↓ Skip to main content

Role of intracranial cavities in avian directional hearing

Overview of attention for article published in Biological Cybernetics, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 Mendeley
Title
Role of intracranial cavities in avian directional hearing
Published in
Biological Cybernetics, May 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00422-016-0688-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ole Næsbye Larsen, Jakob Christensen-Dalsgaard, Kenneth Kragh Jensen

Abstract

Whereas it is clear from anatomical studies that all birds have complex interaural canals connecting their middle ears, the effect of interaural coupling on directional hearing has been disputed. A reason for conflicting results in earlier studies may have been that the function of the tympanic ear and hence of the interaural coupling is sensitive to variations in the intracranial air pressure. In awake birds, the middle ears and connected cavities are vented actively through the pharyngotympanic tube. This venting reflex seems to be suppressed in anesthetized birds, leading to increasingly lower pressure in the interaural cavities, stiffening the eardrums, and displacing them medially. This causes the sensitivity, as well as the interaural coupling, to drop. Conversely, when the middle ears are properly vented, robust directional eardrum responses, most likely caused by internal coupling, have been reported. The anatomical basis of this coupling is the 'interaural canal,' which turns out to be a highly complex canal and cavity system, which we describe for the zebra finch. Surprisingly, given the complexity of the interaural canals, simple models of pipe-coupled middle ears fit the eardrum directionality data quite well, but future models taking the complex anatomy into consideration should be developed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 31 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 3 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 10%
Student > Bachelor 3 10%
Lecturer 2 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Other 10 32%
Unknown 8 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 19%
Neuroscience 5 16%
Engineering 3 10%
Psychology 2 6%
Physics and Astronomy 2 6%
Other 5 16%
Unknown 8 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 November 2016.
All research outputs
#20,353,668
of 22,901,818 outputs
Outputs from Biological Cybernetics
#636
of 676 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#286,228
of 333,193 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biological Cybernetics
#5
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,901,818 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 676 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 333,193 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.