Display options
Cite
Astikainen P, Mällo T, Ruusuvirta T, et al. Electrophysiological evidence for change detection in speech sound patterns by anesthetized rats. Front Neurosci. 2014;8:374doi: 10.3389/fnins.2014.00374.
Astikainen, P., Mällo, T., Ruusuvirta, T., & Näätänen, R. (2014). Electrophysiological evidence for change detection in speech sound patterns by anesthetized rats. Frontiers in neuroscience, 8374. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2014.00374
Astikainen, Piia, et al. "Electrophysiological evidence for change detection in speech sound patterns by anesthetized rats." Frontiers in neuroscience vol. 8 (2014): 374. doi: https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2014.00374
Astikainen P, Mällo T, Ruusuvirta T, Näätänen R. Electrophysiological evidence for change detection in speech sound patterns by anesthetized rats. Front Neurosci. 2014 Nov 17;8:374. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2014.00374. eCollection 2014. PMID: 25452712; PMCID: PMC4233929.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Front Neurosci. 2014 Nov 17;8:374. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2014.00374. eCollection 2014.

Electrophysiological evidence for change detection in speech sound patterns by anesthetized rats.

Frontiers in neuroscience

Piia Astikainen, Tanel Mällo, Timo Ruusuvirta, Risto Näätänen

Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, University of Jyväskylä Jyväskylä, Finland.
  2. Centre for Learning Research, University of Turku Turku, Finland ; Department of Teacher education/Rauma Unit, University of Turku Rauma, Finland.
  3. Institute of Psychology, University of Tartu Tartu, Estonia ; Center of Functionally Integrative Neuroscience, University of Århus Århus, Denmark ; Cognitive Brain Research Unit, Institute of Behavioral Sciences, University of Helsinki Helsinki, Finland.

PMID: 25452712 PMCID: PMC4233929 DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2014.00374

Abstract

Human infants are able to detect changes in grammatical rules in a speech sound stream. Here, we tested whether rats have a comparable ability by using an electrophysiological measure that has been shown to reflect higher order auditory cognition even before it becomes manifested in behavioral level. Urethane-anesthetized rats were presented with a stream of sequences consisting of three pseudowords carried out at a fast pace. Frequently presented "standard" sequences had 16 variants which all had the same structure. They were occasionally replaced by acoustically novel "deviant" sequences of two different types: structurally consistent and inconsistent sequences. Two stimulus conditions were presented for separate animal groups. In one stimulus condition, the standard and the pattern-obeying deviant sequences had an AAB structure, while the pattern-violating deviant sequences had an ABB structure. In the other stimulus condition, these assignments were reversed. During the stimulus presentation, local-field potentials were recorded from the dura, above the auditory cortex. Two temporally separate differential brain responses to the deviant sequences reflected the detection of the deviant speech sound sequences. The first response was elicited by both types of deviant sequences and reflected most probably their acoustical novelty. The second response was elicited specifically by the structurally inconsistent deviant sequences (pattern-violating deviant sequences), suggesting that rats were able to detect changes in the pattern of three-syllabic speech sound sequence (i.e., location of the reduplication of an element in the sequence). Since all the deviant sound sequences were constructed of novel items, our findings indicate that, similarly to the human brain, the rat brain has the ability to automatically generalize extracted structural information to new items.

Keywords: auditory cortex; local-field potentials; mismatch negativity; pattern perception; rat; speech

References

  1. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2012 Jul 19;367(1598):1984-94 - PubMed
  2. Psychophysiology. 2014 Nov;51(11):1195-9 - PubMed
  3. PLoS One. 2007 Nov 14;2(11):e1175 - PubMed
  4. Front Psychol. 2011 Oct 28;2:283 - PubMed
  5. Neuropsychologia. 2012 Sep;50(11):2617-24 - PubMed
  6. Cognition. 2001 Mar;78(3):B53-64 - PubMed
  7. Nature. 2006 Apr 27;440(7088):1204-7 - PubMed
  8. Psychol Sci. 2007 May;18(5):387-91 - PubMed
  9. J Neurosci. 2013 Nov 27;33(48):18825-35 - PubMed
  10. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010 Apr 20;107(16):E65; author reply E66-7 - PubMed
  11. Nature. 1997 Jan 30;385(6615):432-4 - PubMed
  12. Cognition. 2002 Nov;86(1):B15-22 - PubMed
  13. Percept Psychophys. 1990 Jun;47(6):568-74 - PubMed
  14. Science. 2008 Mar 28;319(5871):1849-51 - PubMed
  15. Annu Rev Neurosci. 1999;22:567-631 - PubMed
  16. Trends Neurosci. 2001 May;24(5):283-8 - PubMed
  17. Cognition. 2010 Oct;117(1):106 - PubMed
  18. BMC Neurosci. 2009 Jul 29;10:89 - PubMed
  19. Neuroreport. 1998 Nov 16;9(16):3557-60 - PubMed
  20. Eur J Neurosci. 2007 Aug;26(3):701-3 - PubMed
  21. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2005 Aug;134(3):406-19 - PubMed
  22. J Acoust Soc Am. 1994 Nov;96(5 Pt 1):2758-68 - PubMed
  23. Science. 1999 Jan 1;283(5398):77-80 - PubMed
  24. Anim Cogn. 2013 Mar;16(2):165-75 - PubMed
  25. Percept Psychophys. 2005 Jul;67(5):867-75 - PubMed
  26. Experientia. 1986 Feb 15;42(2):109-14 - PubMed
  27. Nat Neurosci. 2008 May;11(5):603-8 - PubMed
  28. Brain Res Rev. 2010 Sep;64(1):123-36 - PubMed
  29. Acta Psychol (Amst). 1978 Jul;42(4):313-29 - PubMed
  30. J Acoust Soc Am. 2001 Oct;110(4):1729-32 - PubMed
  31. Neuroreport. 2006 Oct 2;17(14):1561-4 - PubMed
  32. J Acoust Soc Am. 1976 Sep;60(3):687-95 - PubMed

Publication Types