Literature DB >> 32006990

Best sensitivity of temporal modulation transfer functions in laboratory mice matches the amplitude modulation embedded in vocalizations.

Huaizhen Cai1, Micheal L Dent1.   

Abstract

The perception of spectrotemporal changes is crucial for distinguishing between acoustic signals, including vocalizations. Temporal modulation transfer functions (TMTFs) have been measured in many species and reveal that the discrimination of amplitude modulation suffers at rapid modulation frequencies. TMTFs were measured in six CBA/CaJ mice in an operant conditioning procedure, where mice were trained to discriminate an 800 ms amplitude modulated white noise target from a continuous noise background. TMTFs of mice show a bandpass characteristic, with an upper limit cutoff frequency of around 567 Hz. Within the measured modulation frequencies ranging from 5 Hz to 1280 Hz, the mice show a best sensitivity for amplitude modulation at around 160 Hz. To look for a possible parallel evolution between sound perception and production in living organisms, we also analyzed the components of amplitude modulations embedded in natural ultrasonic vocalizations (USVs) emitted by this strain. We found that the cutoff frequency of amplitude modulation in most of the individual USVs is around their most sensitive range obtained from the psychoacoustic experiments. Further analyses of the duration and modulation frequency ranges of USVs indicated that the broader the frequency ranges of amplitude modulation in natural USVs, the shorter the durations of the USVs.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32006990      PMCID: PMC7043865          DOI: 10.1121/10.0000583

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am        ISSN: 0001-4966            Impact factor:   2.482


  57 in total

1.  Duration tuning in the mouse auditory midbrain.

Authors:  A Brand; R Urban; B Grothe
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 2.714

2.  Spectrographic analyses reveal signals of individuality and kinship in the ultrasonic courtship vocalizations of wild house mice.

Authors:  Frauke Hoffmann; Kerstin Musolf; Dustin J Penn
Journal:  Physiol Behav       Date:  2011-10-21

3.  Mice produce ultrasonic vocalizations by intra-laryngeal planar impinging jets.

Authors:  Elena Mahrt; Anurag Agarwal; David Perkel; Christine Portfors; Coen P H Elemans
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  2016-10-10       Impact factor: 10.834

4.  Frequency difference limens and auditory cue trading in CBA/CaJ mice (Mus musculus).

Authors:  Kelly E Radziwon; Micheal L Dent
Journal:  Behav Processes       Date:  2014-05-05       Impact factor: 1.777

5.  The modulation transfer function for speech intelligibility.

Authors:  Taffeta M Elliott; Frédéric E Theunissen
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2009-03-06       Impact factor: 4.475

6.  Detection of sinusoidally amplitude modulated noise by the chinchilla.

Authors:  R J Salvi; D M Giraudi; D Henderson; R P Hamernik
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1982-02       Impact factor: 1.840

Review 7.  Determinants of the mouse ultrasonic vocal structure and repertoire.

Authors:  Jesse Heckman; Brigit McGuinness; Tansu Celikel; Bernhard Englitz
Journal:  Neurosci Biobehav Rev       Date:  2016-04-07       Impact factor: 8.989

8.  Spectrotemporal structure of receptive fields in areas AI and AAF of mouse auditory cortex.

Authors:  Jennifer F Linden; Robert C Liu; Maneesh Sahani; Christoph E Schreiner; Michael M Merzenich
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2003-06-18       Impact factor: 2.714

9.  Early-Life Social Isolation Influences Mouse Ultrasonic Vocalizations during Male-Male Social Encounters.

Authors:  Sarah M Keesom; Caitlyn J Finton; Gabrielle L Sell; Laura M Hurley
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-01-05       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Origins of scale invariance in vocalization sequences and speech.

Authors:  Fatemeh Khatami; Markus Wöhr; Heather L Read; Monty A Escabí
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2018-04-16       Impact factor: 4.475

View more
  3 in total

1.  Selecting auditory alerting stimuli for eagles on the basis of auditory evoked potentials.

Authors:  Benjamin Goller; Patrice Baumhardt; Ernesto Dominguez-Villegas; Todd Katzner; Esteban Fernández-Juricic; Jeffrey R Lucas
Journal:  Conserv Physiol       Date:  2022-09-16       Impact factor: 3.252

2.  Blast trauma affects production and perception of mouse ultrasonic vocalizations.

Authors:  Kali Burke; Kathleen A Ohman; Senthilvelan Manohar; Micheal L Dent
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2022-02       Impact factor: 2.482

3.  Long term changes to auditory sensitivity following blast trauma in mice.

Authors:  Kali Burke; Senthilvelan Manohar; Micheal L Dent
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2021-02-12       Impact factor: 3.208

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.