Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31442234›Full record

ArticlePloS one2019

The barn owls' Minimum Audible Angle.

Bianca Krumm, Georg M Klump, Christine Köppl, Ulrike Langemann

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Survey of temporal coding of sensory information.Frontiers in computational neuroscience · 2025
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Hearing in helmeted guineafowl (Numida meleagris): audiogram from 2 Hz to 10 kHz and localization acuity for brief noise bursts.Journal of comparative physiology. A, Neuroethology, sensory, neural, and behavioral physiology · 2024
    Article
  5. Two Types of Auditory Spatial Receptive Fields in Different Parts of the Chicken's Midbrain.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2022
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Barn Owl's Auditory Space Map Activity Matching Conditions for a Population Vector Readout to Drive Adaptive Sound-Localizing Behavior.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2021
    Article
  8. Sound localization in barn owls studied with manipulated head-related transfer functions: beyond broadband interaural time and level differences.Journal of comparative physiology. A, Neuroethology, sensory, neural, and behavioral physiology · 2020
    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

4 authors.

Bianca KrummCluster of Excellence "Hearing4all", Division for Animal Physiology and Behaviour, School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Department of Neuroscience, Carl von Ossietzky University of Oldenburg, Oldenburg, Germany.
Georg M KlumpCluster of Excellence "Hearing4all", Division for Animal Physiology and Behaviour, School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Department of Neuroscience, Carl von Ossietzky University of Oldenburg, Oldenburg, Germany.
Christine KöpplCluster of Excellence "Hearing4all", Division for Cochlea and auditory brainstem physiology, School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Department of Neuroscience, Carl von Ossietzky University of Oldenburg, Oldenburg, Germany.
Ulrike LangemannCluster of Excellence "Hearing4all", Division for Animal Physiology and Behaviour, School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Department of Neuroscience, Carl von Ossietzky University of Oldenburg, Oldenburg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-5600-7939

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Interaural time differences (ITD) and interaural level differences (ILD) are physical cues that enable the auditory system to pinpoint the position of a sound source in space. This ability is crucial for animal communication and predator-prey interactions. The barn owl has evolved an exceptional sense of hearing and shows abilities of sound localisation that outperform most other species. So far, behavioural studies in the barn owl often used reflexive responses to investigate aspects of sound localisation. Furthermore, they predominately probed the higher frequencies of the owl's hearing range (> 3 kHz). In the present study we used a Go/NoGo paradigm to measure the barn owl's behavioural sound localisation acuity (expressed as the Minimum Audible Angle, MAA) as a function of stimulus type (narrow-band noise centred at 500, 1000, 2000, 4000 and 8000 Hz, and broad-band noise) and sound source position. We found significant effects of both stimulus type and sound source position on the barn owls' MAA. The MAA improved with increasing stimulus frequency, from 14° at 500 Hz to 6° at 8000 Hz. The smallest MAA of 4° was found for broadband noise stimuli. Comparing different sound source positions revealed smaller MAAs for frontal compared to lateral stimulus presentation, irrespective of stimulus type. These results are consistent with both the known variations in physical ITDs and variation in the width of neural ITD tuning curves with azimuth and frequency. Physical and neural characteristics combine to result in better spatial acuity for frontal compared to lateral sounds and reduced localisation acuity at lower frequencies.

Indexed as

Acoustic StimulationAnimalsAuditory PathwaysHearingSound LocalizationStrigiformes

Identifiers

PMID31442234
PMCPMC6707599

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.