English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Dishabituation has been thought to be due either to reversal of the process of habituation or to a second process equivalent to sensitization superimposed on habituation. One way to address this question is by testing whether dishabituation and sensitization can be dissociated. Previous studies using this approach in  Aplysia  have come to different conclusions about the nature of dishabituation, perhaps because those studies differed in many respects, including (1) whether they also observed transient behavioral inhibition, and (2) whether they used test stimuli that activated the LE siphon sensory neurons or as yet unidentified sensory neurons. To attempt to resolve the apparent contradictions between the previous studies, we have explored the importance of these two factors by performing a parametric study of dishabituation and sensitization of gill withdrawal in a simplified preparation that does not exhibit transient behavioral inhibition, using two different test stimuli that are known to activate the LE (Touch) or unidentified (Not Touch) sensory neurons. We find that dishabituation and sensitization in this preparation have similar time courses and generally similar functions of shock intensity. However, under one condition, with the Not Touch stimulus 2.5 min after the shock, dishabituation has a reverse effect of shock intensity. Additional analyses suggest that dishabituation with the Not Touch stimulus 2.5 min after the shock is due to reversal of habituation, whereas 12.5 min after the shock, dishabituation is due to superimposed sensitization. These results thus suggest that dishabituation may involve either process in the same preparation, and begin to define the conditions that favor one or the other.

Dishabituation in Aplysia can involve either reversal of habituation or superimposed sensitization