Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorMooney, T. Aran  Concept link
dc.contributor.authorLi, Songhai  Concept link
dc.contributor.authorKetten, Darlene R.  Concept link
dc.contributor.authorWang, Kexiong  Concept link
dc.contributor.authorWang, Ding  Concept link
dc.date.accessioned2014-04-01T15:40:44Z
dc.date.available2014-04-01T15:40:44Z
dc.date.issued2013-10-18
dc.identifier.citationJournal of Experimental Biology 217 (2014): 444-452en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1912/6528
dc.description© The Author(s), 2013. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License. The definitive version was published in Journal of Experimental Biology 217 (2014): 444-452, doi:10.1242/​jeb.093773.en_US
dc.description.abstractHow an animal receives sound may influence its use of sound. While ‘jaw hearing’ is well supported for odontocetes, work examining how sound is received across the head has been limited to a few representative species. The substantial variation in jaw and head morphology among odontocetes suggests variation in sound reception. Here, we address how a divergent subspecies, the Yangtze finless porpoise (Neophocaena asiaeorientalis asiaeorientalis) hears low-, mid- and high-frequency tones, as well as broadband clicks, comparing sounds presented at different locations across the head. Hearing was measured using auditory evoked potentials (AEPs). Click and tone stimuli (8, 54 and 120 kHz) were presented at nine locations on the head and body using a suction-cup transducer. Threshold differences were compared between frequencies and locations, and referenced to the underlying anatomy using computed tomography (CT) imaging of deceased animals of the same subspecies. The best hearing locations with minimum thresholds were found adjacent to a mandibular fat pad and overlaying the auditory bulla. Mean thresholds were not substantially different at locations from the rostrum tip to the ear (11.6 dB). This contrasts with tests with bottlenose dolphins and beluga whales, in which 30–40 dB threshold differences were found across the animals' heads. Response latencies increased with decreasing response amplitudes, which suggests that latency and sensitivity are interrelated when considering sound reception across the odontocete head. The results suggest that there are differences among odontocetes in the anatomy related to receiving sound, and porpoises may have relatively less acoustic ‘shadowing’.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipThe work was funded by the Office of Naval Research, a Mellon Joint Initiatives Award, the Knowledge Innovation Program of Chinese Academy of Sciences [grant no. KSCX2-EW-Z-4] and the National Natural Science Foundation of China [grant no. 31170501].en_US
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisherCompany of Biologistsen_US
dc.relation.urihttps://doi.org/10.1242/​jeb.093773
dc.rightsAttribution 3.0 Unported*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/
dc.subjectSensoryen_US
dc.subjectAuditory brainstem responseen_US
dc.subjectNoiseen_US
dc.subjectMarine mammalen_US
dc.subjectOdontoceteen_US
dc.subjectCommunicationen_US
dc.titleHearing pathways in the Yangtze finless porpoise, Neophocaena asiaeorientalis asiaeorientalisen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1242/​jeb.093773


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Attribution 3.0 Unported
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Attribution 3.0 Unported