Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32273487›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience2020

Streaming of Repeated Noise in Primary and Secondary Fields of Auditory Cortex.

Daniela Saderi, Brad N Buran, Stephen V David

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 2020. 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. Review
  2. Article
  3. Reduced Neural Responses to Natural Foreground versus Background Sounds in the Auditory Cortex.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Implementation of Manual and Automated Water Regulation for Rats (Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS · 2021
    Article
  7. Article
  8. 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.

Daniela SaderiNeuroscience Graduate Program, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, Oregon 97239.ORCID 0000-0002-6109-0367
Brad N BuranOregon Hearing Research Center, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, Oregon 97239.ORCID 0000-0002-9864-7798
Stephen V DavidOregon Hearing Research Center, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, Oregon 97239 davids@ohsu.edu.ORCID 0000-0003-4135-3104

Funding

Top-down control of auditory processing in the cortico-collicular network (Administrative Supplement)R01DC014950 · NIDCD · OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY · PI DAVID, STEPHEN V · 2016 to 2025
$3.5M
Pathway to Independence Award, IndependentR00DC010439 · NIDCD · OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY · PI DAVID, STEPHEN V · 2012 to 2014
$835k
Consequences of cochlear synaptopathy on signal detection in noisy environments: perception and central auditory processingR21DC016969 · NIDCD · OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY · PI BURAN, BRAD N · 2018 to 2020
$513k
Measuring the the functional role of the corticocollicular pathway in auditory behaviorF31DC014888 · NIDCD · OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY · PI SADERI, DANIELA · 2016 to 2018
$114k
NIDCD NIH HHS F31 DC014888NIDCD NIH HHS R00 DC010439NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC014950NIDCD NIH HHS R21 DC016969
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Statistical regularities in natural sounds facilitate the perceptual segregation of auditory sources, or streams. Repetition is one cue that drives stream segregation in humans, but the neural basis of this perceptual phenomenon remains unknown. We demonstrated a similar perceptual ability in animals by training ferrets of both sexes to detect a stream of repeating noise samples (foreground) embedded in a stream of random samples (background). During passive listening, we recorded neural activity in primary auditory cortex (A1) and secondary auditory cortex (posterior ectosylvian gyrus, PEG). We used two context-dependent encoding models to test for evidence of streaming of the repeating stimulus. The first was based on average evoked activity per noise sample and the second on the spectro-temporal receptive field. Both approaches tested whether differences in neural responses to repeating versus random stimuli were better modeled by scaling the response to both streams equally (global gain) or by separately scaling the response to the foreground versus background stream (stream-specific gain). Consistent with previous observations of adaptation, we found an overall reduction in global gain when the stimulus began to repeat. However, when we measured stream-specific changes in gain, responses to the foreground were enhanced relative to the background. This enhancement was stronger in PEG than A1. In A1, enhancement was strongest in units with low sparseness (i.e., broad sensory tuning) and with tuning selective for the repeated sample. Enhancement of responses to the foreground relative to the background provides evidence for stream segregation that emerges in A1 and is refined in PEG.

Indexed as

NoiseAnimalsAuditory CortexAuditory PerceptionFemaleFerretsMaleNeuronsauditorybehaviorcortexrepetitionsoundstreaming

Identifiers

PMID32273487
PMCPMC7204085

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.