Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26357595›Full record

ArticlePeerJ2015

Large-scale assessment of olfactory preferences and learning in Drosophila melanogaster: behavioral and genetic components.

Elisabetta Versace, Julia Reisenberger

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Multiple methods for assessing learning and memory inbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Origins of Knowledge: Insights from Precocial Species.Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2015
    Review
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.

Elisabetta VersaceInstitut für Populationsgenetik , Vetmeduni, Vienna , Austria ; Center for Mind/Brain Sciences, University of Trento , Rovereto , Italy.
Julia ReisenbergerInstitut für Populationsgenetik , Vetmeduni, Vienna , Austria.

Funding

Austrian Science Fund FWF P 22725
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the Evolve and Resequence method (E&R), experimental evolution and genomics are combined to investigate evolutionary dynamics and the genotype-phenotype link. As other genomic approaches, this methods requires many replicates with large population sizes, which imposes severe restrictions on the analysis of behavioral phenotypes. Aiming to use E&R for investigating the evolution of behavior in Drosophila, we have developed a simple and effective method to assess spontaneous olfactory preferences and learning in large samples of fruit flies using a T-maze. We tested this procedure on (a) a large wild-caught population and (b) 11 isofemale lines of Drosophila melanogaster. Compared to previous methods, this procedure reduces the environmental noise and allows for the analysis of large population samples. Consistent with previous results, we show that flies have a preference for orange vs. apple odor. With our procedure wild-derived flies exhibit olfactory learning in the absence of previous laboratory selection. Furthermore, we find genetic differences in the olfactory learning with relatively high heritability. We propose this large-scale method as an effective tool for E&R and genome-wide association studies on olfactory preferences and learning.

Indexed as

Drosophila melanogasterEvolve and ResequenceExperimental evolutionHeritabilityOlfactory learningOlfactory preferencesT-maze

Identifiers

PMID26357595
PMCPMC4562235

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.