Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19543525›Full record

ArticlePloS one2009

Shared visual attention and memory systems in the Drosophila brain.

Bruno van Swinderen, Amber McCartney, Sarah Kauffman, Kris Flores, Kunal Agrawal, Jenée Wagner, Angelique Paulk

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed, 67 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Multiple methods for assessing learning and memory inbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. CREBA and CREBB in two identified neurons gate long-term memory formation inProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Parallel pathways for cross-modal memory retrieval in Drosophila.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2013
    Article
  17. Article
  18. A GABAergic inhibitory neural circuit regulates visual reversal learning in Drosophila.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2012
    Article
  19. Article
  20. An olfactory circuit increases the fidelity of visual behavior.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2011
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Bruno van SwinderenQueensland Brain Institute, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. b.vanswinderen@uq.edu.au
Amber McCartney
Sarah Kauffman
Kris Flores
Kunal Agrawal
Jenée Wagner
Angelique Paulk
Neurosciences Institute · USUniversity of Queensland · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSelective attention and memory seem to be related in human experience. This appears to be the case as well in simple model organisms such as the fly Drosophila melanogaster. Mutations affecting olfactory and visual memory formation in Drosophila, such as in dunce and rutabaga, also affect short-term visual processes relevant to selective attention. In particular, increased optomotor responsiveness appears to be predictive of visual attention defects in these mutants. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL

findingsTo further explore the possible overlap between memory and visual attention systems in the fly brain, we screened a panel of 36 olfactory long term memory (LTM) mutants for visual attention-like defects using an optomotor maze paradigm. Three of these mutants yielded high dunce-like optomotor responsiveness. We characterized these three strains by examining their visual distraction in the maze, their visual learning capabilities, and their brain activity responses to visual novelty. We found that one of these mutants, D0067, was almost completely identical to dunce(1) for all measures, while another, D0264, was more like wild type. Exploiting the fact that the LTM mutants are also Gal4 enhancer traps, we explored the sufficiency for the cells subserved by these elements to rescue dunce attention defects and found overlap at the level of the mushroom bodies. Finally, we demonstrate that control of synaptic function in these Gal4 expressing cells specifically modulates a 20-30 Hz local field potential associated with attention-like effects in the fly brain. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Our study uncovers genetic and neuroanatomical systems in the fly brain affecting both visual attention and odor memory phenotypes. A common component to these systems appears to be the mushroom bodies, brain structures which have been traditionally associated with odor learning but which we propose might be also involved in generating oscillatory brain activity required for attention-like processes in the fly brain.

Indexed as

MemoryMutationVision, OcularAnimalsBrainBrain MappingDrosophila melanogasterDrosophila ProteinsElectrophysiologyMaze LearningModels, GeneticNeuronsOscillometryPhenotypednc protein, DrosophilaDrosophila Proteins

Identifiers

PMID19543525
PMCPMC2694981
OpenAlexW2121808275

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.