Literature DB >> 23297906

Auditory brainstem responses and auditory thresholds in woodpeckers.

Bernard Lohr1, Elizabeth F Brittan-Powell, Robert J Dooling.   

Abstract

Auditory sensitivity in three species of woodpeckers was estimated using the auditory brainstem response (ABR), a measure of the summed electrical activity of auditory neurons. For all species, the ABR waveform showed at least two, and sometimes three prominent peaks occurring within 10 ms of stimulus onset. Also ABR peak amplitude increased and latency decreased as a function of increasing sound pressure levels. Results showed no significant differences in overall auditory abilities between the three species of woodpeckers. The average ABR audiogram showed that woodpeckers have lowest thresholds between 1.5 and 5.7 kHz. The shape of the average woodpecker ABR audiogram was similar to the shape of the ABR-measured audiograms of other small birds at most frequencies, but at the highest frequency data suggest that woodpecker thresholds may be lower than those of domesticated birds, while similar to those of wild birds.

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23297906      PMCID: PMC3548892          DOI: 10.1121/1.4770255

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am        ISSN: 0001-4966            Impact factor:   1.840


  27 in total

1.  Development of auditory sensitivity of altricial birds: absolute thresholds of the generation of evoked potentials.

Authors:  L I Aleksandrov; L P Dmitrieva
Journal:  Neurosci Behav Physiol       Date:  1992 Mar-Apr

2.  Comparisons of the development of auditory brainstem response latencies between cats and humans.

Authors:  E J Walsh; M Gorga; J McGee
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  1992-06       Impact factor: 3.208

3.  Effects of stimulus repetition rate on ABR threshold, amplitude and latency in neonatal and adult Mongolian gerbils.

Authors:  G S Donaldson; E W Rubel
Journal:  Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  1990 Nov-Dec

4.  Age-related changes in auditory potentials of Mongolian gerbil.

Authors:  J H Mills; R A Schmiedt; L F Kulish
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  1990-07       Impact factor: 3.208

5.  Development of auditory-evoked potentials in the cat. I. Onset of response and development of sensitivity.

Authors:  E J Walsh; J McGee; E Javel
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1986-03       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Stimulus dependencies of the gerbil brain-stem auditory-evoked response (BAER). I: Effects of click level, rate, and polarity.

Authors:  R Burkard; H F Voigt
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1989-06       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Woodpecker drilling behavior. An endorsement of the rotational theory of impact brain injury.

Authors:  P R May; J M Fuster; J Haber; A Hirschman
Journal:  Arch Neurol       Date:  1979-06

8.  Notes on the comparative mechanics of hearing. I.A shock-proof ear.

Authors:  L U Kohllöffel
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  1984-01       Impact factor: 3.208

9.  Woodpeckers and head injury.

Authors:  P R May; J M Fuster; P Newman; A Hirschman
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1976-02-28       Impact factor: 79.321

10.  Hearing thresholds in the rabbit. A behavioral and electrophysiological study.

Authors:  E Borg; B Engström
Journal:  Acta Otolaryngol       Date:  1983 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 1.494

View more
  10 in total

1.  Assessing stimulus and subject influences on auditory evoked potentials and their relation to peripheral physiology in green treefrogs (Hyla cinerea).

Authors:  Nathan P Buerkle; Katrina M Schrode; Mark A Bee
Journal:  Comp Biochem Physiol A Mol Integr Physiol       Date:  2014-08-20       Impact factor: 2.320

2.  A comparison of auditory brainstem responses across diving bird species.

Authors:  Sara E Crowell; Alicia M Wells-Berlin; Catherine E Carr; Glenn H Olsen; Ronald E Therrien; Sally E Yannuzzi; Darlene R Ketten
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2015-07-09       Impact factor: 1.836

3.  In-air hearing of a diving duck: A comparison of psychoacoustic and auditory brainstem response thresholds.

Authors:  Sara E Crowell; Alicia M Wells-Berlin; Ronald E Therrien; Sally E Yannuzzi; Catherine E Carr
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2016-05       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Auditory brainstem responses in Cope's gray treefrog (Hyla chrysoscelis): effects of frequency, level, sex and size.

Authors:  Katrina M Schrode; Nathan P Buerkle; Elizabeth F Brittan-Powell; Mark A Bee
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2014-01-18       Impact factor: 1.836

5.  Methylmercury Exposure Reduces the Auditory Brainstem Response of Zebra Finches (Taeniopygia guttata ).

Authors:  Sarah E Wolf; John P Swaddle; Daniel A Cristol; William J Buchser
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2017-03-30

6.  Development of auditory sensitivity in the barn owl.

Authors:  Anna Kraemer; Caitlin Baxter; Alayna Hendrix; Catherine E Carr
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2017-07-08       Impact factor: 1.836

7.  Evaluation of Auditory Brainstem Response in Chicken Hatchlings.

Authors:  George Ordiway; Miranda McDonnell; Sandesh Mohan; Jason Tait Sanchez
Journal:  J Vis Exp       Date:  2022-04-01       Impact factor: 1.424

8.  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

9.  Space use of suburban pileated woodpeckers (Dryocopus pileatus): insights on the relationship between home range, core areas, and territory.

Authors:  Jorge A Tomasevic; John M Marzluff
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2018-04-03       Impact factor: 3.225

10.  Auditory performance in bald eagles and red-tailed hawks: a comparative study of hearing in diurnal raptors.

Authors:  JoAnn McGee; Peggy B Nelson; Julia B Ponder; Jeffrey Marr; Patrick Redig; Edward J Walsh
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2019-09-13       Impact factor: 1.836

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.