| Literature DB >> 30232547 |
Kazuo Okanoya1,2, Shigeto Yosida2, Catherine M Barone3, Daniel T Applegate3, Elizabeth F Brittan-Powell4, Robert J Dooling4, Thomas J Park5.
Abstract
Naked mole-rats are extremely social and extremely vocal rodents, displaying a wide range of functionally distinct call types and vocalizing almost continuously. Their vocalizations are low frequency, and a behavioral audiogram has shown that naked mole-rats, like other subterranean mammals, hear only low frequencies. Hence, the frequency range of their hearing and vocalizations appears to be well matched. However, even at low frequencies, naked mole-rats show very poor auditory thresholds, suggesting vocal communication may be effective only over short distances. However, in a tunnel environment where low frequency sounds propagate well and background noise is low, it may be that vocalizations travel considerable distances at suprathreshold intensities. Here, we confirmed hearing sensitivity using the auditory brainstem response; we characterized signature and alarm calls in intensity and frequency domains and we measured the effects of propagation through tubes with the diameter of naked mole-rat tunnels. Signature calls-used for intimate communication-could travel 3-8 m at suprathreshold intensities, and alarm calls (lower frequency and higher intensity), could travel up to 15 m. Despite this species' poor hearing sensitivity, the naked mole-rat displays a functional, coupled auditory-vocal communication system-a hallmark principle of acoustic communication systems across taxa.Entities:
Keywords: Alarm call; Auditory brainstem response; Auditory threshold; Signature call; Vocal communication
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30232547 PMCID: PMC6208660 DOI: 10.1007/s00359-018-1287-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol ISSN: 0340-7594 Impact factor: 1.836
Fig. 1Audiograms for naked mole-rats and gerbils. Behavioral audiogram for the naked mole-rat (closed circle) re-drawn from Heffner and Heffner (1993; data points for lowest two frequencies tested not shown). A behavioral audiogram for the gerbil (Ryan 1976; open triangle) is shown for comparison. NMR naked mole-rat
Fig. 2ABR waveforms evoked by a 2 kHz tone train presented at different intensities for a gerbil and a naked mole-rat. Arrows indicate thresholds for this frequency, 22.5 dB for the gerbil and 52.5 dB for the naked mole-rat. Due to the differences in thresholds, the range of intensities shown are different for the two animals. Note that the scale bars (uV) also differ between species because ABR waveform amplitudes for the naked mole-rat were smaller in general compared to the gerbil. This species difference was consistent across all animals tested
Fig. 3ABR-derived audiograms for four naked mole-rats and two gerbils. Error bars are s.e.m.
Fig. 4shows representative spectrograms and average power spectra from alarm calls and signature calls. a Alarm calls from five different individual naked mole-rats, five calls each (each row is from one animal). The scale bar in the upper left is 100 ms. b Signature calls from five different individual naked mole-rats, five calls each (each row is from one animal). The scale bar in the upper left is 100 ms. c Average power spectra from five animals, five calls each for alarm and signature calls
Fig. 5Attenuation through pipes as a function of distance and frequency. Tones with frequencies of 0.5, 3.1, and 10.6 kHz were played through plain PVC pipe (dashed lines with open symbols, “P” in the legend) or played through PVC pipe lined with soft rice paper (solid lines with solid symbols, “R” in the legend)
Fig. 6Spectrograms of a signature calls, and an alarm call after transmission through 0.2 and 3.2 m pipes