Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Collections
    • Podcast
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
    • Information for Authors
    • Fees
    • Journal Clubs
    • eLetters
    • Submit
  • EDITORIAL BOARD
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Advertise
    • For the Media
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Privacy Policy
    • Feedback
  • SUBSCRIBE

User menu

  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Neuroscience
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Journal of Neuroscience

Advanced Search

Submit a Manuscript
  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Collections
    • Podcast
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
    • Information for Authors
    • Fees
    • Journal Clubs
    • eLetters
    • Submit
  • EDITORIAL BOARD
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Advertise
    • For the Media
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Privacy Policy
    • Feedback
  • SUBSCRIBE
PreviousNext
Featured ArticleArticles, Systems/Circuits

Differential Combinatorial Coding of Pheromones in Two Olfactory Subsystems of the Honey Bee Brain

Julie Carcaud, Martin Giurfa and Jean-Christophe Sandoz
Journal of Neuroscience 11 March 2015, 35 (10) 4157-4167; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0734-14.2015
Julie Carcaud
1Evolution, Genomes, Behavior and Ecology Lab, CNRS, Université Paris-Sud, IRD (UMR 9191), F-91198 Gif-sur-Yvette, France,
2Research Center on Animal Cognition, Université de Toulouse, F-31062 Toulouse Cedex 9, France, and
3Research Center on Animal Cognition, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, F-31062 Toulouse Cedex 9, France
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Martin Giurfa
2Research Center on Animal Cognition, Université de Toulouse, F-31062 Toulouse Cedex 9, France, and
3Research Center on Animal Cognition, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, F-31062 Toulouse Cedex 9, France
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jean-Christophe Sandoz
1Evolution, Genomes, Behavior and Ecology Lab, CNRS, Université Paris-Sud, IRD (UMR 9191), F-91198 Gif-sur-Yvette, France,
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Jean-Christophe Sandoz
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Figure 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 1.

    Calcium signals from m-ALT and l-ALT PNs to pheromonal odorants. A, Dual olfactory pathway of the honey bee brain (adapted from Carcaud et al., 2012). Odorant molecules are detected by ORNs on the antenna, forming the antennal nerve (AN) and project to the AL. Then, PNs convey information to the MB and the LH via two main tracts: the m-ALT (magenta) and the l-ALT (green). Injection locations are shown as black dots (inj1 and inj2). OL, Optical lobe. B, Retrograde staining of l-ALT PNs (left) and m-ALT PNs (right) innervating, respectively, ventral and dorsal AL glomeruli. Z-projection of optical slices at the indicated depths. C, Odor-induced calcium signals in the AL at room temperature (∼25°C, left) or at hive temperature (35°C, right), for l-ALT PNs to QMP (top) and for m-ALT PNs to methyl linolenate (bottom). Relative fluorescence changes (ΔR/R%) are presented in a false-color code, from dark blue to red. D, Time course of ΔR/R% during a 20 s 5 Hz recording for l-ALT (top) and m-ALT PNs (bottom). The signals from different glomeruli (1–4) located as indicated in C are shown for room T° (dashed lines) and hive T° (solid lines).

  • Figure 2.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 2.

    Responses to queen and brood pheromone compounds in l-ALT and m-ALT PNs. A, Odor-induced calcium activity maps obtained from l-ALT (top) and m-ALT neurons (bottom) in two different animals, to 5 queen mandibular compounds and the QMP mixture, to 3 queen nonmandibular compounds, to 6 compounds of the brood pheromone and to the solvent. Relative fluorescence changes (ΔR/R%) are presented in a false-color code, from dark blue to red. B, Pixelwise analysis. Amplitude of calcium responses (ΔR/R%) in the antennal lobe for m-ALT (n = 9) and l-ALT neurons (n = 10) to queen mandibular compounds (in red), queen nonmandibular compounds (in orange), and brood pheromone compounds (in green). Gray represents the response to the solvent. C, Glomerular analysis. Example of repartition of the 20 glomerulus-sized areas of interest (henceforth “glomeruli”) on a l-ALT recording, showing overlay with 3 odor response maps. D, Number of activated glomeruli in m-ALT (n = 9) and l-ALT neurons (n = 10). Error bars indicate the SEM across animals. Stars on the right of each bar indicate significant difference compared with solvent (Dunnett's test). *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001; (*)p < 0.1.

  • Figure 3.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 3.

    Coding of queen and brood pheromone compounds in both subsystems. These analyses are based on pixelwise Euclidian distances between odor representations after averaging across animals, for l-ALT (left) and m-ALT neurons. A, Cluster analysis showing similarity relationships among representations of queen and brood pheromone compounds (Ward's method). Higher linkage distances correspond to more dissimilar odorants. Red represents queen mandibular compounds; orange represents queen nonmandibular compounds; green represents brood pheromone compounds. Gray represents the solvent. Gray background represents noncoding compounds within each neuron type (Fig. 2B). White background represents compounds processed within each subsystem. B, Proximity analysis (multidimensional scaling). The two main dimensions explain 69% and 76% of overall variance for l-ALT (left) and m-ALT neurons (right), respectively.

  • Figure 4.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 4.

    Representation sparseness and glomerular coactivation for queen and brood pheromone. A, Population sparseness and lifetime sparseness measured from l-ALT and m-ALT recordings to queen and brood pheromones. Boxes represent the median and first and third quartiles. Whiskers represent 10% and 90% percentiles. ***p < 0.001. B, Glomerular coactivation. Principle for the classification of glomeruli according to four classes depending on their coactivating odorants from the same and/or another pheromone (putative example). For each reference odorant, all activated glomeruli were classified as follows: unique glomerulus (white arrow, only activated by the reference odorant), same type glomerulus (light gray arrow, activated by the reference odorant and by another odorant of the same pheromone), other type glomerulus (dark gray arrow, activated by the reference odorant, not by other odorants of the same pheromone but activated by other pheromone types; here Pheromones B and C), or mixed glomerulus (black arrow, activated by odorants from both the same and other pheromone types). C, Proportions of the four classes of glomeruli for each pheromone compound and for all the glomeruli they activate: white represents unique; light gray represents same type; dark gray represents other type; black represents mixed.

  • Figure 5.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 5.

    Responses to alarm and aggregation compounds in l-ALT and m-ALT PNs. A, Odor-induced calcium activity maps obtained from l-ALT (top) and m-ALT neurons (bottom) in different animals to 9 alarm compounds (in blue), 4 aggregation compounds (in brown), and to the control (air). Relative fluorescence changes (ΔR/R%) are presented in a false-color code, from dark blue to red. B, Amplitude of calcium responses (ΔR/R%). C, Numbers of activated glomeruli recorded for l-ALT (n = 10) and in m-ALT neurons (n = 8) to alarm (in blue) and aggregation compounds (in brown). Gray represents responses to the air control. Error bars indicate SEM. D, Correlation between the amplitudes of calcium responses (ΔR/R%) recorded in the l-ALT and m-ALT neurons for alarm and aggregation compounds (black circles and solid line) and for queen mandibular, nonmandibular, and brood compounds (gray circles and dashed line). Dunnett's test: *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001; (*)p < 0.1.

  • Figure 6.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 6.

    Coding of alarm and aggregation pheromone compounds in both subsystems. A, Cluster analysis showing similarity relationships among alarm and aggregation compounds (Ward's method), using Euclidian distances obtained for the 91 odor pairs in both subsystems. In both analyses, blue represents alarm compounds, and brown represents aggregation compounds. Gray represents air control. Gray background represents noncoding compounds within each neuron type (Fig. 5B). White background represents the compounds processed within each subsystem. The dendrogram for l-ALT neurons (left) does not show a separation based on the pheromonal nature of the compounds. Rather, short chain alcohols are separated from most other compounds. The cluster analysis for the m-ALT neurons (right) isolates aggregation compounds with the alcohols of the alarm pheromone from the remaining alarm compounds. B, Proximity analysis for both neuron types. For l-ALT neurons (left), the first dimension (46% of variance) separates processed from the nonprocessed compounds. The second dimension (24% of variance) separates acetate esters from short chain alcohols. Proximity analysis for m-ALT neurons (right) defines two main dimensions (75% of variance), which mostly differentiated ester-type from alcohol-type alarm compounds, the latter appearing together with aggregation compounds.

  • Figure 7.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 7.

    Representation sparseness and glomerular coactivation for alarm and aggregation pheromone. A, Population sparseness and lifetime sparseness measured from l-ALT and m-ALT recordings to alarm and aggregation pheromone compounds. Boxes represent the median and first and third quartiles. Whiskers represent 10% and 90% percentiles. **p < 0.01. B, Glomerular coactivation. Representation for each compound, of the percentage of glomeruli observed in the four classes (for definitions, see Fig. 4B): white represents unique; light gray represents same type; dark gray represents other type; black represents mixed. Only compounds that induced significant activity in l-ALT (top) or m-ALT neurons (bottom) are represented. The majority of glomeruli are mixed glomeruli, being activated both by other compounds of the same pheromone and by other odorants.

Tables

  • Figures
    • View popup
    Table 1.

    Summary of pheromonal components used in this study

    Pheromone typeCompoundAbbreviationVapor pressure (mmHg)
    Queen mandibular compounds (QM)Homovanillyl alcoholHVA2.04 × 10−5
    Methyl 4-hydroxybenzoateHOB2.37 × 10−4
    9-Oxo-(E)-2-decenoic acid9-ODA1.77 × 10−6
    9-Hydroxy-(E)-2-decenoic acid9-HDA2.87 × 10−6
    10-Hydroxy-(E)-2-decenoic acid10-HDA6.28 × 10−6
    Queen nonmandibular compounds (QnM)Coniferyl alcohol—8.80 × 10−6
    1-Hexadecanol1–16ol6.00 × 10−6
    Linolenic acid—5.40 × 10−7
    Brood compounds (brood)Methyl linoleate—3.67 × 10−6
    Methyl linolenatem. linolenate5.07 × 10−6
    Ethyl oleate—6.07 × 10−5
    Methyl oleate—6.29 × 10−6
    Ethyl palmitate—2.34 × 10−5
    Methyl palmitate—4.70 × 10−5
    Alarm compounds (alarm)Isopentyl acetateIPA5.60
    2-Heptanone2–7one3.86
    1-Butanol1–4ol6.70
    1-Hexanol1–6ol0.93
    1-Octanol1–8ol7.94 × 10−2
    2-Nonanol2–9ol6.76 × 10−2
    Octyl acetate—0.22
    Benzyl acetate—0.17
    Hexyl acetate—1.32
    Aggregation compounds (aggregation)Geranic acid—3.27 × 10−3
    Farnesol—2.52 × 10−4
    Citral—9.13 × 10−2
    Geraniol—3.00 × 10−2
Back to top

In this issue

The Journal of Neuroscience: 35 (10)
Journal of Neuroscience
Vol. 35, Issue 10
11 Mar 2015
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
  • Advertising (PDF)
  • Ed Board (PDF)
Email

Thank you for sharing this Journal of Neuroscience article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Differential Combinatorial Coding of Pheromones in Two Olfactory Subsystems of the Honey Bee Brain
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Journal of Neuroscience
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Journal of Neuroscience.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
View Full Page PDF
Citation Tools
Differential Combinatorial Coding of Pheromones in Two Olfactory Subsystems of the Honey Bee Brain
Julie Carcaud, Martin Giurfa, Jean-Christophe Sandoz
Journal of Neuroscience 11 March 2015, 35 (10) 4157-4167; DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0734-14.2015

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Respond to this article
Request Permissions
Share
Differential Combinatorial Coding of Pheromones in Two Olfactory Subsystems of the Honey Bee Brain
Julie Carcaud, Martin Giurfa, Jean-Christophe Sandoz
Journal of Neuroscience 11 March 2015, 35 (10) 4157-4167; DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0734-14.2015
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Materials and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF

Keywords

  • insect
  • olfaction
  • optical imaging
  • parallel processing
  • pheromone

Responses to this article

Respond to this article

Jump to comment:

No eLetters have been published for this article.

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

Articles

  • Choice Behavior Guided by Learned, But Not Innate, Taste Aversion Recruits the Orbitofrontal Cortex
  • Maturation of Spontaneous Firing Properties after Hearing Onset in Rat Auditory Nerve Fibers: Spontaneous Rates, Refractoriness, and Interfiber Correlations
  • Insulin Treatment Prevents Neuroinflammation and Neuronal Injury with Restored Neurobehavioral Function in Models of HIV/AIDS Neurodegeneration
Show more Articles

Systems/Circuits

  • INFLUENCE OF RAT CENTRAL THALAMIC NEURONS ON FORAGING BEHAVIOR IN A HAZARDOUS ENVIRONMENT
  • Mapping the Integration of Sensory Information across Fingers in Human Sensorimotor Cortex
  • Functional (ir)Relevance of Posterior Parietal Cortex during Audiovisual Change Detection
Show more Systems/Circuits
  • Home
  • Alerts
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Facebook
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on Twitter
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on LinkedIn
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Youtube
  • Follow our RSS feeds

Content

  • Early Release
  • Current Issue
  • Issue Archive
  • Collections

Information

  • For Authors
  • For Advertisers
  • For the Media
  • For Subscribers

About

  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Privacy Policy
  • Contact
(JNeurosci logo)
(SfN logo)

Copyright © 2022 by the Society for Neuroscience.
JNeurosci Online ISSN: 1529-2401

The ideas and opinions expressed in JNeurosci do not necessarily reflect those of SfN or the JNeurosci Editorial Board. Publication of an advertisement or other product mention in JNeurosci should not be construed as an endorsement of the manufacturer’s claims. SfN does not assume any responsibility for any injury and/or damage to persons or property arising from or related to any use of any material contained in JNeurosci.