Skip to main content
. 2019 Mar 11;9:4055. doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-40640-4

Figure 8.

Figure 8

Orco antagonist molecules from two distinct structural groups can inhibit ethyl acetate attraction. (A) A representative linalyl formate inhibition experiment. In both panels, larvae were placed in the starting circle, flanked on the right by EA (10 µL of EA, diluted 1:10−6 in mineral oil) and on the left by mineral oil (10 µL). In the left panel, mineral oil (vehicle) was applied to the lid filter paper, while in the right panel, linalyl formate was applied to the lid filter paper. (B) Results of the larval chemotaxis assay. EA, ethyl acetate; oil, mineral oil (vehicle); BMP, Orco antagonist (2-tert-butyl-6-methylphenol); LF, Orco antagonist (linalyl formate); Ø, nothing added; light, fiber optic light source. Data are presented as mean ± SEM (n = 4–7). Results (top 6 bars) were compared by one-way ANOVA, followed by Dunnett’s multiple comparison test, for comparison to oil vs. oil control (top bar). When larvae were offered the choice of EA or mineral oil alone on the plate filters, the attraction to EA was strong, yielding a response index (RI) of 0.76 ± 0.08 (4th bar from top), which significantly differed from the RI value obtained when mineral oil alone was offered on both plate filters (**p < 0.01). Application of BMP or LF to the lid filter (685 µL of 100 mM) completely abolished larval attraction to EA, yielding RI values that did not significantly differ from the RI value obtained when mineral oil alone was offered on both small filters. Light repulsion (bottom 3 bars) with mineral oil, BMP, or LF in the lid filter was compared by one-way ANOVA and Dunnett’s multiple comparison test (ns, no significant differences). Other symbols (†, •) are intended to allow the results in panel A to be placed within the context of panel B.