Stimulus-specific adaptation and its dynamics in the inferior colliculus of rat

Zhao, Lingyun; Liu, Y.; Shen, Li; Feng, Lei; Hong, Bo

doi:10.1016/j.neuroscience.2011.01.060

Cited by 79 publications

(99 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This limits the extent to which response functions adapt to encode ipsilateral-leading HPRs. The adaptive coding seen in the above studies may share some mechanisms with stimulusspecific adaptation in the IC (Lumani and Zhang 2010;Malmierca et al 2009;Reches and Gutfreund 2008;Zhao et al 2011). The adaptive coding perspective elucidates a different but related role of adaptation in the auditory system.…”

Section: How Strongly Adaptive Are Auditory Spatial Cues?mentioning

confidence: 72%

Adaptive coding is constrained to midline locations in a spatial listening task

Maier

Hehrmann

Harper³

et al. 2012

Journal of Neurophysiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although such adaptation is thought to improve coding of relevant stimulus features, the relationship between adaptation at the neural and behavioral levels remains to be established. Here we describe improved discrimination performance for an auditory spatial cue (interaural time differences, ITDs) following adaptation to stimulus statistics. Physiological recordings in the midbrain of anesthetized guinea pigs and measurement of discrimination performance in humans both demonstrate improved coding of the most prevalent ITDs in a distribution, but with highest accuracy maintained for ITDs corresponding to frontal locations, suggesting the existence of a fovea for auditory space. A biologically plausible model accounting for the physiological data suggests that neural tuning is stabilized by inhibition to maintain high discriminability for frontal locations. The data support the notion that adaptive coding in the midbrain is a key element of behaviorally efficient sound localization in dynamic acoustic environments.adaptation; interaural time difference; midbrain; neural model; psychophysics MOST SPECIES EVOLVE in complex environments containing diverse sources of sensory information over a very wide range of intensities, frequencies, and locations. Sensory systems must efficiently encode over this wide range of possible stimulus values, given a limited availability of coding resources. One means by which neural systems can overcome this challenge is to adapt on a behavioral timescale in order to represent with particular efficiency the subset of natural stimuli in the current environment. Such adaptive coding is observed across a wide range of species and stimulus modalities and is apparent in the responses of single neurons (Dean et al. 2005;Fairhall et al. 2001;Ohzawa et al. 1982) and across populations of neurons (Dean et al. 2005(Dean et al. , 2008Watkins and Barbour 2008). Fisher information (FI) represents one possible measure of coding quality that can be used to evaluate adaptive coding (Dean et al. 2005).Nevertheless, despite the apparent advantage adaptive coding would confer on sensory processing, the link between adaptive coding at the neural level and performance in sensory tasks is difficult to establish. Psychophysical assessment of adapted neural systems is often considered with respect to perceptual illusions such as afterimages (McCollough 1965) At the cognitive level, the term "cuing" is employed to describe the influence of prior stimulation on sensory performance, for example, in reducing reaction times required to localize a sound source in a given spatial hemifield (Spence and Driver 1994).However, none of these concepts-aftereffects, mislocalization, or cuing-is easily reconciled with the concept of adaptive coding at the neural level. This normally describes the rapid adjustment of neural tuning properties to better represent the prevailing stimulus environment (Garcia-Lazaro et al. 2007;Maravall et al. 2007; Nagel and Doupe 2006) rather than neural fatigue or higher, perhaps attentiona...

show abstract

Section: How Strongly Adaptive Are Auditory Spatial Cues?mentioning

confidence: 72%

Adaptive coding is constrained to midline locations in a spatial listening task

Maier

Hehrmann

Harper³

et al. 2012

Journal of Neurophysiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This, with all caution in comparing different neural scales, makes the RP a possible human electrophysiological counterpart of SSA, with which it shares many properties: both occur without overt attention to sounds, are stimulus-specific, and develop rapidly over multiple timescales (Baldeweg, 2007;Nelken and Ulanovsky, 2007;CostaFaidella et al, 2011). Although SSA literature is overwhelming (Ulanovsky et al, 2003(Ulanovsky et al, , 2004Pérez-González et al, 2005;Reches and Gutfreund, 2008;Anderson et al, 2009;Malmierca et al, 2009;Antunes et al, 2010;Farley et al, 2010;Zhao et al, 2011), to date, no study has attempted to explore SSA-timing interactions. To confirm that an irregular timing dampens the repetition effects on a neuronal scale, further research in animal models tapping the influence of timing predictability in the generation of SSA should prove instructive.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the auditory system, repetition suppression spans multiple spatial and time scales, as revealed by animal single-cell recordings exhibiting stimulus-specific adaptation (SSA) in cortical and subcortical structures (Ulanovsky et al, 2003(Ulanovsky et al, , 2004Pérez-González et al, 2005;Reches and Gutfreund, 2008;Anderson et al, 2009;Malmierca et al, 2009;Antunes et al, 2010;Farley et al, 2010;Zhao et al, 2011), human long-and middle-latency auditory-evoked potentials (AEP) (Haenschel et al, 2005;Slabu et al, 2010;Costa-Faidella et al, 2011;, and fMRI studies (Mutschler et al, 2010). However, none of the abovementioned studies explored the influence of timing regularity on repetition suppression, a subject lightly tapped in human electrophysiology literature, leading to contradictory findings.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interactions between “What” and “When” in the Auditory System: Temporal Predictability Enhances Repetition Suppression

Costa‐Faidella

Baldeweg²,

Grimm³

et al. 2011

J. Neurosci.

140

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Neural activity in the auditory system decreases with repeated stimulation, matching stimulus probability in multiple timescales. This phenomenon, known as stimulus-specific adaptation, is interpreted as a neural mechanism of regularity encoding aiding auditory object formation. However, despite the overwhelming literature covering recordings from single-cell to scalp auditory-evoked potential (AEP), stimulation timing has received little interest. Here we investigated whether timing predictability enhances the experience-dependent modulation of neural activity associated with stimulus probability encoding. We used human electrophysiological recordings in healthy participants who were exposed to passive listening of sound sequences. Pure tones of different frequencies were delivered in successive trains of a variable number of repetitions, enabling the study of sequential repetition effects in the AEP. In the predictable timing condition, tones were delivered with isochronous interstimulus intervals; in the unpredictable timing condition, interstimulus intervals varied randomly. Our results show that unpredictable stimulus timing abolishes the early part of the repetition positivity, an AEP indexing auditory sensory memory trace formation, while leaving the later part (ϳϾ200 ms) unaffected. This suggests that timing predictability aids the propagation of repetition effects upstream the auditory pathway, most likely from association auditory cortex (including the planum temporale) toward primary auditory cortex (Heschl's gyrus) and beyond, as judged by the timing of AEP latencies. This outcome calls for attention to stimulation timing in future experiments regarding sensory memory trace formation in AEP measures and stimulus probability encoding in animal models.

show abstract

“…Unlike those previous designs, oddball sequences give us the opportunity to investigate the effect of the local stimulus history on stimulus-specific adaptation. Such analyses of responses in oddball sequences have been conducted before in the auditory cortex of anesthetized cats (Ulanovsky et al, 2004) and the inferior colliculus of anesthetized rats (Zhao et al, 2011). These studies distinguished local effects, i.e., of the just preceding stimuli within a sequence, and global effects, i.e., of the overall presentation probability, on the responses.…”

Section: Effects Of Stimulus History On It Responsesmentioning

confidence: 97%

Neurons in Macaque Inferior Temporal Cortex Show No Surprise Response to Deviants in Visual Oddball Sequences

Kaliukhovich

Vogels

2014

Journal of Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many studies measured neural responses in oddball paradigms, showing a different response to the same stimulus when presented with a low (deviant) compared with a high probability (standard) in a sequence. Such a differential response is manifested in event-related potential studies as the mismatch negativity (MMN) and has been observed in several sensory modalities, including vision. Other studies showed that stimulus repetition suppresses the neural response. It has been suggested that this adaptation effect underlies the smaller responses to the standard compared with the deviant stimulus in oddball sequences. However, the MMN may also reflect the violation of a prediction based on the sequence of standards, i.e., a surprise response. We examined the presence of a surprise response to deviants in visual oddball sequences in macaque (Macaca mulatta) inferior temporal (IT) cortex, a higher-order cortical area. In agreement with visual MMN studies, single-unit IT responses were greater for the deviant than for the standard stimuli. However, single IT neurons showed no greater response to the deviant stimulus in the oddball sequence than to the same stimulus presented with the same probability in a sequence that consisted of many stimuli. LFPs also showed no evidence of a surprise response. These data suggest that stimulus-specific adaptation, without a surprise-related boost of activity to the deviant, underlies the responses in visual oddball sequences even in higher visual cortex. Furthermore, we show that for IT neurons such adaptive mechanisms take into account a relatively short stimulus history, with weaker effects at longer time scales.

show abstract

Stimulus-specific adaptation and its dynamics in the inferior colliculus of rat

Cited by 79 publications

References 19 publications

Adaptive coding is constrained to midline locations in a spatial listening task

Adaptive coding is constrained to midline locations in a spatial listening task

Interactions between “What” and “When” in the Auditory System: Temporal Predictability Enhances Repetition Suppression

Neurons in Macaque Inferior Temporal Cortex Show No Surprise Response to Deviants in Visual Oddball Sequences

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About