| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1 Psychology, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA
2 Hearing and Speech Sciences, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN, USA
3 Hearing and Speech Sciences, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN, USA; Psychology, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA
* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: troy.a.hackett{at}vanderbilt.edu.
The purpose of this study was to compare response properties of two adjacent areas of the marmoset monkey auditory cortex. Multiunit responses to 50 ms tones and broadband noise bursts (BBN) were recorded in the core area, A1, and the caudomedial belt area, CM, of ketamine-anesthetized animals. Neurons in A1 and CM exhibited robust low-threshold short-latency responses to BBN and tones, whereas neurons in adjoining lateral belt areas were poorly responsive or unresponsive to tones and noise. Except for a population of broadly-tuned units in CM, the characteristic frequency (CF) could be determined for all recording sites in A1 and CM. Both areas were tonotopically organized and shared a high CF border. Whereas the tonotopic gradient in A1 was smooth and continuous across the field, the gradient in CM was discontinuous, and the intermediate CF range was underrepresented. For BBN stimuli, rate level functions were largely monotonic in A1 and CM. Response profiles were also similar in both areas. As a population, neurons in CM were distinguished from A1 by significantly shorter response latencies, lower thresholds, and broader tuning bandwidth at higher intensities. The results indicated that while A1 and CM represent anatomically and physiologically distinct areas, their response profiles under anesthesia overlapped considerably compared to the lateral belt areas. Therefore, refinements of current models of the primate auditory cortex may be needed to account for differences in organization among the auditory belt areas.
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  P. Kusmierek and J. P. Rauschecker Functional Specialization of Medial Auditory Belt Cortex in the Alert Rhesus Monkey J Neurophysiol, September 1, 2009; 102(3): 1606 - 1622. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. Bendor and X. Wang Neural Response Properties of Primary, Rostral, and Rostrotemporal Core Fields in the Auditory Cortex of Marmoset Monkeys J Neurophysiol, August 1, 2008; 100(2): 888 - 906. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 U. Werner-Reiss and J. M. Groh A Rate Code for Sound Azimuth in Monkey Auditory Cortex: Implications for Human Neuroimaging Studies J. Neurosci., April 2, 2008; 28(14): 3747 - 3758. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. A. Bourne and M. G.P. Rosa Hierarchical Development of the Primate Visual Cortex, as Revealed by Neurofilament Immunoreactivity: Early Maturation of the Middle Temporal Area (MT) Cereb Cortex, March 1, 2006; 16(3): 405 - 414. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. Inui, H. Okamoto, K. Miki, A. Gunji, and R. Kakigi Serial and Parallel Processing in the Human Auditory Cortex: A Magnetoencephalographic Study Cereb Cortex, January 1, 2006; 16(1): 18 - 30. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH |
| Visit Other APS Journals Online |
