Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22553042›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience2012

Duration tuning across vertebrates.

Brandon Aubie, Riziq Sayegh, Paul A Faure

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

33 citing papers in PubMed, 56 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. A Second Introduction to the Neurobiology of Interval Timing.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2024
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. GABAJournal of neurophysiology · 2020
    Article
  10. Periodicity Pitch Perception.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2020
    Article
  11. Differential Inhibitory Configurations Segregate Frequency Selectivity in the Mouse Inferior Colliculus.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2019
    Article
  12. Bats are unusually insensitive to brief low-frequency tones.Journal of comparative physiology. A, Neuroethology, sensory, neural, and behavioral physiology · 2019
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Flutter sensitivity in FM bats. Part I: delay modulation.Journal of comparative physiology. A, Neuroethology, sensory, neural, and behavioral physiology · 2018
    Article
  15. Review
  16. The effects of stimulus parameters on auditory evoked potentials of Carassius auratus.Journal of comparative physiology. A, Neuroethology, sensory, neural, and behavioral physiology · 2017
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Object size determines the spatial spread of visual time.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2016
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Multiple channels of visual time perception.Current opinion in behavioral sciences · 2016
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Brandon AubieDepartment of Psychology, Neuroscience & Behaviour, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario L8S 4K1, Canada.
Riziq Sayegh
Paul A Faure
McMaster University · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Signal duration is important for identifying sound sources and determining signal meaning. Duration-tuned neurons (DTNs) respond preferentially to a range of stimulus durations and maximally to a best duration (BD). Duration-tuned neurons are found in the auditory midbrain of many vertebrates, although studied most extensively in bats. Studies of DTNs across vertebrates have identified cells with BDs and temporal response bandwidths that mirror the range of species-specific vocalizations. Neural tuning to stimulus duration appears to be universal among hearing vertebrates. Herein, we test the hypothesis that neural mechanisms underlying duration selectivity may be similar across vertebrates. We instantiated theoretical mechanisms of duration tuning in computational models to systematically explore the roles of excitatory and inhibitory receptor strengths, input latencies, and membrane time constant on duration tuning response profiles. We demonstrate that models of duration tuning with similar neural circuitry can be tuned with species-specific parameters to reproduce the responses of in vivo DTNs from the auditory midbrain. To relate and validate model output to in vivo responses, we collected electrophysiological data from the inferior colliculus of the awake big brown bat, Eptesicus fuscus, and present similar in vivo data from the published literature on DTNs in rats, mice, and frogs. Our results support the hypothesis that neural mechanisms of duration tuning may be shared across vertebrates despite species-specific differences in duration selectivity. Finally, we discuss how the underlying mechanisms of duration selectivity relate to other auditory feature detectors arising from the interaction of neural excitation and inhibition.

Indexed as

Models, NeurologicalAnimalsAuditory PerceptionBrainChiropteraComputer SimulationEcholocationHumansMiceRatsSpecies SpecificityTime Factors

Identifiers

PMID22553042
PMCPMC6622122
OpenAlexW1986606784

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.