Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39963949›Full record

ArticleJournal of neurophysiology2025

Hierarchical emergence of opponent coding in auditory belt cortex.

Jeffrey S Johnson, Mamiko Niwa, Kevin N O'Connor, Brian J Malone, Mitchell L Sutter

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of neurophysiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

5 authors.

Jeffrey S JohnsonCenter for Neuroscience, University of California at Davis, Davis, California, United States.ORCID 0009-0008-6427-9908
Mamiko NiwaCenter for Neuroscience, University of California at Davis, Davis, California, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-1353-3394
Kevin N O'ConnorCenter for Neuroscience, University of California at Davis, Davis, California, United States.
Brian J MaloneDepartment of Neurobiology, Physiology and Behavior, University of California at Davis, Davis, California, United States.
Mitchell L SutterCenter for Neuroscience, University of California at Davis, Davis, California, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-3875-1320

Funding

Spectral and Temporal Integration in the Auditory SystemR01DC002514 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVIS · PI MITCHELL L SUTTER · 2001 to 2026
$10.3M
FREQUENCY INTEGRATION IN THE AUDITORY CORTEXR29DC002514 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVIS · PI SUTTER, MITCHELL L · 1996 to 2000
$103k
HHS | NIH | National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (NIDCD) DC02514NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC002514NIDCD NIH HHS R29 DC002514
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We recorded from neurons in primary auditory cortex (A1) and middle-lateral belt area (ML) while rhesus macaques either discriminated amplitude-modulated noise (AM) from unmodulated noise or passively heard the same stimuli. We used several post hoc pooling models to investigate the ability of auditory cortex to leverage population coding for AM detection. We find that pooled-response AM detection is better in the active condition than the passive condition, and better using rate-based coding than synchrony-based coding. Neurons can be segregated into two classes based on whether they increase (INC) or decrease (DEC) their firing rate in response to increasing modulation depth. In these samples, A1 had relatively fewer DEC neurons (26%) than ML (45%). When responses were pooled without segregating these classes, AM detection using rate-based coding was much better in A1 than in ML, but when pooling only INC neurons, AM detection in ML approached that found in A1. Pooling only DEC neurons resulted in impaired AM detection in both areas. To investigate the role of DEC neurons, we devised two pooling methods that opposed DEC and INC neurons-a direct subtractive method and a two-pool push-pull opponent method. Only the push-pull opponent method resulted in superior AM detection relative to indiscriminate pooling. In the active condition, the opponent method was superior to pooling only INC neurons during the late portion of the response in ML. These results suggest that the increasing prevalence of the DEC response type in ML can be leveraged by appropriate methods to improve AM detection.

Indexed as

Auditory CortexAuditory PerceptionNeuronsAcoustic StimulationAction PotentialsAnimalsFemaleMacaca mulattaMaleModels, Neurologicalamplitude modulationauditory cortexmiddle lateral auditory cortexpopulation codingprimary auditory cortex

Identifiers

PMID39963949
PMCPMC12282654

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.