English
 
User Manual Privacy Policy Disclaimer Contact us
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT
  Comparative behavioral studies on two visual mutants of Drosophila

Heisenberg, M. (1972). Comparative behavioral studies on two visual mutants of Drosophila. Journal of Comparative Physiology, 80(2), 119-136. doi:10.1007/BF00696485.

Item is

Basic

show hide
Item Permalink: http://hdl.handle.net/21.11116/0000-0005-E868-1 Version Permalink: http://hdl.handle.net/21.11116/0000-0005-E869-0
Genre: Journal Article

Files

show Files

Locators

show
hide
Description:
-

Creators

show
hide
 Creators:
Heisenberg, M1, 2, Author              
Affiliations:
1Former Department Neurophysiology of Insect Behavior, Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society, ou_1497802              
2Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society, Spemannstrasse 38, 72076 Tübingen, DE, ou_1497794              

Content

show
hide
Free keywords: -
 Abstract: Phototaxis and optomotor reactions of the mutantsebony and opm 2 are investigated. LikeMusca, Drosophila has two complementary visual input systems, one specialized (e. g.) in optimal contrast transfer (high acuity system, HAS, retinula cells 7 and 8) the other in high sensitivity (HSS, retinula cells 1–6). Inebony the HSS seems to be blocked for phototaxis and optomotor responses (Figs. 1 A, 5). However, even the HAS has a higher threshold intensity than in wild type (Fig. 5). In opm 2 the HSS is disturbed for phototaxis (Fig. 1) but is operating for the optomotor response (Fig. 6). However the HAS seems to be largely suppressed for the optomotor response (Table 2). In the double mutantebony-opm 2 both visual input systems seem to be impaired for movement detection (Fig. 7). Two other properties of the visual system of opm 2 are described. The visual fields of the sampling stations for movement detection are about twice as large as in wild type (Figs. 2A, B). This can not be explained by a disturbance of the optics. In other mutants of this type the visual field size is slightly different. In opm 2 the reaction to movement from front to back (progressive) is specificly suppressed, whereas, at least in flight, the reaction to movement from back to front (regressive) is normal (Table 1, Figs. 3, 4). The degree of suppression of the reaction to progressive movement is variable in individual flies and differs for the three mutants of the opm 2-group (Table 1). In a simple example the use of these mutants for system analysis experiments is demonstrated.

Details

show
hide
Language(s):
 Dates: 1972-06
 Publication Status: Published in print
 Pages: -
 Publishing info: -
 Table of Contents: -
 Rev. Method: -
 Identifiers: DOI: 10.1007/BF00696485
 Degree: -

Event

show

Legal Case

show

Project information

show

Source 1

show
hide
Title: Journal of Comparative Physiology
  Other : J. Comp. Physiol.
Source Genre: Journal
 Creator(s):
Affiliations:
Publ. Info: -
Pages: - Volume / Issue: 80 (2) Sequence Number: - Start / End Page: 119 - 136 Identifier: ISSN: 0373-0859
CoNE: https://pure.mpg.de/cone/journals/resource/954928574702