Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27827366›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2016

Evolutionary origins of non-adjacent sequence processing in primate brain potentials.

Alice E Milne, Jutta L Mueller, Claudia Männel, Adam Attaheri, Angela D Friederici, Christopher I Petkov

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
10.2field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Critical Review on the Development and Evolution of Beat Perception.Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. A Cortical Mechanism Linking Saliency Detection and Motor Reactivity in Rhesus Monkeys.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Hierarchy processing in human neurobiology: how specific is it?Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2020
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. 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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Alice E MilneInstitute of Neuroscience, Henry Wellcome Building, Newcastle University, Framlington Place, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4HH, United Kingdom.
Jutta L MuellerDepartment of Neuropsychology, Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, 04103 Leipzig, Germany.
Claudia MännelDepartment of Neuropsychology, Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, 04103 Leipzig, Germany.
Adam AttaheriInstitute of Neuroscience, Henry Wellcome Building, Newcastle University, Framlington Place, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4HH, United Kingdom.
Angela D FriedericiDepartment of Neuropsychology, Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, 04103 Leipzig, Germany.
Christopher I PetkovInstitute of Neuroscience, Henry Wellcome Building, Newcastle University, Framlington Place, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4HH, United Kingdom.
Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences · DENewcastle University · GBUniversity of Cambridge · GB

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/J009849/1Medical Research CouncilNational Centre for the Replacement, Refinement and Reduction of Animals in Research NC/K000608/1Wellcome Trust 102961/Z/13/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is considerable interest in understanding the ontogeny and phylogeny of the human language system, yet, neurobiological work at the interface of both fields is absent. Syntactic processes in language build on sensory processing and sequencing capabilities on the side of the receiver. While we better understand language-related ontogenetic changes in the human brain, it remains a mystery how neurobiological processes at specific human development stages compare with those in phylogenetically closely related species. To address this knowledge gap, we measured EEG event-related potentials (ERPs) in two macaque monkeys using a paradigm developed to evaluate human infant and adult brain potentials associated with the processing of non-adjacent ordering relationships in sequences of syllable triplets. Frequent standard triplet sequences were interspersed with infrequent voice pitch or non-adjacent rule deviants. Monkey ERPs show early pitch and rule deviant mismatch responses that are strikingly similar to those previously reported in human infants. This stands in contrast to adults' later ERP responses for rule deviants. The results reveal how non-adjacent sequence ordering relationships are processed in the primate brain and provide evidence for evolutionarily conserved neurophysiological effects, some of which are remarkably like those seen at an early human developmental stage.

Indexed as

Evoked PotentialsAcoustic StimulationAdultAnimalsBrainElectroencephalographyEvoked Potentials, AuditoryEvolution, MolecularHumansInfantLanguageLanguage DevelopmentMacaca mulattaPitch Perception

Identifiers

PMID27827366
PMCPMC5101811
OpenAlexW2527877584

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.