Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20224292›Full record

ArticleFly

Parallel processing of olfactory memories in Drosophila.

Allison Blum, Joshua T Dubnau

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Fly. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

2 authors.

Allison BlumWatson School of Biological Sciences, Cold Spring Harbor, NY, USA.
Joshua T Dubnau

Funding

Functional Anatomy of Learning and Memory in DrosophilaR01MH069644 · NIMH · COLD SPRING HARBOR LABORATORY · PI DUBNAU, JOSHUA T · 2004 to 2008
$1.8M
NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH069644
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

One of the hallmarks of both memory and the underlying synaptic plasticity is that they each rely on short-lived and longer-lived forms. Short-lived memory is thought to rely on modification to existing proteins, whereas long-term memory requires induction of new gene expression. The most common view is that these two processes rely on signaling mechanisms within the same neurons. We recently demonstrated a dissection of the signaling requirements for short and long-lived memory into distinct sets of neurons. Using an aversive olfactory conditioning task in Drosophila, we found that cAMP signaling in different neuron cell types is sufficient to support short or long-term memory independently.

Indexed as

AnimalsConditioning, PsychologicalCyclic AMPDrosophila melanogasterMemoryModels, NeurologicalMushroom BodiesOlfactory Receptor NeuronsSignal TransductionSmellCyclic AMP

Identifiers

PMID20224292
PMCPMC2888992

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.