Literature DB >> 16510728

Stimulus-dependent auditory tuning results in synchronous population coding of vocalizations in the songbird midbrain.

Sarah M N Woolley1, Patrick R Gill, Frédéric E Theunissen.   

Abstract

Physiological studies in vocal animals such as songbirds indicate that vocalizations drive auditory neurons particularly well. But the neural mechanisms whereby vocalizations are encoded differently from other sounds in the auditory system are unknown. We used spectrotemporal receptive fields (STRFs) to study the neural encoding of song versus the encoding of a generic sound, modulation-limited noise, by single neurons and the neuronal population in the zebra finch auditory midbrain. The noise was designed to match song in frequency, spectrotemporal modulation boundaries, and power. STRF calculations were balanced between the two stimulus types by forcing a common stimulus subspace. We found that 91% of midbrain neurons showed significant differences in spectral and temporal tuning properties when birds heard song and when birds heard modulation-limited noise. During the processing of noise, spectrotemporal tuning was highly variable across cells. During song processing, the tuning of individual cells became more similar; frequency tuning bandwidth increased, best temporal modulation frequency increased, and spike timing became more precise. The outcome was a population response to song that encoded rapidly changing sounds with power and precision, resulting in a faithful neural representation of the temporal pattern of a song. Modeling responses to song using the tuning to modulation-limited noise showed that the population response would not encode song as precisely or robustly. We conclude that stimulus-dependent changes in auditory tuning during song processing facilitate the high-fidelity encoding of the temporal pattern of a song.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16510728      PMCID: PMC6793651          DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3731-05.2006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurosci        ISSN: 0270-6474            Impact factor:   6.167


  79 in total

1.  Spectral-temporal receptive fields of nonlinear auditory neurons obtained using natural sounds.

Authors:  F E Theunissen; K Sen; A J Doupe
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2000-03-15       Impact factor: 6.167

2.  Corticofugal modulation of the midbrain frequency map in the bat auditory system.

Authors:  W Yan; N Suga
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  1998-05       Impact factor: 24.884

3.  Neuronal responses in cat primary auditory cortex to natural and altered species-specific calls.

Authors:  D D Gehr; H Komiya; J J Eggermont
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2000-12       Impact factor: 3.208

Review 4.  Recent dynamics in olfactory population coding.

Authors:  R W Friedrich; M Stopfer
Journal:  Curr Opin Neurobiol       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 6.627

5.  Cooperative synchronized assemblies enhance orientation discrimination.

Authors:  Jason M Samonds; John D Allison; Heather A Brown; A B Bonds
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2004-04-19       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Tuning for spectro-temporal modulations as a mechanism for auditory discrimination of natural sounds.

Authors:  Sarah M N Woolley; Thane E Fremouw; Anne Hsu; Frédéric E Theunissen
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2005-09-04       Impact factor: 24.884

7.  Responses of auditory-cortex neurons to structural features of natural sounds.

Authors:  I Nelken; Y Rotman; O Bar Yosef
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1999-01-14       Impact factor: 49.962

8.  Behavioral assessment of acoustic parameters relevant to signal recognition and preference in a vocal fish.

Authors:  J R McKibben; A H Bass
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1998-12       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  Naturalistic stimuli increase the rate and efficiency of information transmission by primary auditory afferents.

Authors:  F Rieke; D A Bodnar; W Bialek
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  1995-12-22       Impact factor: 5.349

Review 10.  Principles of auditory information-processing derived from neuroethology.

Authors:  N Suga
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  1989-09       Impact factor: 3.312

View more
  78 in total

1.  Characterizing responses of translation-invariant neurons to natural stimuli: maximally informative invariant dimensions.

Authors:  Michael Eickenberg; Ryan J Rowekamp; Minjoon Kouh; Tatyana O Sharpee
Journal:  Neural Comput       Date:  2012-06-26       Impact factor: 2.026

2.  Role of the zebra finch auditory thalamus in generating complex representations for natural sounds.

Authors:  Noopur Amin; Patrick Gill; Frédéric E Theunissen
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2010-06-16       Impact factor: 2.714

3.  Automating the design of informative sequences of sensory stimuli.

Authors:  Jeremy Lewi; David M Schneider; Sarah M N Woolley; Liam Paninski
Journal:  J Comput Neurosci       Date:  2010-06-16       Impact factor: 1.621

4.  Differential influence of frequency, timing, and intensity cues in a complex acoustic categorization task.

Authors:  Katherine I Nagel; Helen M McLendon; Allison J Doupe
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2010-07-07       Impact factor: 2.714

5.  Spatial structure of neuronal receptive field in awake monkey secondary visual cortex (V2).

Authors:  Lu Liu; Liang She; Ming Chen; Tianyi Liu; Haidong D Lu; Yang Dan; Mu-ming Poo
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2016-02-02       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  On the importance of static nonlinearity in estimating spatiotemporal neural filters with natural stimuli.

Authors:  Tatyana O Sharpee; Kenneth D Miller; Michael P Stryker
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2008-03-19       Impact factor: 2.714

Review 7.  Neural networks a century after Cajal.

Authors:  Walter J Jermakowicz; Vivien A Casagrande
Journal:  Brain Res Rev       Date:  2007-07-13

Review 8.  Sensory adaptation.

Authors:  Barry Wark; Brian Nils Lundstrom; Adrienne Fairhall
Journal:  Curr Opin Neurobiol       Date:  2007-08-21       Impact factor: 6.627

9.  Female reproductive state influences the auditory midbrain response.

Authors:  Jason A Miranda; Walter Wilczynski
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2009-01-30       Impact factor: 1.836

10.  Adaptive temporal encoding leads to a background-insensitive cortical representation of speech.

Authors:  Nai Ding; Jonathan Z Simon
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2013-03-27       Impact factor: 6.167

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.