Auditory processing in birds

Current Opinion in Neurobiology

Volumn 10, Issue 4, 2000, Pages 474-481

  Köppl, Christine ^a   Manley, Geoffrey A ^a   Konishi, Masakazu ^b  

^a TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF MUNICH   (Germany)

^b CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

4 AMINOBUTYRIC ACID;

ACOUSTIC NERVE FIBER; ANIMAL TISSUE; AUDITORY NERVOUS SYSTEM; BIRD; BRAIN STEM; CELL DIFFERENTIATION; CELL REGENERATION; CHANNEL GATING; FEEDBACK SYSTEM; FREQUENCY DISCRIMINATION; GABAERGIC SYSTEM; HAIR CELL; INNER EAR; MAGNOCELLULAR NUCLEUS; MOTOR SYSTEM; NERVE CELL PLASTICITY; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; SOUND DETECTION; THALAMUS INTRALAMINAR NUCLEUS; VOCALIZATION;

EID: 0342297885     PISSN: 09594388     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0959-4388(00)00110-0     Document Type: Review

References (76)

1. Gleich O., Manley G.A. The hearing organ of birds and their relatives. Dooling R., Popper A.N., Fay R.R Comparative Hearing: Birds and Reptiles, Springer Handbook of Auditory Research. 2000;70-138 Springer Verlag, New York.
2. Necker R. The avian ear and hearing. Whittow G.C. Sturkie's Avian Physiology, edn 5. 2000;21-38 Academic Press, London, NY.
3. Gleich O., Manley G.A., Mandl A., Dooling R. The basilar papilla of the canary and the zebra finch: a quantitative scanning electron microscopic description. J Morphol. 221:1994;1-24.
4. Köppl C., Gleich O., Schwabedissen G., Siegl E., Manley G.A. Fine structure of the basilar papilla of the Emu: implications for the evolution of avian hair-cell types. Hear Res. 126:1998;99-112.
5. + channel isoforms along the tonotopic gradient of the chicken's cochlea. Neuron. 19:1997;1061-1075.
6. •].
7. Ramanathan K., Michael T.H., Fuchs P.A. β subunits modulate alternatively-spliced, large conductance, calcium-activated potassium channels of avian hair cells. J Neurosci. 20:2000;1675-1684.
8. •], the authors provide two useful summaries of the molecular substrates that contribute to the gradient in frequency selectivity of hair cells along the avian auditory papilla.
9. 2+ channels in the chicken's cochlea. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 94:1997;14889-14893.
10. Black D.L. Splicing in the inner ear: a familiar tune, but what are the instruments? Neuron. 20:1998;165-168.
11. Manley G.A. Design plasticity in the evolution of the amniote hearing organ. Manley G.A., Fastl H., Kössl M., Oeckinghaus H., Klump G.M. Auditory Worlds: Sensory Analysis and Perception in Animals and Man. 2000;7-19 Wiley-VCH, Weinheim.
12. Manley G.A., Köppl C. Phylogenetic development of the cochlea and its innervation. Curr Opin Neurobiol. 8:1998;468-474.
13. Fischer F.P. General pattern and morphological specializations of the avian cochlea. Scanning Microsc. 8:1994;351-364.
14. Fischer F.P. Hair cell morphology and innervation in the basilar papilla of the emu (Dromaius novaehollandiae). Hear Res. 121:1998;112-124.
15. Dallos P. Overview: cochlear neurobiology. Dallos P., Popper A.N., Fay R.R. The Cochlea. 1996;1-43 Springer Verlag, New York.
16. Hudspeth A.J. Mechanical amplification of stimuli by hair cells. Curr Opin Neurobiol. 7:1997;480-486.
17. Manley G.A. Do non-mammals have a cochlear amplifier? Wada H., Takasaka T., Ohyama K., Ikeda K., Koike T. Recent Developments in Auditory Mechanics. 2000;499-505 World Scientific Publishers, Singapore.
18. Taschenberger G., Manley G.A. Spontaneous otoacoustic emissions in the barn owl. Hear Res. 110:1997;61-76.
19. •].
20. •], this work demonstrates that auditory nerve fibres in birds, like their mammalian counterparts, show a non-linear component in their rate-intensity functions that is restricted to the respective fibres' most sensitive frequencies. It is argued that this reflects the operation of a cochlear amplifier in both birds and mammals.
21. Kaiser A., Manley G.A. Physiology of single putative efferents in the chicken. J Neurophysiol. 72:1994;2966-2979.
22. Cole K.S., Gummer A.W. A double-label study of efferent projections to the cochlea of the chicken, Gallus domesticus. Exp Brain Res. 82:1990;585-588.
23. Manley G.A., Taschenberger G., Oeckinghaus H. Influence of contralateral acoustic stimulation on distortion-product and spontaneous otoacoustic emissions in the barn owl. Hear Res. 138:1999;1-12. In barn owls, contralateral sound can effect clear changes in the amplitudes of otoacoustic emissions, an effect presumably mediated by brainstem-crossing efferent fibres. The effects are complex and highly frequency selective.
24. ••].
25. ••] provide two very useful updated summaries of the rapidly developing field of recovery and hair-cell regeneration after damage in the avian basilar papilla.
26. Plontke S.K.R., Lifshitz J., Saunders J.C. Distribution of rate-intensity function types in chick cochlear nerve after exposure to intense sound. Brain Res. 842:1999;262-274.
27. Müller M., Smolders J.W.T. Responses of auditory nerve fibers innervating regenerated hair cells after local application of gentamycin at the round window of the cochlea in the pigeon. Hear Res. 131:1999;153-169.
28. Gleich O., Dooling R.J., Presson J.C. Evidence for supporting cell proliferation and hair cell differentiation in the basilar papilla of adult Belgian waterslager canaries (Serinus canaries). J Comp Neurol. 377:1997;5-14.
29. Ryals B.M., Dooling R.J., Westbrook E., Dent M., MacKenzie A., Larsen O.N. Avian species differences in susceptibility to noise exposure. Hear Res. 131:1999;71-88.
30. Carr C.E., Code R.A. The central auditory system of reptiles and birds. Dooling R., Popper A.N., Fay R.R. Comparative Hearing: Birds and Reptiles, Springer Handbook of Auditory Research. 2000;197-248 Springer Verlag, New York.
31. Agmon-Snir H., Carr C.E., Rinzel R. The role of dendrites in auditory coincidence detection. Nature. 393:1998;268-272.
32. Carr C.E., Konishi M. A circuit for detection of interaural time differences in the brain stem of the barn owl. J Neurosci. 10:1990;3227-3246.
33. Köppl C. Phase locking to high frequencies in the auditory nerve and cochlear nucleus magnocellularis of the barn owl, Tyto alba. J Neurosci. 17:1997;3312-3321.
34. Peña J.L., Viete S., Albeck Y., Konishi M. Tolerance to sound intensity of binaural coincidence detection in the nucleus laminaris of the owl. J Neurosci. 16:1996;7046-7054.
35. Yang L., Monsivais P., Rubel E.W. The superior olivary nucleus and its influence on nucleus laminaris: a source of inhibitory feedback for coincidence detection in the avian auditory brainstem. J Neurosci. 19:1999;2313-2325. An in vitro study on chicken brain slices using stimulation of inhibitory input neurones to study the effects of GABAergic inputs to NL. This goes part of the way towards proving that, in vivo, it is indeed these neurones that mediate the effects seen previously with direct transmitter application. The results also show that the inhibitory inputs are likely to be long-lasting and temporally unstructured.
36. Monsivais P., Yang L., Rubel E. GABAergic inhibition in nucleus magnocellularis: implications for phase-locking in the avian auditory brainstem. J Neurosci. 20:2000;2954-2963.
37. Funabiki K., Koyano K., Ohmori H. The role of GABAergic inputs for coincidence detection in the neurones of nucleus laminaris of the chick. J Physiol. 503:1998;851-869.
38. Lachica E.A., Rübsamen R., Rubel E.W. GABAergic terminals in nucleus magnocellularis and laminaris originate from the superior olivary nucleus. J Comp Neurol. 348:1994;403-418.
39. Brückner S., Hyson R.L. Effect of GABA on the processing of interaural time differences in nucleus laminaris neurons in the chick. Eur J Neurosci. 10:1998;3438-3450.
40. Nordeen K.W., Nordeen E.J. Auditory feedback is necessary for the maintenance of stereotyped song in adult zebra finches. Behav Neural Biol. 57:1992;58-66.
41. Okanoya K., Yamaguchi A. Adult Bengalese finches (Lonchura striata var. domestica) require real-time auditory feedback to produce normal song syntax. J Neurobiol. 4:1997;343-356.
42. Woolley S.M., Rubel E.W. Bengalese finches Lonchura Striata domestica depend upon auditory feedback for the maintenance of adult song. J Neurosci. 17:1997;6380-6390.
43. Leonardo A., Konishi M. Decrystallization of adult birdsong by perturbation of auditory feedback. Nature. 399:1999;466-470. Computer-controlled manipulation of auditory feedback is shown to cause dramatic changes in the song of adult zebra finches. When normal feedback is restored, the birds gradually re-establish their original song.
44. Plummer T.K., Striedter G.F. Auditory responses in the vocal motor system of budgerigars. J Neurobiol. 42:2000;79-94.
45. Bottjer S.W., Miesner E.A., Arnold A.P. Forebrain lesions disrupt development but not maintenance of song in passerine birds. Science. 224:1984;901-903.
46. Benton S., Nelson D.A., Marler P., DeVoogd T.J. Anterior forebrain pathway is needed for stable song expression in adult male white-crowned sparrows (Zonotrichia leucophrys). Behav Brain Res. 96:1998;135-150.
47. Williams H., Mehta N. Changes in adult zebra finch song require a forebrain nucleus that is not necessary for song production. J Neurobiol. 39:1999;14-28.
48. Scharff C., Nottebohm F., Cynx J. Conspecific and heterospecific song discrimination in male zebra finches with lesions in the anterior forebrain pathway. J Neurobiol. 36:1998;81-90.
49. Burt J.M., Lent K.L., Beecher M.D., Brenowitz E.A. Lesions of the anterior forebrain song control pathway in female canaries affect song perception in an operant task. J Neurobiol. 42:2000;1-13.
50. Kittelberger J.M., Mooney R. Lesions of an avian forebrain nucleus that disrupt song development alter synaptic connectivity and transmission in the vocal pre-motor pathway. J Neurosci. 19:1999;9385-9398.
51. Katz L.C., Gurney M.E. Auditory responses in the zebra finch's motor system for song. Brain Res. 221:1981;192-197.
52. Lewicki M.S. Intracellular characterization of song-specific neurons in the zebra finch auditory forebrain. J Neurosci. 16:1996;5854-5863.
53. Mooney R. Different subthreshold mechanisms underlie song selectivity in identified HVc neurons of the zebra finch. J Neurosci. 20:2000;5420-5436. This paper is the first to provide convincing evidence that the RA-projecting neurones, X-projecting neurones, and interneurones of HVC in anesthetised birds respond to auditory stimuli, particularly BOS.
54. Hessler N.A., Doupe A.J. Singing-related neural activity in a dorsal forebrain-basal ganglia circuit of adult zebra finches. J Neurosci. 19:1999;10461-10481. This paper is the first to show that song-related multi-unit activities and responses to song playback occur in the LMAN of awake birds.
55. Williams H., Nottebohm F. Auditory responses in avian vocal motor neurons: a motor theory for song perception in birds. Science. 229:1985;279-282.
56. McCasland J.S. Neuronal control of bird song production. J Neurosci. 7:1987;23-39.
57. Dave A.S., Yu A.C., Margoliash D. Behavioral state modulation of auditory activity in a vocal motor system. Science. 282:1998;2250-2254.
58. Schmidt M.F., Konishi M. Gating of auditory responses in the vocal control system of awake songbirds. Nat Neurosci. 1:1998;513-518.
59. Williams H. Multiple representations and auditory-motor interactions in the avian song system. Ann NY Acad Sci. 563:1989;148-164.
60. Volman S.F. Development of neural selectivity for birdsong during vocal learning. J Neurosci. 13:1993;4737-4747.
61. Doupe A.J. Song- and order-selective neurons in the songbird anterior forebrain and their emergence during vocal development. J Neurosci. 17:1997;1147-1167.
62. •].
63. •] report song-specific neurones in Area X that respond to both BOS and a tutor song that has been heard but not sung. The first paper uses 60 day old birds and the second one older birds to examine whether responding to the two songs is transitory at 60 days. The results show that the phenomenon persists in adulthood, although these neurones are much less song-selective than those in normal adults. If auditory exposure alone can shape the stimulus selectivity of song-specific neurones, it might mean that these neurones carry the memory trace (template) of the tutor song.
64. Theunissen F.E., Doupe A.J. Temporal and spectral sensitivity of complex auditory neurons in the nucleus HVc of male zebra finches. J Neurosci. 18:1998;3786-3802.
65. Theunissen F.E., Sen K., Doupe A.J. Spectral-temporal receptive fields of non-linear auditory neurons obtained using natural sounds. J Neurosci. 20:2000;2315-2331. This paper describes a reverse correlation method in which natural stimuli instead of white noise can be used. Song-specific neurones respond selectively to specific sequences of complex sounds contained in the song. This paper discusses how to predict the most effective temporal and spectral patterns for such neurones from their responses to different components of such patterns. The predictions made are incomplete, but this type of logical approach is essential for finding the cues detected by song-specific neurones.
66. Janata P., Margoliash D. Gradual emergence of song selectivity in sensorimotor structures of the male zebra finch song system. J Neurosci. 19:1999;5108-5118.
67. Ball G.F., Gentner T.Q. They're playing our song: gene expression and birdsong perception. Neuron. 21:1998;271-274.
68. Ribeiro S., Cecchi G.A., Magnasco M.O., Mello C.V. Toward a song code: evidence for a syllabic representation in the canary brain. Neuron. 21:1998;359-371.
69. Knudsen E.I. Mechanisms of experience-dependent plasticity in the auditory localization pathway of the barn owl. J Comp Physiol. 185:1999;305-321. A good updated summary of the large amount of work done in the author's laboratory on both the role of vision in calibrating the auditory space map and the period of life during which this process can occur.
70. Knudsen E.I., Konishi M. Center-surround organization of auditory receptive fields in the owl. Science. 202:1978;778-780.
71. A-mediated inhibition. Science. 284:1999;962-965. Displacement of the visual field by prisms in young owls causes shifts in the ITD to which map loci are tuned. These shifts are attributable to changes in the balance between excitation and inhibition that maintain receptive field organisation.
72. Miller G.L., Knudsen E.I. Early visual experience shapes the representation of auditory space in the forebrain gaze fields of the barn owl. J Neurosci. 19:1999;2326-2336.
73. Cohen Y.E., Miller G.L., Knudsen E.I. Forebrain pathway for auditory space processing in the barn owl. Neurophysiol. 79:1998;891-902.
74. Blauert J., Lindemann W. Spatial mapping of intercranial auditory events for various degrees of interaural coherence. J Acoust Soc Am. 79:1986;806-813.
75. Jeffress L.A., Blodgett H.C., Deatherage B.H. Effect of interaural correlation on the precision of centering a noise. J Acoust Soc Am. 32:1962;1122-1123.
76. Saberi K., Takahashi Y., Konishi M., Albeck Y., Arthur B.J., Farahbod H. Effects of interaural decorrelation on neural and behavioral detection of spatial cues. Neuron. 21:1998;789-798.