Literature DB >> 22855616

The sender-receiver matching hypothesis: support from the peripheral coding of acoustic features in songbirds.

Megan D Gall1, Lauren E Brierley, Jeffrey R Lucas.   

Abstract

The sender-receiver matching hypothesis predicts that species-specific features of vocalizations will be reflected in species-specific auditory processing. This hypothesis has most often been invoked to explain correlations between vocal frequency ranges and the frequency range of auditory sensitivity; however, it could apply to other structural features, such as the rise time of stimuli. We explored this hypothesis in five songbird species that vary in the rise times and frequency range of their vocalizations. We recorded auditory evoked potentials (AEPs) to onset and sustained portions of stimuli that varied in both frequency and rise time. AEPs are gross potentials generated in the auditory nerve and brainstem and measured from the scalp. We found that species with shorter rise times in their vocalizations had greater amplitude and shorter latency onset AEPs than species with longer rise times. We also found that species with lower frequency and/or more tonal vocalizations had stronger sustained AEPs that follow the sound pressure changes in the stimulus (i.e. frequency following responses) than species with higher frequency and/or less tonal vocalizations. This is the first study in songbirds to show that acoustic features such as rise time and tonality are reflected in peripheral auditory processing.

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22855616     DOI: 10.1242/jeb.072959

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


  5 in total

1.  Habitat-related differences in auditory processing of complex tones and vocal signal properties in four songbirds.

Authors:  Jeffrey R Lucas; Alejandro Vélez; Kenneth S Henry
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2015-02-15       Impact factor: 1.836

2.  A broad filter between call frequency and peripheral auditory sensitivity in northern grasshopper mice (Onychomys leucogaster).

Authors:  Dana M Green; Tucker Scolman; O'neil W Guthrie; Bret Pasch
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2019-04-27       Impact factor: 1.836

3.  Frequency discrimination in the common marmoset (Callithrix jacchus).

Authors:  Michael S Osmanski; Xindong Song; Yueqi Guo; Xiaoqin Wang
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2016-08-03       Impact factor: 3.208

4.  Frequency sensitivity in Northern saw-whet owls (Aegolius acadicus).

Authors:  Julia R Beatini; Glenn A Proudfoot; Megan D Gall
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2017-10-09       Impact factor: 1.836

5.  An exception to the matched filter hypothesis: A mismatch of male call frequency and female best hearing frequency in a torrent frog.

Authors:  Longhui Zhao; Jichao Wang; Yue Yang; Bicheng Zhu; Steven E Brauth; Yezhong Tang; Jianguo Cui
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2016-12-20       Impact factor: 2.912

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.