The circadian genes are required in DAL neurons for Drosophila long-term memory formation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We previously showed that memory formation of Drosophila olfactory avoidance can be inhibited by ubiquitous, post-training, inducible disruption of the circadian system. In this report, we limit intervention to the dorsal anterior lateral neurons, cells important for memory formation but not considered a part of the central clock. Post-training induction of “dominant negative” proteins or RNAi directed against either the clock or cycle genes in dorsal anterior lateral neurons disrupts 3-day memory. This experimental design minimizes indirect effects due to abnormal neuronal development, altered sensory processing at the time of training, effects of widespread ectopic expression of inhibiting proteins, and decreases the likelihood of “off-target” effects contributing to the disruption of memory. Induction prior to testing does not have any effect, likely ruling out an effect on retrieval. The transgene inductions mildly affect circadian locomotor rhythmicity and sleep but similarly to how these are affected in the parents of the progeny. Therefore, the effects on memory are very unlikely to be attributable to alterations in circadian locomotor activity or sleep. Paradoxically we also show that mutants in two of the circadian genes have normal 3-day memory. Thus, while global mutations in circadian genes do not impair memory formation, spatially and temporally restricted interventions in neurons do. We speculate that this discrepancy resembles a previously described developmental phenotype involving the central and a peripheral clock. In both contexts, systems-level compensation may allow events to occur independently of a functional circadian clock.
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".