Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40640427›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Context-dependent effects of formic acid on olfactory learning and generalisation in ants.

Natacha Rossi, Martin Giurfa, Patrizia d'Ettorre

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Natacha RossiEcology and Evolution, School of Life Sciences, University of Sussex, Brighton, UK. n.c.rossi@sussex.ac.uk.
Martin Giurfa *Sorbonne University, CNRS, Inserm, Neuro-SU, Paris, F-75005, France.
Patrizia d'Ettorre *Laboratory of Experimental and Comparative Ethology, UR4443, University Sorbonne Paris Nord, 99 avenue J.-B. Clément, Villetaneuse, France.

Funding

Agence Nationale de la Recherche ANR-14-CE18-0003
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Animals use learning and memory to recognise cues that predict rewards or punishments, allowing flexible decision-making. When facing new stimuli, they often generalise - responding similarly to different but related cues - enabling adaptive behaviour despite natural variation. Pheromones, chemical signals central to social interactions, are known to affect learning and memory, but their role in generalisation is unknown. This study explores how formic acid, an alarm pheromone in Camponotus aethiops ants, influences odour discrimination and generalisation in an appetitive olfactory discrimination learning task. Using controlled conditioning, we found that formic acid affected learning asymmetrically: it enhanced discrimination when octanal was rewarded and hexanal punished but not when hexanal was rewarded and octanal punished, suggesting a shift in learning priorities. Unexpectedly, formic acid also increased responses to conditioned stimuli and novel odours but only when octanal was the rewarded stimulus. These findings suggest that formic acid modulates associative learning and generalisation in a context-dependent way. Rather than acting solely as an arousal trigger, formic acid appears to reshape cognitive processing by altering stimulus discrimination and odour sensitivity. This highlights a novel role for alarm pheromones in modulating cognition, with broader implications for understanding chemical communication in social insects and beyond.

Indexed as

AntsDiscrimination LearningFormatesLearningOlfactory PerceptionSmellAnimalsBehavior, AnimalCuesOdorantsPheromonesRewardFormatesformic acidPheromonesAlarm pheromonesAssociative learningChemical communicationInsect neurobiologyStimulus discrimination

Identifiers

PMID40640427
PMCPMC12246152

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.