The Study of Hearing in Animals

Warfield, Dickens

doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-278004-2.50008-6

Cited by 25 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 162 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While there may be an optimal transmission range defined by the physical structure of the habitat and local environmental conditions, species are limited by their hearing and sound-production abilities. In general, anurans can hear between~50-4000 Hz, birds between~50-12,000 Hz and insects can hear from the infra-to ultrasound [39][40][41]. These differences in frequency use are reflected in the distributions used by the acoustic morphospecies in this study (Figure 4), which included large frequency overlap between anurans and birds, and birds and insects.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 90%

Species Richness (of Insects) Drives the Use of Acoustic Space in the Tropics

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Acoustic ecology, or ecoacoustics, is a growing field that uses sound as a tool to evaluate animal communities. In this manuscript, we evaluate recordings from eight tropical forest sites that vary in species richness, from a relatively low diversity Caribbean forest to a megadiverse Amazonian forest, with the goal of understanding the relationship between acoustic space use (ASU) and species diversity across different taxonomic groups. For each site, we determined the acoustic morphospecies richness and composition of the biophony, and we used a global biodiversity dataset to estimate the regional richness of birds. Here, we demonstrate how detailed information on activity patterns of the acoustic community (<22 kHz) can easily be visualized and ASU determined by aggregating recordings collected over relatively short periods (4-13 days). We show a strong positive relationship between ASU and regional and acoustic morphospecies richness. Premontane forest sites had the highest ASU and the highest species richness, while dry forest and montane sites had lower ASU and lower species richness. Furthermore, we show that insect richness was the best predictor of variation in total ASU, and that insect richness was proportionally greater at high-diversity sites. In addition, insects used a broad range of frequencies, including high frequencies (>8000 Hz), which contributed to greater ASU. This novel approach for analyzing the presence and acoustic activity of multiple taxonomic groups contributes to our understanding of ecological community dynamics and provides a useful tool for monitoring species in the context of restoration ecology, climate change and conservation biology.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 90%

Species Richness (of Insects) Drives the Use of Acoustic Space in the Tropics

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…High frequency click stimulation, such as 64 or 99 kHz, may result in good synchronization of nuclei in the brain-stem and increase the amplitude of wave III or V. Wave I appeared at stimulus frequencies between 8 and 99 kHz, and its amplitude increased at 16 and 32 kHz. It was reported that the most sensitive frequency in the marmoset for recording cochlear microphonics was between 15 and 40 kHz [42] and that wave I contributed to the activity of the eighth cranial nerve [1,22,38]. Therefore, the increases in amplitude of wave I at 16 and 32 kHz may have resulted from heightened synchronization of the peripheral auditory pathways from hair cells to the cochlear nerve.…”

Section: Effects Of Stimulus Intensitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Only a few studies, however, have described the characteristics of BAEPs elicited by use of click stimuli in the marmoset and the relationship between click frequency and BAEP morphology [26]. It is well known that the hearing ranges in experimental animals are wider than those in humans: the range in rats is between 0.1 and 70 kHz; in dogs, between 0.1 and 55 kHz; in marmosets, between 0.1 and 100 kHz; and in humans, between 0.02 and 20 kHz [42]. In this study, therefore, we recorded BAEPs evoked by clicks over a broad range of stimulus frequencies up to 99 kHz in 20 common marmosets to more fully characterize the wave forms in detail and to evaluate the effects of click frequency and intensity on wave forms, peak latencies, and peak amplitudes.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Click Intensity and Frequency on the Brain-Stem Auditory Evoked Potentials in the Common Marmoset (Callithrix jacchus).

Harada

Tokuriki

1997

J. Vet. Med. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Brain-stem auditory evoked potentials (BAEPs) were recorded in 20 common marmosets (Callithrix jacchus) to investigate the effects of click frequency up to 99 kHz, in consideration of the higher hearing range of the marmoset, and intensity on wave forms and peak latencies. According to the results of BAEP recordings at frequencies of 4, 32, and 99 kHz, the number of components recorded was affected by the stimulus intensity and the clicks at an intensity of 80 dB peak equivalent sound pressure level (pe SPL) had the maximum number of clear components. Therefore, it was indicated that click stimulations at an intensity of 80 dB pe SPL over a broad range of frequencies appears to be useful for recording the maximum number of components in marmosets and may increase the information obtainable from BAEPs. BAEP latencies were prolonged as the stimulus intensity decreased from 100 to 50 dB pe SPL. The effects of stimulus frequency on the wave latencies and amplitudes in response to 80 dB pe SPL at frequencies between 0.5 and 99 kHz revealed various changes: the amplitude of wave I increased at 16 and 32 kHz, but that of waves III and V increased at 4-8 and 64-99 kHz. These increases in amplitudes of the waves may correlate with higher synchronous activity of the peripheral or central auditory pathways. -KEY WORDS: brain-stem auditory evoked potential (BAEP), click stimulation, marmoset, stimulus frequency, stimulus intensity.

show abstract

“…Because of the lack of detailed information on the hearing abilities of laboratory animals for sounds generally produced in the animal house, and on the defined effects of these sounds, it is proposed to concentrate this study on drawing together what information is available from recent literature, and the results of my own work in this field. Warfield (1973) has said that hearing cannot really be defined, but must be experienced. Hearing is perception, and as such is never directly observed by a second organism, but inferred from various observations.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Insufficient work has been done to permit understanding of the inherent differences in the procedures and their effect on the animal and its status quo. In essence, methods for determining auditory ranges may be civided into anatomical, behavioural and electrophysiological (Warfield, 1973).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Sound and Its Significance for Laboratory Animals

Gamble

1982

Biological Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary 1. Several methods of varying accuracy have been used to assess what sounds small laboratory animals such as rodents are capable of hearing. Most rodents can detect sounds from 1000 Hz (the frequency of the Greenwich Time Signal) up to 100000 Hz, depending on the strain, with usually one or more commonly two peaks of sensitivity within this range. Dogs can detect sound most easily from 500 Hz to 55000 Hz, depending on the breed. 2. Rodents also produce sound signals as a behavioural response and for communication in a variety of situations. Ultrasonic calls in the range 22000–70000 Hz are the main communicating pathway during aggressive encounters, mating, and mothering. Similar calls have also been recorded from isolated animals associated with inactivity, rest and possibly even sleep. 3. Very loud sounds cause seizures in rats and mice, or can make them more susceptible to other sounds later in life. This effect is possible even when animals are fully anaesthetized. Sound tends to startle and reduce activity in several species of animal. Even offspring of mice that have been sound‐stressed exhibit abnormal behaviour patterns. Sounds also elicit various responses in rats from increasing aggression to making them more tolerant to electric shocks. 4. Levels of sound above 100 dB are teratogenic in several species of animals and several hormonal, haematological and reproductive parameters are disturbed by sounds above 80 dB. When rats are chemically deafened the disturbance to their fertility disappears. Lipid metabolism is disrupted in rats when exposed to over 95 dB of sounds, leading to increases in plasma triglycerides. Atherosclerosis can be produced in rabbits by similar levels of sound. 5. It has also been shown in guinea pigs and cats that hearing damage is governed by the duration as well as the intensity of the sound and is irreversible. Work on chinchillas hs demonstrated that sounds above 95 dB lead to this injury, but that sounds of 80 dB have no permanent effect on hearing sensitivity.

show abstract

The Study of Hearing in Animals

Cited by 25 publications

References 162 publications

Species Richness (of Insects) Drives the Use of Acoustic Space in the Tropics

Species Richness (of Insects) Drives the Use of Acoustic Space in the Tropics

Effects of Click Intensity and Frequency on the Brain-Stem Auditory Evoked Potentials in the Common Marmoset (Callithrix jacchus).

Sound and Its Significance for Laboratory Animals

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About