Dishabituating long-term memory for gustatory habituation in the cabbage looper, Trichoplusia ni.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The gustatory rejection response of the cabbage looper, Trichoplusia ni (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae), habituates to antifeedant compounds, allowing for the consumption of deterrent yet nontoxic plant materials. In the present study, we demonstrate that habituation to an antifeedant compound (quinine) persists through the moult between larval instars. As an indirect test of whether the memory was protein synthesis-dependent, we tested whether disrupting protein synthesis would block memory reconsolidation after a reminder. The results indicated that disrupting protein synthesis in habituated larvae following a reminder treatment (reexposure to quinine) eliminated the memory for habituation and restored the antifeedant properties of the quinine. We then examined whether the learned memory could be dishabituated and whether this would disrupt or eliminate long-term memory. We show that 6 hr after exposure to a novel/noxious stimulus (a second antifeedant, xanthotoxin) habituated larvae showed a transient dishabituation-like effect in which the quinine deterred feeding again. However, this effect did not permanently eliminate the habituation produced by the extended exposure as larvae tested 72 hr after xanthotoxin exposure again showed a willingness to consume the quinine treated leaves, indicating that the earlier habituation was still present.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".