Cited by 157Neurobiology and Insect Physiology ResearchMemory and Neural MechanismsNeural dynamics and brain function

Mushroom Body Output Neurons Encode Odor–Reward Associations

Open access
Strube-Bloss, Martin Fritz, Nawrot, Martin Paul, Menzel, Randolf·2011·The Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

Neural correlates of learning and memory formation have been reported at different stages of the olfactory pathway in both vertebrates and invertebrates. However, the contribution of different neurons to the formation of a memory trace is little understood. Mushroom bodies (MBs) in the insect brain are higher-order structures involved in integration of olfactory, visual, and mechanosensory information and in memory formation. Here we focus on the ensemble spiking activity of single MB output neurons (ENs) when honeybees learned to associate an odor with reward. A large group of ENs (∼50%) changed their odor response spectra by losing or gaining sensitivity for specific odors. This response switching was dominated by the rewarded stimulus (CS+), which evoked exclusively recruitment. The remaining ENs did not change their qualitative odor spectrum but modulated their tuning strength, again dominated by increased responses to the CS+. While the bees showed a conditioned response (proboscis extension) after a few acquisition trials, no short-term effects were observed in the neuronal activity. In both EN types, associative plastic changes occurred only during retention 3 h after conditioning. Thus, long-term but not short-term memory was reflected by increased EN activity to the CS+. During retention, the EN ensemble separated the CS+ most differently from the CS− and control odors ∼140 ms after stimulus onset. The learned behavioral response appeared ∼330 ms later. It is concluded that after memory consolidation, the ensemble activity of the MB output neurons predicts the meaning of the stimulus (reward) and may provide the prerequisite for the expression of the learned behavior.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1523/jneurosci.2583-10.2011

Cites

61 of 61 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Hebbian-like plasticity in connections at the output of the mushroom body can support various forms of reinforcement learning.

    “It is well established that Hebbian-like plasticity in connections at the output of the mushroom body can support various forms of reinforcement learning [71,76–78].”

    From Phenomenal interface theory: a model for basal consciousness (2025) · cites this paper as [78]

    The “Mechanisms of associative plasticity” section reports learning-related changes in mushroom body output neurons after odor–reward conditioning and discusses prior evidence of LTP and STDP at their inputs (page not available). But the authors conclude that fast mechanisms such as STDP cannot explain their results. This paper does not establish that Hebbian-like plasticity at mushroom body output connections supports various forms of reinforcement learning. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 62 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Strube-Bloss MF (2008) Characterization of mushroom body extrinsic neu- rons of the honeybee: odor specificity, response reliability, and learning related plasticity. Dissertation, Freie Universitaet Berlin.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Strube-Bloss, M. F., Nawrot, M. P., & Menzel, R.
Affiliations
  • Freie Universität Berlin (DE)
  • Arizona State University (US)
Venue
The Journal of Neuroscience
Published
2011-02-23
Volume
31
Issue
8
Pages
3129-3140
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
OpenAlex
W1985449617
Cited by
157
References
62
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 19 · 2012: 11
FWCI
6.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
  • PUB – Publications at Bielefeld University (Bielefeld University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurobiology and Insect Physiology Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
Keywords
mushroom body, output neurons, olfactory conditioning, Apis mellifera, memory consolidation, long-term memory, associative plasticity, memory traces, proboscis extension
MeSH terms
Animals, Bees, Electrophysiology, Female, Memory, Neurons, Odorants, Reward, Smell, Mushroom Bodies

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review