Brief Communications Arising | Published:

Ir40a neurons are not DEET detectors

Nature volume 534, pages E5E7 (23 June 2016) | Download Citation

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

References

  1. 1.

    The enigmatic reception of DEET—the gold standard of insect repellents. Curr. Opin. Insect Sci. 6, 93–98 (2014)

  2. 2.

    et al. Odour receptors and neurons for DEET and new insect repellents. Nature 502, 507–512 (2013)

  3. 3.

    , , & Variant ionotropic glutamate receptors as chemosensory receptors in Drosophila. Cell 136, 149–162 (2009)

  4. 4.

    et al. Complementary function and integrated wiring of the evolutionarily distinct Drosophila olfactory subsystems. J. Neurosci. 31, 13357–13375 (2011)

  5. 5.

    , , & Mapping neural circuits with activity-dependent nuclear import of a transcription factor. J. Neurogenet. 26, 89–102 (2012)

  6. 6.

    et al. Functional architecture of olfactory ionotropic glutamate receptors. Neuron 69, 44–60 (2011)

  7. 7.

    , & Insect odorant receptors are molecular targets of the insect repellent DEET. Science 319, 1838–1842 (2008)

  8. 8.

    , , & Mosquito odorant receptor for DEET and methyl jasmonate. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, 16592–16597 (2014)

  9. 9.

    et al. orco mutant mosquitoes lose strong preference for humans and are not repelled by volatile DEET. Nature 498, 487–491 (2013)

  10. 10.

    , & Ammonia as an attractive component of host odour for the yellow fever mosquito, Aedes aegypti. Chem. Senses 24, 647–653 (1999)

  11. 11.

    , , & Dedicated olfactory neurons mediating attraction behavior to ammonia and amines in Drosophila. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, E1321–E1329 (2013)

  12. 12.

    & Visualizing olfactory receptor expression and localization in Drosophila. Methods Mol. Biol. 1003, 211–228 (2013)

  13. 13.

    , , & Calcium imaging of odor-evoked responses in the Drosophila antennal lobe. J. Vis. Exp. 61, 2976 (2012)

  14. 14.

    et al. More than apples and oranges—detecting cancer with a fruit fly’s antenna. Sci. Rep. 4, 3576 (2014)

  15. 15.

    & CRISPR/Cas9 and genome editing in Drosophila. J. Genet. Genom. 41, 7–19 (2014)

Download references

Author information

Author notes

    • Carolina Gomez-Diaz

    Present address: Department of Biology, University of Konstanz, 78457, Konstanz, Germany.

Affiliations

  1. Center for Integrative Genomics, Faculty of Biology and Medicine, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, CH-1015, Switzerland

    • Ana F. Silbering
    • , Rati Bell
    • , Steeve Cruchet
    • , Carolina Gomez-Diaz
    •  & Richard Benton
  2. Department of Biology, University of Konstanz, 78457, Konstanz, Germany

    • Daniel Münch
    • , Thomas Laudes
    •  & C. Giovanni Galizia

Authors

  1. Search for Ana F. Silbering in:

  2. Search for Rati Bell in:

  3. Search for Daniel Münch in:

  4. Search for Steeve Cruchet in:

  5. Search for Carolina Gomez-Diaz in:

  6. Search for Thomas Laudes in:

  7. Search for C. Giovanni Galizia in:

  8. Search for Richard Benton in:

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Richard Benton.

Extended data

Supplementary information

PDF files

  1. 1.

    Supplementary Information

    This file contains Supplementary Methods, Supplementary References and Acknowledgements.

Videos

  1. 1.

    Video 1: Responses of IR40a neurons to air stimulation

    Raw changes in fluorescence of IR40a OSN soma expressing GCaMP3 (imaged in the antenna by confocal microscopy at 4 Hz) in response to a puff of air (blank control) delivered manually. The ROI is marked by a red circle and the time of stimulation is indicated by the label appearing in the bottom right corner of the image during the corresponding frames. Reproduction rate is 7 fps.

  2. 2.

    Video 2: Responses of IR40a neurons to DEET stimulation

    Raw changes in fluorescence of IR40a OSN soma expressing GCaMP3 (imaged in the antenna by confocal microscopy at 4 Hz) in response to a puff of 100% DEET delivered manually. The ROI is marked by a red circle and the time of stimulation is indicated by the label appearing in the bottom right corner of the image during the corresponding frames. Reproduction rate is 7 fps.

  3. 3.

    Video 3: Responses of IR40a neurons to DMSO stimulation

    Raw changes in fluorescence of IR40a OSN soma expressing GCaMP3 (imaged in the antenna by confocal microscopy at 4 Hz) in response to a puff of DMSO delivered manually. The ROI is marked by a red circle and the time of stimulation is indicated by the label appearing in the bottom right corner of the image during the corresponding frames. Reproduction rate is 7 fps.

  4. 4.

    Video 4: Responses of IR40a neurons to BA stimulation

    Raw changes in fluorescence of IR40a OSN soma expressing GCaMP3 (imaged in the antenna by confocal microscopy at 4 Hz) in response to a puff of 50% BA delivered manually. The ROI is marked by a red circle and the time of stimulation is indicated by the label appearing in the bottom right corner of the image during the corresponding frames. Reproduction rate is 7 fps.

  5. 5.

    Video 5: Responses of IR40a neurons to EA stimulation

    Raw changes in fluorescence of IR40a OSN soma expressing GCaMP3 (imaged in the antenna by confocal microscopy at 4 Hz) in response to a puff of 50% EA delivered manually. The ROI is marked by a red circle and the time of stimulation is indicated by the label appearing in the bottom right corner of the image during the corresponding frames. Reproduction rate is 7 fps.

  6. 6.

    Video 6: Responses of IR40a neurons to MDA stimulation

    Raw changes in fluorescence of IR40a OSN soma expressing GCaMP3 (imaged in the antenna by confocal microscopy at 4 Hz) in response to a puff of 50% MDA delivered manually. The ROI is marked by a red circle and the time of stimulation is indicated by the label appearing in the bottom right corner of the image during the corresponding frames. Reproduction rate is 7 fps.

  7. 7.

    Video 7: Responses of IR40a neurons to H2O stimulation

    Raw changes in fluorescence of IR40a OSN soma expressing GCaMP3 (imaged in the antenna by confocal microscopy at 4 Hz) in response to a puff of H2O delivered manually. The ROI is marked by a red circle and the time of stimulation is indicated by the label appearing in the bottom right corner of the image during the corresponding frames. Reproduction rate is 7 fps.

  8. 8.

    Video 8: Responses of IR40a neurons to ammonia stimulation

    Raw changes in fluorescence of IR40a OSN soma expressing GCaMP3 (imaged in the antenna by confocal microscopy at 4 Hz) in response to a puff of 10% ammonia delivered manually. The ROI is marked by a red circle and the time of stimulation is indicated by the label appearing in the bottom right corner of the image during the corresponding frames. Reproduction rate is 7 fps.

About this article

Publication history

Received

Accepted

Published

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1038/nature18321

Further reading

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Newsletter Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing