Differential influence of frequency, timing, and intensity cues in a complex acoustic categorization task

Journal of Neurophysiology

Volumn 104, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 1426-1437

  Nagel, Katherine I ^a   McLendon, Helen M ^a   Doupe, Allison J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACOUSTIC NERVE FIBER; ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ARTICLE; AUDITORY ORIENTATION; AUDITORY STIMULATION; CLASSIFICATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; MALE; NOISE; NONHUMAN; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SINGING; SONGBIRD; SOUND INTENSITY; SOUND LEVEL MEASUREMENT; SOUND TRANSMISSION;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; ANIMALS; AUDITORY PERCEPTION; CUES; DISCRIMINATION LEARNING; FEMALE; FINCHES; MALE; TIME FACTORS; VOCALIZATION, ANIMAL;

EID: 77957202748     PISSN: 00223077     EISSN: 15221598     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1152/jn.00028.2010     Document Type: Article

References (68)

1. Avendaño C, Deng L, Hermansky H, Gold B. The analysis and representation of speech. In: Speech Processing in the Auditory System. New York: Springer-Verlag, 2004, p. 63-100.
2. Billimoria CP, Kraus BJ, Narayan R, Maddox RK, Sen K. Invariance and sensitivity to intensity in neural discrimination of natural sounds. J Neurosci 28: 6304-6308, 2009.
3. Becker PH. The coding of species-specific characteristics in bird sounds. In: Acoustic Communication in Birds, edited by Kroodsma DE, Miller EH, Ouellet H. New York: Academic, 1982, vol. 1, p. 213-252.
4. Beecher MD, Campbell SE, Burt JM. Song perception in the song sparrow: birds classify by song type but not by singer. Anim Behav 47: 1343-1351, 1994.
5. Brooks RJ, Falls JB. Individual recognition by song in white-throated sparrows. II. Effects of location. Can J Zool 53: 1412-1420, 1975a.
6. Brooks RJ, Falls JB. Individual recognition by song in white-throated sparrows. III. Song features used in individual recognition. Can J Zool 53: 1749-1761, 1975b.
7. Burt JM, Lent KL, Beecher MD, Brenowitz EA. Lesions of the anterior forebrain song control pathway in female canaries affect song perception in an operant task. J Neurobiol 42: 1-13, 2000. (Pubitemid 30020621)
8. Cadieu C, Kouh M, Pasupathy A, Connor CE, Riesenhuber M, Poggio T. A model of V4 shape selectivity and invariance. J Neurophysiol 98: 1733-1750, 2007.
9. Cox DD, Meier P, Oertelt N, DiCarlo JJ. Breaking position-invariant object recognition. Nat Neurosci 8: 1145-1147, 2005.
10. Cooper BG, Goller F. Physiological insights into the social-context- dependent changes in the rhythm of the song motor program. J Neurophysiol 95: 3798-3809, 2006. (Pubitemid 43846183)
11. Cynx J, Gell C. Social mediation of vocal amplitude in a songbird, Taeniopygia guttata. Anim Behav 67: 451-455, 2004.
12. Dooling RJ, Haskell RJ. Auditory duration discrimination in the parakeet. J Acoust Soc Am 63: 1640-1642, 1978.
13. Dooling RJ, Lohr B, Dent ML Hearing in birds and reptiles. In: Comparative Hearing, edited by Dooling RJ, Fay RR, Popper AN. New York: Springer-Verlag, 2000, p. 308-360.
14. Dooling RJ, Park TJ, Brown SD, Okanoya K. Perceptual organization of acoustic stimuli by budgerigars (Melopsittacus undulatus). II. Vocal signals. J Comp Neurol 101: 367-381, 1987.
15. Drew PJ, Abbott LF. Model of song selectivity and sequence generation in area HVc of the songbird. J Neurophysiol 89: 2697-2706, 2003.
16. Falls JB. Individual recognition by sound in birds. In: Acoustic Communication in Birds, edited by Kroodsma DE, Miller EH, Quellet H. New York: Academic, 1982, vol. 2, p. 237-278.
17. Flanagan RM, Golden M. Phase vocoder. Bell Syst Techn J 45: 1493-1509, 1966.
18. Fortune ES, Margoliash D. Cytoarchitectonic organization and morphology of cells of the field L complex in male zebra finches (Taenopygia guttata). J Comp Neurol 325: 388-404, 1992.
19. Fortune ES, Margoliash D. Parallel pathways and convergence onto HVc and adjacent neostriatum of adult zebra finches (Taeniopygia guttata). J Comp Neurol 360: 413-441, 1995.
20. Freedman DJ, Riesenhuber M, Poggio T, Miller EK. Categorical representation of visual stimuli in the primate prefrontal cortex. Science 291: 312-316, 2001. (Pubitemid 32096318)
21. Galindo-Leon EE, Lin FG, Liu RC. Inhibitory plasticity in a lateral band improves cortical detection of natural vocalizations. Neuron: 705-716, 2009.
22. Geisler CD. From Sound to Synapse: Physiology of the Mammalian Ear. Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press, 1998.
23. Gentner TQ, Hulse SH. Perceptual mechanisms for individual vocal recognition in European starlings, Sturnus vulgaris. Anim Behav 56: 579-594, 1998.
24. Gentner TQ, Hulse SH, Bentley GE, Ball GF. Individual vocal recognition and the effect of partial lesions to HVc on discrimination, learning, and categorization of conspecific song in adult songbirds. J Neurobiol 42: 117-133, 2000.
25. Glaze CM, Troyer TW. Temporal structure in zebra finch song: implications for motor coding. J Neurosci 26: 991-1005, 2006.
26. Gross-Isserhof R, Lancet D. Concentration-dependent changes of perceived odor quality. Chem Senses 13: 191-204, 1998.
27. Hulse SH, Cynx J. Relative pitch perception is constrained by absolute pitch in songbirds. J Comp Psychol 99: 176-196, 1985.
28. Hulse SH, Page SC, Braaten RF. Frequency range size and the frequency range constraint in auditory perception by European starlings (Sturnus vulgaris). Anim Learn Behav 18: 238-245, 1990.
29. Hung CP, Kreiman G, Poggio T, DiCarlo JJ. Fast readout of object identity from macaque inferior temporal cortex. Science 310: 863-866, 2005. (Pubitemid 41567346)
30. Jusczyk PW, Luce PA. Speech perception and spoken word recognition: past and present. Ear Hear 23: 2-40, 2002.
31. Kao MH, Brainard MS. Lesions of an avian basal ganglia circuit prevent context-dependent changes to song variability. J Neurophysiol 96: 1441-1455, 2006.
32. Kourtzi Z, DiCarlo JJ. Learning and neural plasticity in visual object recognition. Curr Opin Neurobiol 16: 152-158, 2006.
33. Kreiman G, Hung CP, Kraskov A, Quiroga RQ, Poggio T, DiCarlo JJ. Object selectivity of local field potentials and spikes in the macaque inferior temporal cortex. Neuron 49: 433-445, 2006. (Pubitemid 43152244)
34. Larson E, Billimoria CP, Sen K. A biologically plausible computational model for auditory object recognition. J Neurophysiol 101: 323-331, 2009.
35. Liu RC, Schreiner CE. Auditory cortical detection and discrimination correlates with communicative significance. PLoS Biol 5: 1426-1439, 2007.
36. Marler P. Bird songs and mate selection. In: Animal Sounds and Communication, edited by Lanyon WE, Tavolga WN. Washington, DC: Am Inst Biol Sci, 1960, p. 348-367.
37. Miller DB. The acoustic basis of mate recognition by female zebra finches (Taeniopygia guttata). Anim Behav 27: 376-380, 1979.
38. Miller EH. Character and variance shift in the acoustic signals of birds. In: Acoustic Communication in Birds, edited by Kroodsma DE, Miller EH, Ouellet H. New York: Academic, 1982, vol. 1, p. 253-285.
39. Naugib MD, Todt D. Recognition of neighbors' song in a species with large and complex song repertoires: the Thrush Nightingale. J Avian Biol 29: 155-160, 1998. (Pubitemid 28300860)
40. Nagel KI, Doupe AJ. Temporal processing and adaptation in the songbird auditory forebrain. Neuron 51: 845-859, 2006. (Pubitemid 44374913)
41. Nagel KI, Doupe AJ. Organizing principles of spectro-temporal encoding in the avian primary auditory area field L. Neuron 58: 938-955, 2008.
42. Narayan R, Graña G, Sen K. Distinct time scales in cortical discrimination of natural sounds in songbirds. J Neurophysiol 96: 252-258, 2006. (Pubitemid 44015357)
43. Nelson DA. Song frequency as a cue for recognition of species and individuals in the field sparrow (Spizella pusilla). J Comp Psychol 103: 171-176, 1989.
44. Nelson DA, Marler P. Categorical perception of a natural stimulus continuum: birdsong. Science 244: 976-978, 1989. (Pubitemid 19152288)
45. Nowicki S, Searcy WA, Peters S. Quality of song learning affects female response to male bird song. Proc Biol Sci 269: 1949-1954, 2002.
46. Okanoya K, Dooling RJ. Detection of gaps in noise by budgerigars (Melopsittacus undulatus) and zebra finches (Peophila guttata). Hear Res 50: 185-192, 1990.
47. O'Lochlen AL, Beecher MD. Mate, neighbour and stranger songs: a female song sparrow perspective. Anim Behav 58: 13-20, 1999.
48. O'Shaughnessy D. Speaker recognition. IEEE Acoust Speech Signal Process 3: 4-17, 1986.
49. Prather JF, Nowicki S, Anderson RC, Peters S, Mooney R. Neural correlates of categorical perception in learned vocal communication. Nat Neurosci 12: 221-228, 2009.
50. 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: 81-90, 1998. (Pubitemid 28292970)
51. Sen K, Theunissen FE, Doupe AJ. Feature analysis of natural sounds in the songbird auditory forebrain. J Neurophysiol 86: 1445-1458, 2001. (Pubitemid 32847788)
52. Serre T, Oliva A, Poggio T. A feedforward architecture accounts for rapid categorization. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104: 6424-6249, 2007.
53. Shamir M, Sen K, Colburn HS. Temporal coding of time-varying stimuli. Neural Comput 19: 3239-3261, 2007.
54. Stoddard PK, Beecher MD, Horning CL, Campbell SE. Recognition of individual neighors by song in the song sparrow, a species with song repertoires. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 29: 211-215, 1991.
55. Stripling R, Milewski L, Kruse AA, Clayton DF. Rapidly learned song-discrimination without behavioral reinforcement in adult male zebra finches (Taeniopygia guttata). Neurobiol Learn Mem 79: 41-50, 2003. (Pubitemid 36071189)
56. Sugrue LP, Corrado GS, Newsome WT. Choosing the greater of two goods: neural currencies for valuation and decision making. Nat Rev Neurosci 6: 363-375, 2005.
57. Theunissen FE, Sen K, Doupe AJ. Spectral-temporal receptive fields of nonlinear auditory neurons obtained using natural sounds. J Neurosci 20: 2315-2331, 2000. (Pubitemid 30230085)
58. Vates GE, Broome BM, Mello CV, Nottebohm F. Auditory pathways of caudal telencephalon and their relation to the song system of adult male zebra finches. J Comp Neurol 366: 613-642, 1996. (Pubitemid 26087298)
59. Vicario DS. Using learned calls to study sensory-motor integration in songbirds. Ann NY Acad Sci 1016: 246-262, 2004.
60. Vicario DS, Raksin JN, Naqvi NH, Thande N, Simpson HB. The relationship between perception and production in songbird vocal imitation: what learned calls can teach us. J Comp Physiol [A] 188: 897-908, 2002.
61. Vignal C, Mathevon N, Mottin S. Audience drives male songbird response to partner's voice. Nature 430: 448-451, 2004. (Pubitemid 38987904)
62. Vignal C, Mathevon N, Mottin S. Mate recognition by female zebra finch: analysis of individuality in male call and first investigations on female decoding process. Behav Process 77: 191-198, 2008. (Pubitemid 351227411)
63. Walden BE, Montgomery AA, Gibeily GJ, Prosek RA, Schwartz DM. Correlates of psychological dimensions in talker similarity. J Speech Hear Res 21: 265-275, 1978.
64. Wang L, Narayan R, Graña G, Shamir M, Sen K. Cortical discrimination of complex natural stimuli: can single neurons match behavior? J Neurosci 27: 582-589, 2007. (Pubitemid 46143762)
65. Woolley SM, Fremouw TE, Hsu A, Theunissen FE. Tuning for spectrotemporal modulations as a mechanism for auditory discrimination of natural sounds. Nat Neurosci 8: 1371-1379, 2005. (Pubitemid 41630426)
66. Woolley SM, Gill PR, Theunissen FE. Stimulus-dependent auditory tuning results in synchronous population coding of vocalizations in the songbird midbrain. J Neurosci 26: 2499-2512, 2006.
67. Woolley SM, Gill PR, Fremouw T, Theunissen FE. Functional groups in the avian auditory system. J Neurosci 29: 2780-2793, 2009.
68. Zann RA. The Zebra Finch: A Synthesis of Field and Laboratory Studies. Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press, 1996.