| 1 |
Front Matter |
|
|
Abstract
|
| 2 |
|
|
|
Abstract
|
| 3 |
Structure and Function in Teleost Auditory Systems |
Richard R. Fay,Arthur N. Popper |
|
Abstract
In this chapter much of the recent literature on hearing in fishes has been brought together. First, the gross morphological and ultrastructural bases of sensitivity to the pressure and the motional components of underwater sound will be considered. This will be followed by a discussion of the behavioral and physiological literature on signal processing, particularly as it relates to the structure and function of the inner ear. The goal is to contribute to a greater understanding of the organizing principles of auditory processing by fishes, and by vertebrates in general, through emphasis on comparative issues and data. However, the central auditory system or the mechanism of localization, including the possible relationships between labyrinthine and lateral line function will not be considered since they are considered in other chapters (see Schuijf andBuwalda, Chapter 2; Bullock, Chapter 16; and Northcutt, Chapter 3).
|
| 4 |
Underwater Localization — A Major Problem in Fish Acoustics |
Arie Schuijf,Robbert J. A. Buwalda |
|
Abstract
Only recently have data on acoustic localization by aquatic vertebrates become available. It has quickly become apparent that it is not possible to extrapolate localization mechanisms from terrestrial vertebrates to fishes, whereas this appears possible for certain pinniped mammals (Moore and Au 1975).
|
| 5 |
Central Auditory Pathways in Anamniotic Vertebrates |
R. Glenn Northcutt |
|
Abstract
The late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries witnessed rapid growth in descriptive neuroanatomy. This period of intensive study of nervous systems in a wide variety of vertebrates resulted in several hypotheses concerning the origin and subsequent evolution of the otic and lateralis systems. These hypotheses possess two common features: they are based on descriptive anatomical material and were not tested experimentally as the appropriate techniques did not yet exist; and they reflect certain supposed anatomical relationships among an amniotic vertebrates that were believed to form a linear series of increasingly complex groups.
|
| 6 |
|
|
|
Abstract
|
| 7 |
The Structure of the Amphibian Auditory Periphery: A Unique Experiment in Terrestrial Hearing |
R. Eric Lombard |
|
Abstract
In a period of objective reflection as preparation for writing this chapter, the question arose: What amphibian otic morphology is there to review that is not adequately covered already? Figure 4-1 illustrates the observation behind this thought. In the one-hundred year period, 1880 to 1980, the publication rate of original works on amphibian otic morphology has never been overwhelming. From 1880 the rate increases, peaks prior to WW II, and then declines precipitously to a steady rate of one paper per year over the past thirty years. This latter pace is, by current tenure committee standards, the output expected of about one-half an assistant professor! The arrows indicate the occurrence of major reviews. Using the publication of Retzius’ monograph as a start and the publication date for this chapter as a finish, a trend is evident. Apparently, the field is reviewing a declining volume of new observations at an increasing rate!
|
| 8 |
Nonlinear Properties of the Peripheral Auditory System of Anurans |
Robert R. Capranica,Anne J. M. Moffat |
|
Abstract
The vertebrate ear is highly nonlinear. This is rather surprising since its vibrational amplitudes are so minute in response to normal sound pressures. Generally, one might expect a stable mechanical system to respond linearly when disturbed slightly from its resting state. Thus the nonlinear properties of the peripheral auditory system are of considerable interest inasmuch as they can provide valuable insight into the underlying transduction process in the ear. The two most prominent nonlinear properties are inter-modulation distortion and two-tone suppression. Their characteristics have been studied extensively in the mammalian auditory system by a number of investigators. To provide a comparative view, a series of electrophysiological experiments were conducted in order to determine the nonlinear behavior of the anuran’s peripheral auditory system. The results have interesting implications regarding the origin of nonlinearities, as well as the mechanical basis for frequency analysis, in the vertebrate inner ear in general. Before presenting these findings, several relevant studies of nonlinearities in the mammalian auditory system are summarized, followed by a brief review of th
|
| 9 |
|
|
|
Abstract
|
| 10 |
The Reptilian Cochlear Duct |
Malcolm R. Miller |
|
Abstract
Before the 1950s only two major studies of the reptilian cochlea had been reported. They were the now classical works of Retzius (1884) and de Burlet (1934). In these studies some important gross and some microscopic features of a few representative species were described and figured.
|
| 11 |
Physiology and Bioacoustics in Reptiles |
Robert G. Turner |
|
Abstract
Recent anatomical studies have revealed a unique and important characteristic of the reptilian auditory system. Auditory anatomy is extremely diverse among reptiles, particularly in the cochlea where morphology can vary significantly across taxonomic families (see Miller, Chapter 6). This anatomical diversity has stimulated interest in the physiology of hearing in reptiles by providing an excellent opportunity to investigate the fundamental relation between anatomical structure and physiological response.
|
| 12 |
|
|
|
Abstract
|
| 13 |
Structure and Function of the Avian Ear |
Nozomu Saito |
|
Abstract
There is much behavioral and neurophysiological data on the auditory system of members of the class Ave but considerably less data regarding the structure and function of their receptor organs. The auditory discrimination capacities of avian species and their responses to “biologically relevant” sounds have been worked out in considerable detail. The audibility curves of the passerines and nonpasserines fall close to those of man (Dooling, Chapter 9; Dooling 1975b), while pigeons are now known to be sensitive to infrasound (Yodlowski, Kreithen, and Keeton 1977). The vocal frequency range of song birds tends to exceed the highest best frequency response of auditory neurons (Konishi 1969, Sachs and Simmott 1978). The response of the pigeon’s auditory neuron does not appear to be qualitatively different from those of the mammal’s (Sachs, Lewis, and Young 1974, Sachs, Woolf, and Sinnott, Chapter 11). Song birds are particularly interesting since they tend to respond to “biologically relevant” sounds (Dooling 1978, Leppelsack 1978, Scheich 1977) and also share with man an aptitude for vocal learning (Bullock 1977, Nottebohm, Konishi, Hillyard, and Marler 1972, Karten 1968, Konishi 1963)
|
| 14 |
Behavior and Psychophysics of Hearing in Birds |
Robert J. Dooling |
|
Abstract
It is generally agreed that birds and mammals share a common ancestry in the class Reptilia dating back about 250 million years (Brodkorb 1971). In considering the evolution of vertebrate auditory systems, it is therefore not uncommon to find birds placed between reptiles and mammals, particularly on the basis of anatomical criteria. For instance, the basilar membrane is generally short in reptiles, longer in birds, and longest in mammals, with some degree of overlap (Manley 1971, 1973).
|
| 15 |
Sound Localization in Birds |
Eric I. Knudsen |
|
Abstract
Birds perform a wide variety of acoustically guided behaviors that place a demand on their abilities to localize sound sources in space. Consider, for example, a male song-bird foraging on the forest floor. Should it hear the song of a conspecific male up in the canopy, it will localize the song and fly to the intruder to defend its territory (Weeden and Falls 1959, Falls 1963, Emlen 1971, Krebs 1976). Or consider the barn owl that silently flies over meadows at night in search of food—it hears the rustle of an unsuspecting field mouse, localizes the source, and dives for its prey (Payne and Drury 1958, Payne 1962). Notice that for birds the task of sound localization is complicated by their need to localize accurately in two dimensions: azimuth and elevation.
|
| 16 |
Response Properties of Neurons in the Avian Auditory System: Comparisons with Mammalian Homologues a |
Murray B. Sachs,Nigel K. Woolf,Joan M. Sinnott |
|
Abstract
The neural encoding of so-called “biologically relevant” sounds has been one focus for the efforts of auditory neurophysiologists in recent years (e.g., Woorden and Galambos 1972). Studies on amphibians have shown that the peripheral auditory systems of these animals are highly specialized for the processing of species-specific vocalizations (Frishkopf, Capranica, and Goldstein 1968). Cells have been described in the auditory cortex of squirrel monkeys that respond only to a very limited set of the vocalizations produced by these species (Newman and Wollberg 1973); the responses of such cells to these vocalizations are not easily explained in terms of their response to “simple” stimuli such as tones. Similarly, Leppelsack and Vogt (1976) and Scheich, Langner, and Koch (1977) have found cells in the avian field L and nucleus magnocellularis lateralis pars dorsalis whose selective responsiveness to vocalizations are not easily explained in terms of a relationship between those single frequencies that excite the neuron and the spectral content of the vocalizations. Suga (1978) has described a neural organization in the auditory cortex of bats that is highly specialized for the echoloc
|
| 17 |
|
|
|
Abstract
|
| 18 |
Directional Hearing in Terrestrial Mammals |
George Gourevitch |
|
Abstract
Whether a sound is made by prey or predator, or is that of a conspeciflc courting or signaling danger, there is little doubt that being able to locate its source in space is of great utility to an animal. One might expect, therefore, that a wide-ranging research interest in animal auditory localization would exist and would have spawned a vast literature. The contrary is true if the concern is with psychophysical determinations of sound localization and sound lateralization in terrestrial mammals, as is the case with this chapter. (Judgements about the position in space of a sound source are referred to as localization. Lateralization indicates “localization” within the head of a fused sound image that occurs when separate acoustic signals are delivered to each ear through headphones.)
|
| 19 |
Comparative Organization of Mammalian Auditory Cortex |
Moïse H. Goldstein Jr.,Paul L. Knight |
|
Abstract
A range of species will be discussed here. Domestic cats, however, will receive the most attention since most of the research on auditory cortex has used them as experimental animals.
|
| 20 |
Man as Mammal: Psychoacoustics |
William A. Yost |
|
Abstract
Phenomena such as critical bands, temporal integration, and lateralization have been studied extensively in man. The procedures used to study these phenomena and the data that have been obtained form a significant part of the foundation of mammalian psychoacoustical theory. It is not surprising, then, that these phenomena have been investigated in other animals in order to compare modes of auditory processing across species and to add to our knowledge of auditory functioning.
|
|Archiver|手机版|小黑屋|
派博传思国际
( 京公网安备110108008328)
GMT+8, 2025-8-21 03:56
发表于 2025-3-21 18:54:27
