Article Figures & Data
Figures
- Figure 1.
Preparation and experimental protocol. A, Illustration of the reduced preparation of Aplysia used for differential classical conditioning of the siphon-elicited GWR. B, Illustration of the differential conditioning protocol. Training consisted of five total bouts of paired stimulation in which stimulation of one side of the siphon (CS+) was paired with the US. (The onset of the US occurred at the end of the CS.) The bouts of paired CS+–US stimulation occurred at one per 5 min. Stimulation of the other side of the siphon (CS−) occurred 2.5 min after each occurrence of the paired stimulation. In other experiments, the preparations received training in which only the CSs were delivered (CS-alone experiments) (see Materials and Methods).
- Figure 2.
Differential classical conditioning of the GWR. A, Results for differential training in normal ASW. The graph shows the post-test results normalized to the results on the first pretest. Asterisks indicate statistical significance of the difference between the CS+ and CS− results. Traces shown above the graph in this and Figure 3 represent GWRs recorded with the force transducer during one representative experiment. B, Results for the CS-alone experiments.
- Figure 3.
APV disrupts differential conditioning of the GWR. A, Results for the control experiment in which differential training was performed in ASW, similar to the experiment shown in Figure 2B. See the legend for Figure 2. Asterisks indicate statistical significance of the difference between the CS+ and CS− results. B, Results for experiments in which differential training was performed in APV (100 μm); compare with the results in A. n.s., Not significant.
