On the use of natural stimuli in neurophysiological studies of audition

Symmes, David

doi:10.1016/0378-5955(81)90007-1

Cited by 32 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This region corresponds to part of area 22 of Brodmann [1909], although the region has been divided in various ways in current architectonic parcellations of the rhesus monkey [Pandya and Sanides, 1973;Burton and Jones, 1976;Galaburda and Pandya, 1983]. Neurons in the parabelt region respond to complex auditory stimuli [Symmes et al, 1971;Rauschecker et al, 1995;Tian and Rauschecker, 1995] and sometimes somatosensory and visual stimuli [Leinonen et al, 1980].…”

Section: The Auditory Parabeltmentioning

confidence: 99%

Subdivisions of AuditoryCortex and Levels of Processing in Primates

Kaas

Hackett²

1998

Audiol Neurotol

205

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In a series of experiments on New World and Old World monkeys, architectonic features of auditory cortex were related to tone frequency maps and patterns of connections to generate and evaluate theories of cortical organization. The results suggest that cortical processing of auditory information involves a number of functionally distinct fields that can be broadly grouped into four or more levels of processing. At the first level, there are three primary-like areas, each with a discrete pattern of tonotopic organization, koniocortical histological features, and direct inputs from the ventral division of the medial geniculate complex. These three core areas are interconnected and project to a narrow surrounding belt of perhaps seven areas which receive thalamic input from the major divisions of the medial geniculate complex, the suprageniculate/limitans complex, and the medial pulvinar. The belt areas connect with a lateral parabelt region of two or more fields that are almost devoid of direct connections with the core and the ventral division of the medial geniculate complex. The parabelt fields connect with more distant cortex in the superior temporal gyrus, superior temporal sulcus, and prefrontal cortex. The results indicate that auditory processing involves 15 or more cortical areas, each of which is interconnected with a number of other fields, especially adjoining fields of the same level.

show abstract

Section: The Auditory Parabeltmentioning

confidence: 99%

Subdivisions of AuditoryCortex and Levels of Processing in Primates

Kaas

Hackett²

1998

Audiol Neurotol

205

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In other mammals, such an approach is made more difficult by their less specialized behavioral repertoire and a bewildering number of natural complex sounds that may be expected to trigger responses in nonprimary cortical neurons. One group of species-specific sounds that has been used with some success in nonhuman primates in the past (Newman and Symmes 1974;Symmes 1981;Winter and Funkenstein 1973;Wollberg and Newman 1973) and again more recently (Eliades and Wang 2003;Rauschecker and Tian 2000;Rauschecker et al 1995;Tian et al 2001;Wang 2000;Wang and Kadia 2001;Wang et al 1995) is that of vocalizations. Although their spectra are known, however, they are still too complex to be used as a first-or second-order stimulus with any hope of finding stimulus-specific characteristics across different cortical areas.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Processing of Frequency-Modulated Sounds in the Lateral Auditory Belt Cortex of the Rhesus Monkey

Tian

Rauschecker

2004

Journal of Neurophysiology

155

108

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tian, Biao and Josef P. Rauschecker. Processing of frequencymodulated sounds in the lateral auditory belt cortex of the rhesus monkey. J Neurophysiol 92: 2993-3013, 2004; 10.1152/ jn.00472.2003. Single neurons were recorded from the lateral belt areas, anterolateral (AL), mediolateral (ML), and caudolateral (CL), of nonprimary auditory cortex in 4 adult rhesus monkeys under gas anesthesia, while the neurons were stimulated with frequency-modulated (FM) sweeps. Responses to FM sweeps, measured as the firing rate of the neurons, were invariably greater than those to tone bursts. In our stimuli, frequency changed linearly from low to high frequencies (FM direction "up") or high to low frequencies ("down") at varying speeds (FM rates). Neurons were highly selective to the rate and direction of the FM sweep. Significant differences were found between the 3 lateral belt areas with regard to their FM rate preferences: whereas neurons in ML responded to the whole range of FM rates, AL neurons responded better to slower FM rates in the range of naturally occurring communication sounds. CL neurons generally responded best to fast FM rates at a speed of several hundred Hz/ms, which have the broadest frequency spectrum. These selectivities are consistent with a role of AL in the decoding of communication sounds and of CL in the localization of sounds, which works best with broader bandwidths. Together, the results support the hypothesis of parallel streams for the processing of different aspects of sounds, including auditory objects and auditory space.

show abstract

“…However, animal sounds used in these studies and other relevant investigations typically were 'electronically edited' to separate the natural stimuli from the ongo ing recorded sounds to allow isolated presentation to the experimental animal. It is possible that such an experimental procedure causes a reduction in the com municative significance and perhaps in the effectiveness of the sounds [see also Symmes, 1981], causing the neural re sponses to be similar to the responses to artificial stimuli.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, during the last decade, an increasing number of studies using the communication sounds of animals has been published [e.g., Capranica, 1972;Wollberg and Newman, 1972;Symmes, 1981], The rationale for the latter ap proach is the observation of the difficulty, especially at the cortical level, of predict ing the responsiveness of neurons to com plex stimuli, such as species-specific vo calizations, on the basis of their respon siveness to simple artificial sounds [e.g., Katsuki et al, 1962;Newman and Woll berg, 1973a]. Furthermore, the importance of using animal sounds is stressed by the question as to whether, during evolution, the auditory system was specialized for se lective responses to communication sounds of biological and survival import ance [Capranica.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Auditory Cortex Responses to Sequences of Normal and Reversed Squirrel Monkey Vocalizations

Glass

Wollberg²

1983

Brain Behav Evol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Responsiveness of auditory cortex (AC) units of awake squirrel monkeys to a natural sequence of species-specific calls was not significantly different from their responsiveness to a reverse playback of the sequence. No dependency was noted between the percentage of responding units and the average intensity of sounds, their spectral content or their order of presentation. The effectiveness of the sounds in eliciting responses was variable even when the sequence was produced in an unchanging behavioral context. Comparison of these findings with earlier results of individual vocalizations presented normally or backward in an isolated manner suggest that responsiveness of AC neurons to continuous sounds is lower than their responsiveness to isolated sounds, whether natural or artificial.

show abstract

On the use of natural stimuli in neurophysiological studies of audition

Cited by 32 publications

References 40 publications

Subdivisions of AuditoryCortex and Levels of Processing in Primates

Subdivisions of AuditoryCortex and Levels of Processing in Primates

Processing of Frequency-Modulated Sounds in the Lateral Auditory Belt Cortex of the Rhesus Monkey

Auditory Cortex Responses to Sequences of Normal and Reversed Squirrel Monkey Vocalizations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About