Thanks, Wolf.

4/ We would like to thank our editor Rita Gemayel and the reviewers for a very efficient and pleasant review process.

3/ Excitation of highly active glomeruli results in odor decorrelation. Indeed, knockdown of mAChR-B increases correlation between odors representation in the brain and decreases flies’ odor discrimination capabilities.

2/ We uncover a novel mechanism for signal decorrelation which is based on intraglomerular excitation and works in synergism with lateral interglomerular inhibition. This intraglomerular excitation is mediated by mAChR-B and it only occurs at high neuronal activity.

Thank you Simon!

Thank you Silke, much appreciated.

Thank you, Carolina!

7/ 🌐 The Big Picture: Our findings challenge the long-held belief that these memories just stack up together. Instead, there’s a tug-of-war, and your brain actively picks sides. This discovery could change how we study learning, from flies to humans.

6/ 🔍 Why Should We Care?: This isn’t just about flies—it’s a peek into how our own brains might handle competing memories. Imagine the implications for understanding decision-making, multitasking, or even mental health! 🤯

5/ 🧠 Neural Circuit Plot Twist: We found that operant learning taps into the brain’s navigation center (CX). The CX actively blocks classical learning, allowing operant memory to form without interference. It’s like having a bouncer neuron guarding the dance floor of your memories! 💃🧠

4/ 🏃‍♂️ The Behavior Shift: Here’s where it gets wild: After classical learning, flies freeze when they smell the conditioned odor. But after operant learning, they actively avoid it! This active vs. passive response hints at different cognitive processes, even for the same stimulus.

3/ 🧩 Surprise! They Clash: Turns out, the two types of memories compete. When flies try to form both at once, they end up learning… nothing. It’s like trying to follow two GPS directions at the same time. One system has to take charge, or it all falls apart.

2/ 💥 Classical vs. Operant Conditioning: Classical (Pavlovian) learning is when you passively associate a cue with an outcome (think Pavlov’s dogs 🐶🔔). Operant learning is active—you have to make a choice to change the outcome. But what happens when both collide? 🧐

6/ Implications for Cognitive Science: Our findings challenge the hierarchical model of learning. Instead of additive memory formation, active processes separate these memories, allowing distinct behavioral strategies.

5/ Neuronal Circuit Insights: Operant learning requires the fly's navigation center (CX). CX activity gates plasticity, allowing operant learning while preventing interference from classical learning pathways. This active gating mechanism is key to resolving conflicting memories.

4/ Behavioral Differences: Flies show distinct behaviors after different types of conditioning. While classical learning leads to freezing, operant learning prompts active avoidance. This mirrors findings in mammalian studies suggesting shared cognitive principles across species.

3/ 🧑‍🔬 Surprising Discovery: Contrary to the dogma, we show that operant and classical learning cannot happen at the same time. If both forms of plasticity occur simultaneously, they interfere, leading to no effective learning. 🤯

2/ Classical vs. Operant Learning: Classical conditioning is passive, where an association is formed between a cue and an outcome. Operant conditioning is active, requiring the animal's action to influence the outcome. These different strategies involve separate brain circuits.