Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorWalker, Kerry MM
dc.contributor.authorGonzalez, Ray
dc.contributor.authorKang, Joe Z
dc.contributor.authorMcDermott, Joshua Hartman
dc.contributor.authorKing, Andrew J
dc.date.accessioned2021-02-12T22:35:04Z
dc.date.available2021-02-12T22:35:04Z
dc.date.issued2019-03
dc.date.submitted2018-09
dc.identifier.issn2050-084X
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/129762
dc.description.abstractPitch perception is critical for recognizing speech, music and animal vocalizations, but its neurobiological basis remains unsettled, in part because of divergent results across species. We investigated whether species-specific differences exist in the cues used to perceive pitch and whether these can be accounted for by differences in the auditory periphery. Ferrets accurately generalized pitch discriminations to untrained stimuli whenever temporal envelope cues were robust in the probe sounds, but not when resolved harmonics were the main available cue. By contrast, human listeners exhibited the opposite pattern of results on an analogous task, consistent with previous studies. Simulated cochlear responses in the two species suggest that differences in the relative salience of the two pitch cues can be attributed to differences in cochlear filter bandwidths. The results support the view that cross-species variation in pitch perception reflects the constraints of estimating a sound’s fundamental frequency given species-specific cochlear tuning.en_US
dc.language.isoen
dc.publishereLife Sciences Publications, Ltden_US
dc.relation.isversionofhttp://dx.doi.org/10.7554/elife.41626en_US
dc.rightsCreative Commons Attribution 4.0 International licenseen_US
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/en_US
dc.sourceeLifeen_US
dc.titleAcross-species differences in pitch perception are consistent with differences in cochlear filteringen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.citationWalker, Kerry MM et al. "Across-species differences in pitch perception are consistent with differences in cochlear filtering." eLife 8 (March 2019): e41626 © 2018 Walker et al.en_US
dc.contributor.departmentMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciencesen_US
dc.relation.journaleLifeen_US
dc.eprint.versionFinal published versionen_US
dc.type.urihttp://purl.org/eprint/type/JournalArticleen_US
eprint.statushttp://purl.org/eprint/status/PeerRevieweden_US
dc.date.updated2019-07-17T18:36:50Z
dspace.date.submission2019-07-17T18:36:52Z
mit.journal.volume8en_US
mit.metadata.statusComplete


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record