Literature DB >> 12819269

Interruptibility of long call production in tamarins: implications for vocal control.

Cory T Miller1, Stephen Flusberg, Marc D Hauser.   

Abstract

Vocal production can be highly deterministic, such that once the central nervous system generates a signal to call, the vocalization is emitted immune to external events. Conversely, vocal production can be modulated by auditory feedback such that interference or disruption can cause an individual to stop calling or, if it continues to call, for the acoustic morphology of the signal to change. To explore which of these models best accounts for the control of vocal production in non-human primates, we adapted an interruption technique originally developed for songbirds for use with a New World monkey species, the cotton-top tamarin (Saguinus oedipus). Results from a pilot experiment indicated that an auditory stimulus (white noise) was more effective than a visual stimulus (strobe light) at interrupting the tamarin's species-typical 'combination long call (CLC)'. Data from a second experiment showed that although the duration of the auditory stimulus did not affect the proportion of interruptions that occurred, a 1000 ms white noise stimulus perturbed the temporal structure of the CLC to a greater extent than did a 250 ms white noise stimulus. Furthermore, when call production was interrupted, tamarins stopped vocalizing after the completion of a syllable, suggesting that the syllable represents a unit of organization within the call. Overall, these results provide evidence that tamarins can modify their vocal output based on external events, but the degree of vocal control is significantly less than in oscine songbirds.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12819269     DOI: 10.1242/jeb.00458

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Biol        ISSN: 0022-0949            Impact factor:   3.312


  15 in total

Review 1.  Revisiting the syntactic abilities of non-human animals: natural vocalizations and artificial grammar learning.

Authors:  Carel ten Cate; Kazuo Okanoya
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2012-07-19       Impact factor: 6.237

2.  Motor planning for vocal production in common marmosets.

Authors:  Cory T Miller; Steven J Eliades; Xiaoqin Wang
Journal:  Anim Behav       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 2.844

3.  Social context rapidly modulates the influence of auditory feedback on avian vocal motor control.

Authors:  Jon T Sakata; Michael S Brainard
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2009-08-19       Impact factor: 2.714

Review 4.  The neurobiology of primate vocal communication.

Authors:  Asif A Ghazanfar; Steven J Eliades
Journal:  Curr Opin Neurobiol       Date:  2014-07-23       Impact factor: 6.627

5.  Tracking silence: adjusting vocal production to avoid acoustic interference.

Authors:  S E Roian Egnor; Jeanette Graham Wickelgren; Marc D Hauser
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2007-01-23       Impact factor: 1.836

6.  The communicative content of the common marmoset phee call during antiphonal calling.

Authors:  Cory T Miller; Katherine Mandel; Xiaoqin Wang
Journal:  Am J Primatol       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 2.371

7.  Song motor control organizes acoustic patterns on two levels in Bengalese finches (Lonchura striata var. domestica).

Authors:  Yoshimasa Seki; Kenta Suzuki; Miki Takahasi; Kazuo Okanoya
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2008-04-03       Impact factor: 1.836

8.  The effect of altered auditory feedback on control of vocal production in budgerigars (Melopsittacus undulatus).

Authors:  Michael S Osmanski; Robert J Dooling
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  Rat ultrasonic vocalization shows features of a modular behavior.

Authors:  Tobias Riede
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2014-05-14       Impact factor: 6.167

10.  Multiple acoustic features underlie vocal signal recognition in tamarins: antiphonal calling experiments.

Authors:  C T Miller; M D Hauser
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2003-11-11       Impact factor: 1.836

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.