary for bitter avoidance, are dispensable for inhibition of the sweet pathway. Thus, interactions across taste modalities are behaviorally significant and, as we discuss, arguably diverse in mechanism. These results suggest that the coding of tastants and the organization of gustatory behavior may be more combinatorial than is generally acknowledged.
甜味和苦味物质分别独特地支持着吸引性和厌恶性选择行为,因此被认为是通过不同的途径进行处理的。有趣的是,成年果蝇的电生理记录表明,苦味和咸味味觉物质除了激活苦味、咸味或苦味/咸味感觉神经元外,还能抑制甜味感觉神经元。然而,这种组合编码潜力的行为学意义却鲜为人知。以果蝇幼虫为研究对象,我们发现,在苦味味觉物质奎宁的背景下进行测定时,对果糖的偏好会受到抑制。在测试奎宁对其他同样受偏好的甜味味觉物质偏好的影响时,我们发现这些甜味味觉物质对奎宁抑制作用的敏感性有所不同。这种刺激特异性表明,奎宁的抑制作用并非源于对运动或恶心的一般影响。反过来,并非所有苦味味觉物质抑制甜味偏好的能力都相同;值得注意的是,它们的抑制能力并非由对其回避的强度所决定。同样,同样能引起回避的氯化钠浓度在抑制糖分偏好的能力上也有所不同。此外,Gr33a - Gal4阳性神经元虽然对苦味回避是必需的,但对甜味途径的抑制却是可有可无的。因此,不同味觉模式之间的相互作用在行为上具有重要意义,而且正如我们所讨论的,其机制可能多种多样。这些结果表明,味觉物质的编码和味觉行为的组织可能比普遍认为的更具组合性。