Literature DB >> 8331375

Parallel pathways mediating both sound localization and gaze control in the forebrain and midbrain of the barn owl.

E I Knudsen1, P F Knudsen, T Masino.   

Abstract

The hypothesis that sound localization and gaze control are mediated in parallel in the midbrain and forebrain was tested in the barn owl. The midbrain pathway for gaze control was interrupted by reversible inactivation (muscimol injection) or lesion of the optic tectum. Auditory input to the forebrain was disrupted by reversible inactivation or lesion of the primary thalamic auditory nucleus, nucleus ovoidalis (homolog of the medial geniculate nucleus). Barn owls were trained to orient their gaze toward auditory or visual stimuli presented from random locations in a darkened sound chamber. Auditory and visual test stimuli were brief so that the stimulus was over before the orienting response was completed. The accuracy and kinetics of the orienting responses were measured with a search coil attached to the head. Unilateral inactivation of the optic tectum had immediate and long-lasting effects on auditory orienting behavior. The owls failed to respond on a high percentage of trials when the auditory test stimulus was located on the side contralateral to the inactivated tectum. When they did respond, the response was usually (but not always) short of the target, and the latency of the response was abnormally long. When the auditory stimulus was located on the side ipsilateral to the inactivated tectum, responses were reliable and accurate, and the latency of responses was shorter than normal. In a tectally lesioned animal, response probability and latency to contralateral sounds returned to normal within 2 weeks, but the increase in response error (due to undershooting) persisted for at least 12 weeks. Despite abnormalities in the response, all of the owls were capable of localizing and orienting to contralateral auditory stimuli on some trials with the optic tectum inactivated or lesioned. This was not true for contralateral visual stimuli. Immediately following tectal inactivation, the owls exhibited complete neglect for visual stimuli located more than 20 degrees to the contralateral side (i.e., beyond the edge of the visual field of the ipsilateral eye). In the tectally lesioned animal, this neglect diminished with time. Unilateral inactivation of nucleus ovoidalis had different effects in three owls. Response error to contralateral sound sources increased for one owl and decreased for two; response error to ipsilateral sources did not change significantly for any. The probability of response to ipsilateral (but not contralateral) stimuli decreased for one owl. The latency of response to ipsilateral (but not contralateral) stimuli increased for one and decreased for another. All of the owls, however, routinely localized and oriented toward ipsilateral and contralateral auditory stimuli with nucleus ovoidalis inactivated.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8331375      PMCID: PMC6576666     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurosci        ISSN: 0270-6474            Impact factor:   6.167


  22 in total

1.  Adaptive axonal remodeling in the midbrain auditory space map.

Authors:  W M DeBello; D E Feldman; E I Knudsen
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2001-05-01       Impact factor: 6.167

2.  Comparison of midbrain and thalamic space-specific neurons in barn owls.

Authors:  María Lucía Pérez; José Luis Peña
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 2.714

3.  Sensitivity to interaural time difference and representation of azimuth in central nucleus of inferior colliculus in the barn owl.

Authors:  Peter Bremen; Iris Poganiatz; Mark von Campenhausen; Hermann Wagner
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2006-09-26       Impact factor: 1.836

4.  Auditory spatial tuning at the crossroads of the midbrain and forebrain.

Authors:  M Lucía Pérez; Sharad J Shanbhag; José Luis Peña
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2009-07-01       Impact factor: 2.714

5.  Space coding by gamma oscillations in the barn owl optic tectum.

Authors:  Devarajan Sridharan; Kwabena Boahen; Eric I Knudsen
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2011-02-16       Impact factor: 2.714

6.  Target-approaching behavior of barn owls (Tyto alba): influence of sound frequency.

Authors:  Martin Singheiser; Dennis T T Plachta; Sandra Brill; Peter Bremen; Robert F van der Willigen; Hermann Wagner
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2010-02-07       Impact factor: 1.836

7.  Contribution of the forebrain archistriatal gaze fields to auditory orienting behavior in the barn owl.

Authors:  E I Knudsen; P F Knudsen
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1996-02       Impact factor: 1.972

8.  Representation of sound localization cues in the auditory thalamus of the barn owl.

Authors:  L Proctor; M Konishi
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  1997-09-16       Impact factor: 11.205

9.  Adaptive plasticity in the auditory thalamus of juvenile barn owls.

Authors:  Greg L Miller; Eric I Knudsen
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2003-02-01       Impact factor: 6.167

10.  Multiplicative auditory spatial receptive fields created by a hierarchy of population codes.

Authors:  Brian J Fischer; Charles H Anderson; José Luis Peña
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2009-11-24       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.