Journal of Comparative Physiology A

, Volume 191, Issue 12, pp 1131–1135 | Cite as

Grouping in auditory temporal perception and vocal production is mutually adapted: the case of wriggling calls of mice

Original Paper
First Online:
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:

Abstract

Auditory Gestalt perception by grouping of species-specific vocalizations to a perceptual stream with a defined meaning is typical for human speech perception but has not been studied in non-human mammals so far. Here we use synthesized models of vocalizations (series of wriggling calls) of mouse pups (Mus domesticus) and show that their mothers perceive the call series as a meaningful Gestalt for the release of instinctive maternal behavior, if the inter-call intervals have durations of 100–400 ms. Shorter or longer inter-call intervals significantly reduce the maternal responsiveness. We also show that series of natural wriggling calls have inter-call intervals mainly in the range of 100–400 ms. Thus, series of natural wriggling calls of pups match the time-domain auditory filters of their mothers in order to be optimally perceived and recognized. A similar time window exists for the production of human speech and the perception of series of sounds by humans. Neural mechanisms for setting the boundaries of the time window are discussed.

Keywords

Auditory grouping Auditory streaming Maternal behavior Species–specific calls Time-interval perception 

Abbreviations

dB

Decibel

SPL

Sound pressure level

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (EH 53/17-3 and 19-1). The observations comply with the “Principles of animal care”, publication No. 86-23, revised 1985 of the National Institute of Health, and also with the current German laws.

References

  1. Akeroyd MA, Summerfield AQ (1999) A binaural analog of gap detection. J Acoust Soc Am 105:2807–2820CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Anstis S, Saida S (1985) Adaptation to auditory streaming of frequency-modulated tones. J Exp Psychol: Hum Percep Perform 11:257–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bregman AS (1990) Auditory scene analysis. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  4. Brosch M, Schreiner CE (2000) Sequence sensitivity of neurons in cat primary auditory cortex. Cereb Cortex 10:1155–1167PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brosch M, Schulz A, Scheich H (1999) Processing of sound sequences in macaque auditory cortex: response enhancement. J Neurophysiol 82:1542–1559PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Budd TW, Michie PT (1994) Facilitation of the N1 peak of the auditory ERP at short stimulus intervals. NeuroReport 5:2513–2516PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Calford MB, Semple MN (1995) Monaural inhibition in cat auditory cortex. J Neurophysiol 73:1876–1891PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Condon WS, Sander LW (1974) Neonate movement is synchronized with adult speech: interactional participation and language acquisition. Science 183:99–101PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Culling JF, Summerfield Q (1998) Measurements of the binaural temporal window using a detection task. J Acoust Soc Am 103:3540–3553CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ehret G (1975) Schallsignale der Hausmaus (Mus musculus). Behaviour 52:38–56Google Scholar
  11. Ehret G, Bernecker C (1986) Low-frequency sound communication by mouse pups (Mus musculus): wriggling calls release maternal behaviour. Anim Behav 34: 821–830CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ehret G, Riecke S (2002) Mice and humans perceive multiharmonic communication sounds in the same way. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99:479–482CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Fay RR (1998) Auditory stream segregation in goldfish (Carassius auratus). Hear Res 120:69–76CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Fay RR (2000) Spectral contrasts underlying auditory stream segregation in goldfish (Carassius auratus). JARO 01:120–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Finlayson PG (1999) Post-stimulatory suppression, facilitation and tuning for delays shape responses of inferior colliculus neurons to sequential pure tones. Hear Res 131:177–194CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Fishman YI, Reser DH, Arezzo JC, Steinschneider M (2001) Neural correlates of auditory stream segregation in primary auditory cortex of the awake monkey. Hear Res 151:167–187CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Geissler DB, Ehret G (2002) Time-critical integration of formants for perception of communication calls in mice. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99:9021–9025CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Hulse SH, MacDougall-Shackelton SA, Wisniewski B (1997) Auditory scene analysis by songbirds: stream segregation of bird song by European starlings (Sturnus vulgaris). J Comp Psychol 111:3–13CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Kanwal JS, Medvedev AV, Micheyl C (2003) Neurodynamics for auditory stream segregation: tracking sounds in the mustached bat’s natural environment. Network 14:413–435PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. MacDougall-Shackelton SA, Hulse SH, Gentner TQ, White W (1998) Auditory scene analysis by European starlings (Sturnus vulgaris): perceptual segregation of tone sequences. J Acoust Soc Am 103:3581–3587CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Ohala JJ (1975) The temporal regulation of speech. In: Fant G, Tatham MAA (eds) Auditory analysis and perception of speech. Academic Press, London, pp 431–453Google Scholar
  22. Pinker S (1994) The language instinct: how the mind creates language. William Morrow, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  23. Sachs L (1999) Angewandte Statistik. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  24. Scharf B (1978) Loudness. In: Carterette EC, Friedman MP (eds) Handbook of perception vol IV hearing. Academic Press, New York, pp 187–242Google Scholar
  25. Trehub SE (1985) Auditory pattern perception in infancy. In: Trehub SE, Schneider B (eds) Auditory development in infancy. Plenum Pres, New York, pp 183–195Google Scholar
  26. Yabe H, Tervaniemi M, Reinikainen K, Näätänen R (1997) Temporal window of integration revealed by MMN to sound omission. NeuroReport 8:1971–1974PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Yost WA (1991) Auditory image perception and analysis: the basis for hearing. Hear Res 56:8–18CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Zwicker E, Feldtkeller R (1967) Das Ohr als Nachrichtenempfänger. Hirzel, StuttgartGoogle Scholar
  29. Zwislocki J, Hellman RP, Verrillo RT (1962) Threshold of audibility for short pulses. J Acoust Soc Am 34:1648–1652Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of NeurobiologyUniversity of UlmUlmGermany

Personalised recommendations