Figure - PMC

Skip to main content

An official website of the United States government

Here's how you know

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

View full-text article in PMC

. 2018 Mar;25(3):122–128. doi: 10.1101/lm.046136.117

Search in PMC
Search in PubMed
View in NLM Catalog
Add to search

© 2018 Baggett et al.; Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press

This article is distributed exclusively by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press for the first 12 months after the full-issue publication date (see http://learnmem.cshlp.org/site/misc/terms.xhtml). After 12 months, it is available under a Creative Commons License (Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International), as described at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

PMC Copyright notice

Figure 2. — Flies were conditioned in the presence of an air source that could act as a potential attractive cue. (A) Wild-type flies have a preference for an air source. Under no-conditioning, wild-type CS flies show a preference for the side of the chamber with the air source compared to flies not exposed to an air source, evident in negative values (Wilks λ = 0.0378 F_(33,313.0) = 20.3, P < 0.00001 for all groups and conditions. Duncan post hoc tests with significant differences are represented, (*) P < 0.05; (**) P < 0.01; (***) P < 0.001). Moreover, the pretest phase in a training experiment also shows a significant negative value compared to flies from the no-air group. In both training conditions, the Training and Post-test phases are strongly positive, but are not statistically distinguishable in the air and no-air groups. (B) There were no preferences for an air source in dnc¹ flies compared to flies from the no-air group. Only the Post-test performance of dnc¹ flies was significantly lower than that of CS flies in the absence of air. The dnc¹ flies had a low Training and Post-test performance in the presence of air compared to CS flies. (C) The rut²⁰⁸⁰ flies had a significantly lower Training and Post-test performance in the absence of air compared to CS performance levels. Only the Post-test score in rut²⁰⁸⁰ flies was significantly lower than the CS flies levels in the air groups. The pretest preference was significantly lower in rut²⁰⁸⁰ flies in the air versus no-air groups. N = 16 trials for CS in each of the conditions; N’s = 8 trials for dnc¹ and rut²⁰⁸⁰ in each of the conditions. Values are presented as means and error bars are SEMs.