4.7 Article

Sound-intensity-dependent compensation for the small interaural time difference cue for sound source localization

Journal

JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE
Volume 28, Issue 28, Pages 7153-7164

Publisher

SOC NEUROSCIENCE
DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4398-07.2008

Keywords

sound localization; interaural time difference; nucleus laminaris; nucleus magnocellularis; coincidence detection; superior olivary nucleus

Categories

Funding

  1. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [20220008] Funding Source: KAKEN

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Interaural time difference (ITD) is a major cue for sound source localization. However, animals with small heads experience small ITDs, making ITD detection difficult, particularly for low-frequency sound. Here, we describe a sound-intensity-dependent mechanism for compensating for the small ITD cues in the coincidence detector neurons in the nucleus laminaris (NL) of the chicken aged from 3 to 29 d after hatching. The hypothesized compensation mechanisms were confirmed by simulation. In vivo single-unit recordings revealed an improved contrast of ITD tuning in low-best-frequency (< 1 kHz) NL neurons by suppressing the firing activity at the worst ITD, whereas the firing rate was increased with increasing sound intensity at the best ITD. In contrast, level-dependent suppression was so weak in the middle- and high-best-frequency (< 1 kHz) NL neurons that loud sounds led to increases in firing rate at both the best and the worst ITDs. The suppression of firing activity at the worst ITD in the low-best-frequency neurons required the activation of the superior olivary nucleus (SON) and was eliminated by electrolytic lesions of the SON. The frequency-dependent suppression reflected the dense projection from the SON to the low-frequency region of NL. Thus, the small ITD cues available in low-frequency sounds were partly compensated for by a sound-intensity-dependent inhibition from the SON.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available