Auditory sensitivity of the rhesus monkey.

Behar, Isaac; Cronholm, James N.; Loeb, Michel

doi:10.1037/h0022047

Cited by 43 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The shape of the contours in Figure 1 is in good agreement with results obtained by others for macaque monkeys (Bennett, Davis, & Miller, 1983;Behar, Cronholm, & Loeb, 1965;Owren et al, 1988;Pfingst et al, 1975Pfingst et al, , 1978Stebbins, Green, & Miller, 1966). The levels of the thresholds tend to be somewhat higher than in these other studies of monkeys, depending on the particular frequency and the comparison study, most likely because of the interleaved series and stringent criteria for threshold.…”

Section: Thresholdssupporting

confidence: 83%

Early lead exposure effects on an auditory threshold task in the rhesus monkey (Macaca mulatta)

Laughlin

Luck

Lasky

2009

Developmental Psychobiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Behavioral thresholds to pure tones were obtained from adult rhesus monkeys that had been exposed to lead during early development and unexposed cohort controls. Thresholds were elevated (by 2-9 dB) for the previously lead exposed monkeys at all frequencies tested (125-8,000 Hz in octave steps). Although the magnitude and direction of the differences were similar to significant effects reported for children, the more difficult task and much smaller sample sizes in this study of monkeys may have precluded obtaining significant differences at the same magnitude of effects observed in children. Thresholds for one lead-exposed monkey were significantly elevated at midrange frequencies in agreement with electrophysiological results obtained in another study [Lasky, Maier, Snodgrass, Hecox, and Laughlin [1995] Neurotoxicology and Teratology, 17, 633-644]. Behavioral measurements during the threshold task indicated less engagement for lead exposed monkeys than for controls. In addition, the lead exposed monkeys completed testing at significantly fewer frequencies and were significantly more difficult to test than control monkeys by tester ratings. These results are consistent with reports concerning the behavior of lead exposed children.

show abstract

Section: Thresholdssupporting

confidence: 83%

Early lead exposure effects on an auditory threshold task in the rhesus monkey (Macaca mulatta)

Laughlin

Luck

Lasky

2009

Developmental Psychobiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(Beecher 1974a;Fujita and Elliot 1965;Green 1971); Macaca fascicularis (Fujita and Elliot 1965;Stebbins et al 1966); M. fuscata (Jackson et al 1999;Owren et al 1988;Smith and Olszyk 1997); and M. mulatta (Behar et al 1965;Bennett et al 1983;Clack;1966;Clack and Herman 1963;Dalton 1968;Dalton et al 1969;Fujita and Elliot 1965;Harris 1943;Lasky et al 1999;LonsburyMartin and Martin 1981;Pfingst et al 1975Pfingst et al , 1978Wendt 1934). For the comparisons of Macaca mulatta, I modified or excluded several of the audiograms.…”

Section: Effects Of Transducer Type and Conditioning Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…Several studies testing nonhuman primates also tested human subjects, generally to validate sound pressure levels (Behar et al 1965;Brown and Waser 1984;Clack 1966;Jackson et al 1999;Kojima 1990;Owren et al 1988;Pfingst et al 1975;Seiden 1957). I also examine the human threshold values but limited them to comparing transducer type because humans are never tested via negative reinforcement.…”

Section: Effects Of Transducer Type and Conditioning Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

What Do Primates Hear? A Meta-analysis of All Known Nonhuman Primate Behavioral Audiograms

Coleman

2009

Int J Primatol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research on the hearing abilities of nonhuman primates dates back >70 yr and there are audiograms -graphs showing hearing sensitivity over a range of frequencies-for 29 different species including representatives from almost every major group. However, the methods used to obtain the audiograms have been nearly as varied as the number of species tested. I sought to determine the degree to which one can directly compare the audiograms by examining several factors that could have a significant impact on the results: the behavioral conditioning procedure employed to train and test the subjects, the type of transducer used to deliver the test tones, the procedure used to calibrate the amplitude of the test tones, the acoustic enclosure used to minimize ambient noise, and the method used to determine the final threshold values. Audiograms produced using speakers cannot be compared directly with those produced using headphones, and in some cases the calibration procedure and testing chamber may also limit the potential for interspecific comparisons. Based on the findings, I provide 2 lists of optimal primate audiograms: 1 for speaker-derived audiograms and the other for headphone-derived audiograms. I measured a set of audiometric variables on each of the optimal audiograms, and phylogenetic comparisons of the data show that superfamilies of primates display unique patterns of hearing sensitivity, particularly at frequencies in the lower range. Lastly, I discuss the implications for behavioralists investigating primate vocalizations in the field.

show abstract

“…In addition to the demonstrated tonotopic organization of the lateral nucleus, the variations in its size and that of the trapezoid nucleus, show a gross correlation with the width of the frequency band utilized by the animal; that is, the nuclei are extremely large in the echo-locating bats and cetaceans which have been shown to respond to frequencies in the range of 100000 to 120000 cps [Scheville Behar et al, 1965], This coincidence of fre quency range with the size of the lateral and trapezoid nuclei has led to the suggestion that the hypertrophy of these nuclei represents a specialization for broad band and, particularly, high-frequency reception [Zvorykin, 1964], There is an equally good correlation of the development of these two nuclei with nocturnal activity, since all species in which the lateral and trape zoid nuclei are prominent (small bats, porpoise, dolphin, cat, galago) are active noctutnal or aquatic predators, animals which hunt in darkness. The nuclei are not particularly well developed in nocturnal species which are nonpredatory or slow-moving (baleen whales, frugivorous bats, hedgehog, mole, loris).…”

Section: Comparative Anatomy O F the Olivary Complexmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparative Study of the Superior Olivary Complex in the Primate Brain

Moore¹,

Moore²

1971

IJFP

105

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The superior olivary complex is a brainstem auditory center which exhibits differential development of its component nuclei in primates. The nucleus of the trapezoid body and the lateral olivary nucleus are similar in size and are smaller in primates than in carnivores. They do not show an increase in size in the primate series and, as a result, appear to represent relatively insignificant components of the olivary complex in the larger brains of higher primates. In contrast the medial olivary nucleus increases in size through insectivores, prosimians, monkeys, apes and man. The medial nucleus also shows a specific increase in size in nocturnal as compared to diurnal primates. The functional implications of these variations in development of the primate superior olivary complex are discussed.

show abstract

Auditory sensitivity of the rhesus monkey.

Cited by 43 publications

References 4 publications

Early lead exposure effects on an auditory threshold task in the rhesus monkey (Macaca mulatta)

Early lead exposure effects on an auditory threshold task in the rhesus monkey (Macaca mulatta)

What Do Primates Hear? A Meta-analysis of All Known Nonhuman Primate Behavioral Audiograms

A Comparative Study of the Superior Olivary Complex in the Primate Brain

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About