Journal of Comparative Physiology A

, Volume 158, Issue 2, pp 195–202

Deoxyglucose mapping of nervous activity induced inDrosophila brain by visual movement

III. Outer rhabdomeres absentJK84, small optic lobesKS58 and no object fixation EB12, visual mutants
  • Isabelle Bülthoff
Article

Summary

Autoradiographs of the brains of the visual mutantsouter rhabdomeres absentJK84 (ora),small optic lobesKS58 (KS58) andno object fixation EB12 (B12) have been obtained by the deoxyglucose method. The patterns of metabolic activity in the optic lobes of the visually stimulated mutants is compared with that of similarly stimulated wildtype (WT) flies which was described in Part I of this work (Buchner et al. 1984b).

In the mutantKS58 the optomotor following response to movement is nearly normal despite a 40–45% reduction of volume in the visual neuropils, medulla and lobula complex. InB12 flies the volume of these neuropils and the optomotor response are reduced. In autoradiographs of both mutants the pattern of neuronal activity induced by stimulation with moving gratings does not differ substantially from that in the WT. It suggests that only neurons irrelevant to movement detection are affected by the mutation. However, in the lobula plate of someKS58 flies and in the second chiasma of allB12 flies, the pattern of metabolic activity differs from that observed in WT flies. Up to now no causal relation has been found between the modifications described in behaviour or anatomy and those observed in the labelling of these mutants.

In the ommatidia ofora flies the outer rhabdomeres are lacking while the central photoreceptors appear to be normal. Stimulus-specific labelling is absent in the visual neuropil of these mutants stimulated with movement or flicker. This result underlines the importance of the outer rhabdomeres for visual tasks, especially for movement detection.

Abbreviations

DG

deoxyglucose

KS58

small optic lobesKS58

B12

no object fixation EB12

JK84

ora outer rhabdomeres absentJK84

WT

wildtype

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Buchner E, Buchner S (1980) Mapping stimulus-induced nervous activity in small brains by3H-2-deoxy-D-glucose. Cell Tissue Res 211:51–64Google Scholar
  2. Buchner E, Buchner S (1983) Anatomical localization of functional activity in flies using3H-2-deoxy-D-glucose. In: Strausfeld NJ (ed) Functional neuroanatomy. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York Tokyo, pp 225–238Google Scholar
  3. Buchner E, Buchner S, Bülthoff H (1984a) Identification of3H-deoxyglucose labelled interneurons in the fly from serial autoradiographs. Brain Res 305:384–388Google Scholar
  4. Buchner E, Buchner S, Bülthoff I (1984b) Deoxyglucose mapping of nervous activity induced inDrosophila brain by visual movement. I. Wildtype. J Comp Physiol A 155:471–483Google Scholar
  5. Bülthoff H (1982a)Drosophila mutants disturbed in visual orientation. I. Mutants affected in early visual processing. Biol Cybern 45:63–70Google Scholar
  6. Bülthoff H (1982b)Drosophila mutants disturbed in visual orientation. II. Mutants affected in movement and position computation. Biol Cybern 45:71–77Google Scholar
  7. Bülthoff H, Götz KG (1979) Analogous motion illusion in man and fly. Nature 278:636–638Google Scholar
  8. Bülthoff I, Buchner E (1985) Deoxyglucose mapping of nervous activity induced inDrosophila brain by visual movement. II. Optomotor blind H31 and lobula plate-lessN684, visual mutants. J Comp Physiol A 156:25–34Google Scholar
  9. Coombe PE (1984) The role of retinula cell types in fixation behaviour of walkingDrosophila melanogaster. J Comp Physiol A 155:661–672Google Scholar
  10. Fischbach KF (1981) Simplified visual behavior of the small optic lobes mutant ofDrosophila melanogaster. Abstract of 3rd Congress of ESCPB Pergamon Elmsford, NY, pp 229–230Google Scholar
  11. Fischbach KF (1983) Neurogenetik am Beispiel des visuellen Systems vonDrosophila melanogaster. Habilitationsschrift, Universität WürzburgGoogle Scholar
  12. Fischbach KF, Heisenberg M (1981) Structural brain mutant ofDrosophila melanogaster with reduced cell number in the medulla cortex and with normal optomotor yaw response. Proc Natl Acad Sci 78:1105–1109Google Scholar
  13. Fischbach KF, Technau G (1984) Cell degeneration in the developing optic lobes of the sine oculis and small-optic-lobes mutants ofDrosophila melanogaster. Dev Biol 104:219–239Google Scholar
  14. Harris WA, Stark WS, Walker JA (1976) Genetic dissection of the photoreceptor system in the compound eye ofDrosophila melanogaster. J Physiol 256:415–439Google Scholar
  15. Hausen K (1984) The lobula-complex of the fly: Structure, function and significance in visual behaviour. In: Ali MA (ed) Photoreception and vision in invertebrates. Plenum, New York, pp 523–559Google Scholar
  16. Heisenberg M, Böhl K (1979) Isolation of anatomical brain mutants ofDrosophila by histological means. Z Naturforsch 34c:143–147Google Scholar
  17. Heisenberg M, Buchner E (1977) The rôle of retinula cell types in visual behavior ofDrosophila melanogaster. J Comp Physiol 117:127–162Google Scholar
  18. Koenig J, Merriam JR (1977) Autosomal ERG mutants. Drosophila Inf Serv 52:50–51Google Scholar
  19. Rodrigues V, Bülthoff I (1985) Freeze-substitution ofDrosophila heads for subsequent3H-2-deoxyglucose autoradiography. J Neurosci Methods 13:183–190Google Scholar
  20. Sokoloff L, Reivich M, Kennedy C, Des Rosiers MH, Patlak CS, Pettigrew KD, Sakurada O, Shinohara M (1977) The14C-deoxyglucose method for the measurement of local cerebral glucose utilization: theory, procedure, and normal value in the conscious and anesthetized albino rat. J Neurochem 28:897–916Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1986

Authors and Affiliations

  • Isabelle Bülthoff
    • 1
  1. 1.Max-Planck-Institut für biologische KybernetikTübingenFederal Republic of Germany
  2. 2.Center for Biological Information ProcessingMassachusetts Institute of Technology, E25-201CambridgeUSA

Personalised recommendations