Functional and evolutionary trade-offs co-occur between two consolidated memory phases in Drosophila melanogaster.

Memory is a complex and dynamic process that is composed of different phases. Its evolution under natural selection probably depends on a balance between fitness benefits and costs. In Drosophila, two separate forms of consolidated memory phases can be generated experimentally: anaesthesia-resistant memory (ARM) and long-term memory (LTM). In recent years, several studies have focused on the differences between these long-lasting memory types and have found that, at the functional level, ARM and LTM are antagonistic. How this functional relationship will affect their evolutionary dynamics remains unknown. We selected for flies with either improved ARM or improved LTM over several generations, and found that flies selected specifically for improvement of one consolidated memory phase show reduced performance in the other memory phase. We also found that improved LTM was linked to decreased longevity in male flies but not in females. Conversely, males with improved ARM had increased longevity. We found no correlation between either improved ARM or LTM and other phenotypic traits. This is, to our knowledge, the first evidence of a symmetrical evolutionary trade-off between two memory phases for the same learning task. Such trade-offs may have an important impact on the evolution of cognitive capacities. On a neural level, these results support the hypothesis that mechanisms underlying these forms of consolidated memory are, to some degree, antagonistic.

A switch from cycloheximide-resistant consolidated memory to cycloheximide-sensitive reconsolidation and extinction in Drosophila.

It is generally accepted that, after learning, memories stabilize over time and integrate into long-term memory (LTM) through the process of consolidation, which depends on de novo protein synthesis. Besides, studies on several species have shown that reactivation of already stabilized LTM can either make this memory labile and then restabilize it (a process called reconsolidation) or inhibit it (extinction). However, the identity of both processes and their interactions with consolidation are still under debate. Regarding memory stabilization, Drosophila offers a striking exception since, in this species, LTM is not the sole stable form of memory. Under specific learning conditions, anesthesia-resistant memory (ARM) can be formed through processes yet unknown but that are resistant to cycloheximide, a classical protein synthesis inhibitor that impairs LTM. Here, we took advantage of this dichotomy to ask whether both ARM and LTM could be extinguished and/or reconsolidated. We also studied whether two forms of memory extinction and reconsolidation exist in flies, as for memory stabilization. We show that either reconsolidation or extinction can be induced after olfactory conditioning in Drosophila, depending on the number of reactivations as in other species. Furthermore, regarding the effect of cycloheximide, the ARM/LTM dichotomy for stabilization does not apply to extinction and reconsolidation. Blocking protein synthesis interfered with both processes regardless of whether initial stabilization was sensitive (LTM) or not (ARM) to cycloheximide. These results thus show that Drosophila is a useful model to tackle these questions and that reconsolidation is not necessarily a mere repetition of consolidation.