JN Ad Instruments
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Neurophysiol (July 1, 2009). doi:10.1152/jn.91276.2008
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
102/3/1348    most recent
91276.2008v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Triblehorn, J. D.
Right arrow Articles by Schul, J.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Triblehorn, J. D.
Right arrow Articles by Schul, J.
Submitted on December 1, 2008
Revised on June 28, 2009
Accepted on June 30, 2009

Sensory encoding differences contribute to species-specific call recognition mechanisms

Jeffrey D. Triblehorn1* and Johannes Schul1

1 University of Missouri

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: triblehornj{at}missouri.edu.

Object recognition is a fundamental function of the auditory system, but the underlying mechanisms are not well-understood. Acoustic communication in the Tettigoniid genus Neoconocephalus provides a useful system for studying these mechanisms. We examined the ascending interneuron pathway in three Neoconocephalus species with diverse calls and recognition mechanisms. This pathway processes spectral information and transmits call temporal patterns to the supraesophageal ganglion where the recognition circuits reside. For each species, we describe one local auditory interneuron (ON) and three with ascending projections (AN-1, AN-2, TN-1), which were physiologically and morphologically similar to those described in other Tettigoniids. TN-1 responded only to the beginning of call models. For AN-1, each call model pulse elicited a single action potential in N. robustus and N. bivocatus, while every other pulse elicited an action potential in N. triops. Individual pulses did not reliably evoke AN-2 responses in all three species. AN-1 responses were limited to frequencies below 20 kHz. AN-1 tuning differed among the three species, reflecting their differences in the dominant frequency of the calls. AN-2 was broadly-tuned and responses increased with intensity in all three species. In behavioral experiments, N. robustus showed greater spectral selectivity than the other two species. Adding the second harmonic to the spectrum of call models suppressed phonotaxis in N. robustus, but not N. triops or N. bivocatus. Adding the second harmonic reduced AN-1 responses in N. robustus, but not in the other two species. We discuss the potential function of the ascending neurons for call recognition.







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
Visit Other APS Journals Online
Copyright © 2009 by the The American Physiological Society.