Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31263492›Full record

ArticleCurrent zoology2019

Behavioral and neural auditory thresholds in a frog.

Ryan C Taylor, Karin Akre, Walter Wilczynski, Michael J Ryan

RetractedAbstract readRetracted Publication
In one paragraph

Article in Current zoology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Chronic recording of brain activity in awake toads.Journal of neuroscience methods · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Ryan C TaylorDepartment of Integrative Biology, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA.
Karin AkreDepartment of Integrative Biology, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA.
Walter WilczynskiNeuroscience Institute and Center for Behavioral Neuroscience, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Michael J RyanDepartment of Integrative Biology, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Vocalizations play a critical role in mate recognition and mate choice in a number of taxa, especially, but not limited to, orthopterans, frogs, and birds. But receivers can only recognize and prefer sounds that they can hear. Thus a fundamental question linking neurobiology and sexual selection asks-what is the threshold for detecting acoustic sexual displays? In this study, we use 3 methods to assess such thresholds in túngara frogs: behavioral responses, auditory brainstem responses, and multiunit electrophysiological recordings from the midbrain. We show that thresholds are lowest for multiunit recordings (ca. 45 dB SPL), and then for behavioral responses (ca. 61 dB SPL), with auditory brainstem responses exhibiting the highest thresholds (ca. 71 dB SPL). We discuss why these estimates differ and why, as with other studies, it is unlikely that they should be the same. Although all of these studies estimate thresholds they are not measuring the same thresholds; behavioral thresholds are based on signal salience whereas the 2 neural assays estimate physiological thresholds. All 3 estimates, however, make it clear that to have an appreciation for detection and salience of acoustic signals we must listen to those signals through the ears of the receivers.

Indexed as

anuransauditory brainstem responsesauditory thresholdsmate choicePhysalaemus pustulosussexual selectionsignal recognition thresholdstúngara frogsvocalizations

Identifiers

PMID31263492
PMCPMC6595421

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.