Detection of Tones in Reproducible Noise Maskers by Rabbits and Comparison to Detection by Humans

Abstract

Processing mechanisms used for detection of tones in noise can be revealed by using reproducible noise maskers and analyzing the pattern of results across masker waveforms. This study reports detection of a 500-Hz tone in broadband reproducible noise by rabbits using a set of masker waveforms for which human results are available. An appetitive-reinforcement, operant-conditioning procedure with bias control was used. Both fixed-level and roving-level noises were used to explore the utility of energy-related cues for detection. An energy-based detection model was able to partially explain the fixed-level results across reproducible noise waveforms for both rabbit and human. A multiple-channel energy model was able to explain fixed-level results, as well as the robust performance observed with roving-level noises. Further analysis using the energy model indicated a difference between species: human detection was influenced most by the noise spectrum surrounding the tone frequency, whereas rabbit detection was influenced most by the noise spectrum at frequencies above that of the tone. In addition, a temporal envelope-based model predicted detection by humans as well as the single-channel energy model did, but the envelope-based model failed to predict detection by rabbits. This result indicates that the contributions of energy and temporal cues to auditory processing differ across species. Overall, these findings suggest that caution must be used when evaluating neural encoding mechanisms in one species on the basis of behavioral results in another.

Competing Sound Sources Reveal Spatial Effects in Cortical Processing

“…Ten independent, random tokens of noise were created so that any residual temporal structure was averaged out across repeated presentations. Independent noise tokens were used on each trial instead of using a single, frozen token because individual noise tokens with the same statistics can have drastically different masking effects [34] . Additionally, the use of independent masker tokens better simulates what happens in natural settings, where, over time, a bird repeatedly hears highly stereotyped songs from its familiar colony mates, but hears them in a different background of masking sources each time.…”

Identifying cues for tone-in-noise detection using decision variable correlation in the budgerigar (Melopsittacus undulatus)

“…Tone-in-noise detection in nonhuman animal models has most frequently been studied using random noise in the context of critical bands or critical ratios (Niemiec et al, 1992;Nienhuys and Clark, 1979; Electronic mail: kenneth_henry@urmc.rochester.edu 1987; Pickles, 1975;Watson, 1963;Yost and Shofner, 2009). One series of studies in rabbits employed reproducible noise waveforms to determine detection patterns (Early et al, 2001;Gai et al, 2007;Zheng et al, 2002). The detection pattern in rabbits was uncorrelated with human results and model predictions based on ENV cues, suggesting that this species uses different stimulus cues from humans to detect low-frequency tones in noise.…”

Effects of tone duration on three psychophysical measures of temporal integration in rhesus macaques

“…Those earlier data suggest that macaques exhibit drastically slower temporal integration than humans (human mean of ~30 ms; reviewed in O' Connor &Sutter, 2003 andporpoises (~25 ms;Johnson, 1968). Evaluation of this claim is critical to determining the extent to which the macaque serves as a model of human auditory perception, because of the potentially specialized nature of human temporal processing (Gai et al, 2007;O'Connor et al 1999O'Connor et al , 2011. The present data suggest that macaque and human temporal processing are very similar.…”