Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26865621›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience2016

Mind the Gap: Two Dissociable Mechanisms of Temporal Processing in the Auditory System.

Lucy A Anderson, Jennifer F Linden

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 67 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Characterization of Auditory Responsive Neurons in the Mouse Superior Colliculus to White Noise and Frequency-Restricted Sounds.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Offset Responses in the Auditory Cortex Show Unique History Dependence.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2022
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Listening in complex acoustic scenes.Current opinion in physiology · 2020
    Article
  20. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Lucy A AndersonEar Institute, University College London, London, WC1X 8EE, United Kingdom, and.
Jennifer F LindenEar Institute, University College London, London, WC1X 8EE, United Kingdom, and Department of Neuroscience, Physiology and Pharmacology, University College London, London, WC1E 6BT, United Kingdom j.linden@ucl.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2210-1374
University College London · GB

Funding

Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 084364/Z/07/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

High temporal acuity of auditory processing underlies perception of speech and other rapidly varying sounds. A common measure of auditory temporal acuity in humans is the threshold for detection of brief gaps in noise. Gap-detection deficits, observed in developmental disorders, are considered evidence for "sluggish" auditory processing. Here we show, in a mouse model of gap-detection deficits, that auditory brain sensitivity to brief gaps in noise can be impaired even without a general loss of central auditory temporal acuity. Extracellular recordings in three different subdivisions of the auditory thalamus in anesthetized mice revealed a stimulus-specific, subdivision-specific deficit in thalamic sensitivity to brief gaps in noise in experimental animals relative to controls. Neural responses to brief gaps in noise were reduced, but responses to other rapidly changing stimuli unaffected, in lemniscal and nonlemniscal (but not polysensory) subdivisions of the medial geniculate body. Through experiments and modeling, we demonstrate that the observed deficits in thalamic sensitivity to brief gaps in noise arise from reduced neural population activity following noise offsets, but not onsets. These results reveal dissociable sound-onset-sensitive and sound-offset-sensitive channels underlying auditory temporal processing, and suggest that gap-detection deficits can arise from specific impairment of the sound-offset-sensitive channel. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: The experimental and modeling results reported here suggest a new hypothesis regarding the mechanisms of temporal processing in the auditory system. Using a mouse model of auditory temporal processing deficits, we demonstrate the existence of specific abnormalities in auditory thalamic activity following sound offsets, but not sound onsets. These results reveal dissociable sound-onset-sensitive and sound-offset-sensitive mechanisms underlying auditory processing of temporally varying sounds. Furthermore, the findings suggest that auditory temporal processing deficits, such as impairments in gap-in-noise detection, could arise from reduced brain sensitivity to sound offsets alone.

Indexed as

Acoustic StimulationAdaptation, PsychologicalAlgorithmsAnimalsAuditory PerceptionEvoked Potentials, Auditory, Brain StemExcitatory Postsynaptic PotentialsGeniculate BodiesHearingMaleMiceModels, NeurologicalMutationNoiseThalamusTime Perceptionauditorygap detectionhearingmousetemporal processingthalamus

Identifiers

PMID26865621
PMCPMC4748080
OpenAlexW2265862397

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.