Figure 3.
Flies were conditioned in the presence of a light stimulus that could act as a potential attractive cue. (A) In the phototaxis experiments, wild-type CS flies are attracted to the light cue in the absence of conditioning, evident in negative values (Wilks λ = 0.0122 F(33,357.2) = 37.5, P < 0.00001 for all groups and conditions. Duncan post hoc tests with significant differences are represented, (*) P < 0.05; (***) P < 0.001). This preference was also evident in the pretest phase of the conditioning experiment in the light compared to the dark. The learning and memory score during the training and post-test phases were statistically indistinguishable in the presence or absence of a lit chamber end. (B,C) Mutant dnc1 and rut2080 flies did not show a preference for the lit half of the chamber. Mutant dnc1 and rut2080 flies had statistically lower training and post-test performance compared to CS flies. The exception was the training performance of dnc1 flies in the dark. 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.