We investigated modulations by stimulus components placed outside of the classical receptive field in the primary auditory cortex (A1) of awake marmosets. Two classes of neurons were identified using single tone stimuli: neurons with single-peaked frequency tuning characteristics (147/185, 80%) and neurons with multipeaked frequency tuning characteristics (38/185, 20%), referred to as single- and multipeaked units, respectively. Each class of neurons was further studied using two-tone paradigms in which the frequency, intensity, and timing of the second tone were systematically varied while a unit was driven by the first tone placed at a unit's characteristic frequency (CF) if it was single-peaked or at one of multiple spectral peaks if it was multipeaked. The main findings were: 1) excitatory spectral peaks in the frequency tuning of the multipeaked units were often harmonically related. 2) Multipeaked units showed facilitation in their responses to combinations of two harmonically related tones placed at the spectral peaks of their frequency tuning. The two-tone facilitation was strongest for the simultaneously presented tones. 3) In 76 of 113 single-peaked units studied using the two-tone paradigm, facilitatory and/or inhibitory modulations by distant off-CF tones were observed. This distant inhibition differed from flanking (or side-band) inhibitions near CF. 4) In single-peaked units, the distant off-CF inhibitions were dominated by tones at frequencies that were harmonically related to the CF of a unit, whereas the facilitation by off-CF tones was observed for a wide range of frequencies. And 5) in both single- and multipeaked units, sound levels of two interacting tones determined whether the two tones produced excitation or inhibition. The largest facilitation was achieved by using two tones at their corresponding preferred sound levels. Together, these findings suggest that extracting or rejecting harmonically related components embedded in complex sounds may represent fundamental signal processing properties in different classes of A1 neurons.

A number of studies in various species have demonstrated that natural vocalizations generally produce stronger neural responses than do their time-reversed versions. The majority of neurons in the primary auditory cortex (A1) of marmoset monkeys responds more strongly to natural marmoset vocalizations than to the time-reversed vocalizations. However, it was unclear whether such differences in neural responses were simply due to the difference between the acoustic structures of natural and time-reversed vocalizations or whether they also resulted from the difference in behavioral relevance of both types of the stimuli. To address this issue, we have compared neural responses to natural and time-reversed marmoset twitter calls in A1 of cats with those obtained from A1 of marmosets using identical stimuli. It was found that the preference for natural marmoset twitter calls demonstrated in marmoset A1 was absent in cat A1. While both cortices responded approximately equally to time-reversed twitter calls, marmoset A1 responded much more strongly to natural twitter calls than did cat A1. This differential representation of marmoset vocalizations in two cortices suggests that experience-dependent and possibly species-specific mechanisms are involved in cortical processing of communication sounds.

Sir-Axel Kahn reminds us, rightly, that Kant's famous principle states: "Respect for human dignity requires that an individual is never used... exclusively as a means", and suggests that I have ignored the crucial use of the term 'exclusively' (Nature 388, 320; 1997). I did not, of course, and I am happy with Kahn's reformulation of the principle. It is not that Kant's principle does not have powerful intuitive force but that it is so vague and open to selective interpretation, and its scope for application is consequently so limited, that its utility as one of the "fundamental principles of modern bioethical thought", as Kahn describes it, is virtually zero. Kahn himself rightly points out that debates about the moral status of the human embryo are debates about whether embryos fall within the scope of Kant's or any other moral principles concerning persons; so the principle itself is not illuminating in this context. Applied to the creation of individuals which are, or will become, autonomous, it has limited application. True, it rules out slavery, but so do other principles based on autonomy and rights.