ReviewHearing research2023
On the value of diverse organisms in auditory research: From fish to flies to humans.
Review in Hearing research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Historically, diverse organisms have contributed to our understanding of auditory function. In recent years, the laboratory mouse has become the prevailing non-human model in auditory research, particularly for biomedical studies. There are many questions in auditory research for which the mouse is the most appropriate (or the only) model system available. But mice cannot provide answers for all auditory problems of basic and applied importance, nor can any single model system provide a synthetic understanding of the diverse solutions that have evolved to facilitate effective detection and use of acoustic information. In this review, spurred by trends in funding and publishing and inspired by parallel observations in other domains of neuroscience, we highlight a few examples of the profound impact and lasting benefits of comparative and basic organismal research in the auditory system. We begin with the serendipitous discovery of hair cell regeneration in non-mammalian vertebrates, a finding that has fueled an ongoing search for pathways to hearing restoration in humans. We then turn to the problem of sound source localization - a fundamental task that most auditory systems have been compelled to solve despite large variation in the magnitudes and kinds of spatial acoustic cues available, begetting varied direction-detecting mechanisms. Finally, we consider the power of work in highly specialized organisms to reveal exceptional solutions to sensory problems - and the diverse returns of deep neuroethological inquiry - via the example of echolocating bats. Throughout, we consider how discoveries made possible by comparative and curiosity-driven organismal research have driven fundamental scientific, biomedical, and technological advances in the auditory field.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.