JN Information on EB 2010
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

J Neurophysiol (June 4, 2008). doi:10.1152/jn.00884.2007
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
100/2/888    most recent
00884.2007v1
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 PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Bendor, D.
Right arrow Articles by Wang, X.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Bendor, D.
Right arrow Articles by Wang, X.
Submitted on August 8, 2007
Accepted on May 29, 2008

Neural response properties of core fields AI, R, and RT in the auditory cortex of marmoset monkeys

Daniel Bendor1* and Xiaoqin Wang1

1 Biomedical Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, United States

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

The core region of primate auditory cortex contains a primary and two primary-like fields (AI-primary auditory cortex, R-rostral field, RT-rostrotemporal field). Although it is reasonable to assume that multiple core fields provide an advantage for auditory processing over a single primary field, the differential roles these fields play and whether they form a functional pathway collectively such as for the processing of spectral or temporal information is unknown. In this report we compare the response properties of neurons in the three core fields to pure tones and sinusoidal amplitude-modulated tones in awake marmoset monkeys (Callithrix jacchus). The main observations are: 1) All three fields are responsive to spectrally narrowband sounds and are tonotopically organized. 2) Field AI responds more strongly to pure tones than fields R and RT. 3) Field RT neurons have lower best sound levels than neurons in fields AI and R. In addition, rate-level functions in field RT are more commonly non-monotonic than in fields AI and R. 4) Neurons in fields RT and R have longer minimum latencies than field AI neurons. 5) Fields RT and R have poorer stimulus synchronization to amplitude modulated tones than field AI. 6) Between the three core fields the more rostral regions (R and RT) have narrower firing rate-based modulation transfer functions (rMTFs) than AI. This effect was only seen for the non-synchronized neurons. Synchronized neurons showed no such trend.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J. Neurophysiol.Home page
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]

Home page
 J. Neurosci.Home page
J. K. Bizley and K. M. M. Walker
Distributed Sensitivity to Conspecific Vocalizations and Implications for the Auditory Dual Stream Hypothesis
J. Neurosci., March 11, 2009; 29(10): 3011 - 3013.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Neurosci.Home page
G. H. Recanzone
Representation of Con-Specific Vocalizations in the Core and Belt Areas of the Auditory Cortex in the Alert Macaque Monkey
J. Neurosci., December 3, 2008; 28(49): 13184 - 13193.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Neurophysiol.Home page
P. Yin, M. Mishkin, M. Sutter, and J. B. Fritz
Early Stages of Melody Processing: Stimulus-Sequence and Task-Dependent Neuronal Activity in Monkey Auditory Cortical Fields A1 and R
J Neurophysiol, December 1, 2008; 100(6): 3009 - 3029.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
Visit Other APS Journals Online
Copyright © 2008 by the The American Physiological Society.