Literature DB >> 6265262

Neural delay in the ascending auditory pathway.

A R Møller.   

Abstract

Evoked responses from the cochlea and cochlear nucleus in the rat were studied using two types of stimuli: (1) bursts of tones or noise, and (2) continuous tones or noise that were amplitude modulated with pseudorandom noise. While the responses to the first type of stimuli were averaged only in the conventional way, the responses to the continuous and amplitude modulated sounds were averaged over one period of the pseudorandom noise. This average was then cross correlated with one period of the noise. The morphology of these cross correlation functions was in many ways similar to the response to transient sounds. Recordings from the round window of the cochlea and the cochlear nucleus showed that the latencies of these peaks in the responses to tone bursts and those of the cross correlation functions obtained from the continuous tones modulated with pseudorandom noise were similar. However, the latencies of the peaks in the cross correlation functions were slightly shorter and showed less dependency on the stimulus intensity than did the peaks in the responses to tone bursts. When the responses to noise bursts and the responses to noise that was amplitude modulated were compared, it was found that the latencies of the peaks in the cross correlation functions were nearly independent of the stimulus intensity. However, the peaks in the averaged responses to noise bursts showed a decrease in latency with increasing sound intensity.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1981        PMID: 6265262     DOI: 10.1007/bf00238814

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Exp Brain Res        ISSN: 0014-4819            Impact factor:   1.972


  9 in total

1.  Latency of unit responses in cochlear nucleus determined in two different ways.

Authors:  A R Moller
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  1975-07       Impact factor: 2.714

2.  On-line identification of sensory systems using pseudorandom binary noise perturbations.

Authors:  D P O'Leary; V Honrubia
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  1975-06       Impact factor: 4.033

3.  Auditory pathways in the brain stem; a neurophysiological study.

Authors:  S JUNGERT
Journal:  Acta Otolaryngol Suppl       Date:  1958

4.  The central auditory pathway.

Authors:  H W ADES; J M BROOKHART
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  1950-05       Impact factor: 2.714

5.  Dynamic properties of primary auditory fibers compared with cells in the cochlear nucleus.

Authors:  A R Moller
Journal:  Acta Physiol Scand       Date:  1976-10

6.  Use of stochastic signals in evaluation of the dynamic properties of a neuronal system.

Authors:  A R Moller
Journal:  Scand J Rehabil Med Suppl       Date:  1974

7.  Statistical evaluation of the dynamic properties of cochlear nucleus units using stimuli modulated with pseudorandom noise.

Authors:  A R Moller
Journal:  Brain Res       Date:  1973-07-27       Impact factor: 3.252

8.  Unit responses in the cochlear nucleus of the rat to pure tones.

Authors:  A R Moller
Journal:  Acta Physiol Scand       Date:  1969-04

9.  On the choice of noise for the analysis of the peripheral auditory system.

Authors:  C Swerup
Journal:  Biol Cybern       Date:  1978-05-05       Impact factor: 2.086

  9 in total
  6 in total

1.  Prospective molecular and morphological assessment of testicular prepubertal-type teratomas in postpubertal men.

Authors:  Thomas Wagner; Glenda Scandura; Amy Roe; Luis Beltran; Jonathan Shamash; Costantine Alfrangis; Gedske Daugaard; Marianne Grantham; Daniel Berney
Journal:  Mod Pathol       Date:  2019-11-06       Impact factor: 7.842

2.  Use of pseudorandom noise in studies of auditory evoked potentials.

Authors:  A R Møller; R M Angelo
Journal:  Ann Biomed Eng       Date:  1988       Impact factor: 3.934

Review 3.  Overview of the 2022 WHO Classification of Paragangliomas and Pheochromocytomas.

Authors:  Ozgur Mete; Sylvia L Asa; Anthony J Gill; Noriko Kimura; Ronald R de Krijger; Arthur Tischler
Journal:  Endocr Pathol       Date:  2022-03-13       Impact factor: 3.943

Review 4.  Overview of the 2022 WHO Classification of Neuroendocrine Neoplasms.

Authors:  Guido Rindi; Ozgur Mete; Silvia Uccella; Olca Basturk; Stefano La Rosa; Lodewijk A A Brosens; Shereen Ezzat; Wouter W de Herder; David S Klimstra; Mauro Papotti; Sylvia L Asa
Journal:  Endocr Pathol       Date:  2022-03-16       Impact factor: 3.943

Review 5.  Overview of the 2022 WHO Classification of Pituitary Tumors.

Authors:  Sylvia L Asa; Ozgur Mete; Arie Perry; Robert Y Osamura
Journal:  Endocr Pathol       Date:  2022-03-15       Impact factor: 3.943

6.  Prognosis for Poorly Differentiated, High-Grade Rectal Neuroendocrine Carcinomas.

Authors:  Derek J Erstad; Arvind Dasari; Melissa W Taggart; Harmeet Kaur; Tsuyoshi Konishi; Brian K Bednarski; George J Chang
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2021-11-17       Impact factor: 5.344

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.