Literature DB >> 2727217

Prepulse rise time and startle reflex modification: different effects for discrete and continuous prepulses.

T D Blumenthal, B J Levey.   

Abstract

The rise time of an auditory prepulse was varied to determine whether the onset transient of the prepulse is of primary importance in the modification of the acoustic startle reflex. In Experiment 1, 20-ms long discrete prepulses were presented at a lead time of 150 ms, and prepulse rise time was varied from 0.1 to 20 ms. Although all prepulses resulted in decreased response amplitude (inhibition of startle), varying rise time from 0.1 to 20 ms had no effect on reflex modification. These results suggest that the startle response is not sensitive to prepulse rise time changes in the range used here. In Experiment 2, continuous prepulses (in which lead time equals duration) were presented. Several of these prepulses had a lead time of 150 ms and rise times ranging from 0.1 to 150 ms, whereas others had a rise time of 0.1 ms and lead times of 50 to 150 ms. The results showed that only the fast-rising, 50-ms lead time prepulse decreased response amplitude, with the other prepulses having no effect on amplitude, relative to control responding. Rise time changes generally had no effect on responding, but responses were larger at longer lead times than at shorter lead times. Response probability was inhibited by fast-rising prepulses at lead times of 50 to 130 ms. Together with the results of Experiment 1, these findings suggest that startle reflex inhibition is determined by the onset of a prepulse, and that this inhibition is not sensitive to small changes in prepulse rise time.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1989        PMID: 2727217     DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.1989.tb03148.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychophysiology        ISSN: 0048-5772            Impact factor:   4.016


  11 in total

1.  Modification of the human blink reflex by transient and sustained features of acoustic prestimulation.

Authors:  K Reilly; G Hammond
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 3.282

2.  Effects of prepulse intensity, duration, and bandwidth on perceived intensity of startling acoustic stimuli.

Authors:  Neal R Swerdlow; Terry D Blumenthal; Ashley N Sutherland; Erica Weber; Jo A Talledo
Journal:  Biol Psychol       Date:  2006-11-22       Impact factor: 3.251

Review 3.  Central nervous system physiology.

Authors:  John Rothwell; Andrea Antal; David Burke; Antony Carlsen; Dejan Georgiev; Marjan Jahanshahi; Dagmar Sternad; Josep Valls-Solé; Ulf Ziemann
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2021-10-14       Impact factor: 3.708

4.  Impaired prepulse inhibition of acoustic and tactile startle response in patients with Huntington's disease.

Authors:  N R Swerdlow; J Paulsen; D L Braff; N Butters; M A Geyer; M R Swenson
Journal:  J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry       Date:  1995-02       Impact factor: 10.154

5.  Prepulse inhibition of the startle eyeblink as an indicator of temporal summation.

Authors:  T D Blumenthal
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1995-05

6.  Lack of startle modulation by smoking cues in smokers.

Authors:  S Orain-Pelissolo; C Grillon; F Perez-Diaz; R Jouvent
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  2004-01-15       Impact factor: 4.530

7.  Parametric determinants in pre-stimulus modification of acoustic startle: interaction with ketamine.

Authors:  R S Mansbach; M A Geyer
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  1991       Impact factor: 4.530

8.  Addressing variability in the acoustic startle reflex for accurate gap detection assessment.

Authors:  Ryan J Longenecker; Inga Kristaponyte; Gregg L Nelson; Jesse W Young; Alexander V Galazyuk
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2018-03-13       Impact factor: 3.208

9.  Prepulse inhibition of acoustic startle reflex as a function of the frequency difference between prepulse and background sounds in mice.

Authors:  Sidhesh Basavaraj; Jun Yan
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-09-11       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 10.  Schizophrenia and Depression Co-Morbidity: What We have Learned from Animal Models.

Authors:  James N Samsom; Albert H C Wong
Journal:  Front Psychiatry       Date:  2015-02-18       Impact factor: 4.157

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.