The Auditory Cortex 2010
DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4419-0074-6_13
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Spectral Processing in Auditory Cortex

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
15
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 303 publications
3
15
0
Order By: Relevance
“…On average, 31.0 ± 4.4% of GCaMP6s-expressing pyramidal cells (n = 1480 cells, 16 imaging fields, 8 mice) revealed increases in activity (measured as dF/F) in response to at least one frequency. Consistent with previous studies of A1 (Rothschild et al, 2010; Schreiner et al, 2010; Sutter, 2000), 42% of responsive L2/3 pyramidal cells (n = 550) displayed “V-shaped” tonal receptive fields (TRFs, Figure 1B 3 ). To examine the spatial organization of tuning properties at the cellular level, we constructed activity maps representing the best frequencies of responsive cells.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 90%
“…On average, 31.0 ± 4.4% of GCaMP6s-expressing pyramidal cells (n = 1480 cells, 16 imaging fields, 8 mice) revealed increases in activity (measured as dF/F) in response to at least one frequency. Consistent with previous studies of A1 (Rothschild et al, 2010; Schreiner et al, 2010; Sutter, 2000), 42% of responsive L2/3 pyramidal cells (n = 550) displayed “V-shaped” tonal receptive fields (TRFs, Figure 1B 3 ). To examine the spatial organization of tuning properties at the cellular level, we constructed activity maps representing the best frequencies of responsive cells.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 90%
“…In the cat, neurons responding to acoustic stimuli in caudal MGV compared with rostral MGV exhibited weaker excitatory activation, less precise time-locking to click trains, longer latencies, greater spiking jitter, and less strict tonotopic organization with wider tuning curves (Rodrigues-Dagaeff et al 1989). Consistent with these results, the caudal MGV has been shown to project mainly to ACC regions outside of A1 that can exhibit responses with longer latencies, greater spiking jitter, less excitatory activity, and less precise tonotopic organization compared with A1, which receives its inputs primarily from the rostral MGV (Morel and Imig 1987;Polley et al 2007;Rodrigues-Dagaeff et al 1989;Schreiner et al 2011;Storace et al 2010Storace et al , 2012.Although the anatomic and physiological evidence cited above supports a dual lemniscal organization, the hypothesis would be strengthened by evidence for a functional division of acoustic response properties within the ICC that correspond to the anatomic divisions shown within the ICC. A number of previous studies of the ICC have demonstrated regional differences in response properties such as best modulation frequency, threshold, and latency (Hage and Ehret 2003; Hattori and Suga 1997;Langner et al 2002;Portfors and Wenstrup 2001;Schreiner and Langner 1988;Stiebler 1986).…”
supporting
confidence: 61%
“…In the cat, neurons responding to acoustic stimuli in caudal MGV compared with rostral MGV exhibited weaker excitatory activation, less precise time-locking to click trains, longer latencies, greater spiking jitter, and less strict tonotopic organization with wider tuning curves (Rodrigues-Dagaeff et al 1989). Consistent with these results, the caudal MGV has been shown to project mainly to ACC regions outside of A1 that can exhibit responses with longer latencies, greater spiking jitter, less excitatory activity, and less precise tonotopic organization compared with A1, which receives its inputs primarily from the rostral MGV (Morel and Imig 1987;Polley et al 2007;Rodrigues-Dagaeff et al 1989;Schreiner et al 2011;Storace et al 2010Storace et al , 2012.…”
supporting
confidence: 61%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The differences in coding properties between the rostral versus caudal MGV, demonstrated by Rodrigues-Dagaeff (1989) in cat and listed in Figure 9B, suggest that the rostral pathway is designed for stronger excitatory activation and more temporally and spectrally precise transmission of information up to higher centers. Many of these differences in coding properties between the dual pathways have also been shown in ACC (Phillips et al, 1995; Polley et al, 2007; Schreiner et al, 2011; Storace et al, 2012; Wallace et al, 2000) and more recently in ICC (Straka et al, 2014a), as listed in 9B.…”
Section: Animal and Human Studies Towards A Second Clinical Trialmentioning
confidence: 76%