 |
Previous Article | Next Article 
Volume 16, Number 14,
Issue of July 15, 1996
pp. 4501-4517
Copyright ©1996 Society for Neuroscience
The Effects of Superior Temporal Cortex Lesions on the Processing
and Retention of Auditory Information in Monkeys (Cebus
apella)
Michael Colombo1,
Hillary R. Rodman2, and
Charles G. Gross2
1 Department of Psychology, Rutgers University, New
Brunswick, New Jersey 08903, and 2 Department of
Psychology, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey 08544
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
FOOTNOTES
REFERENCES
ABSTRACT
Three monkeys with extensive preoperative training on visual and
auditory memory tasks (delayed matching-to-sample), an auditory
pattern-discrimination task, and a visual serial-order task, received
bilateral lesions of the superior temporal (ST) cortex in two stages,
with testing after each lesion. Unilateral ST cortex lesions resulted
in only moderate auditory memory impairments, whereas bilateral ST
cortex lesions resulted in severe auditory memory impairments. The
bilateral ST cortex lesions also resulted in severe impairments in the
ability to relearn the auditory pattern-discrimination task. In
contrast to the auditory impairments, neither unilateral nor bilateral
ST cortex lesions had any effect whatsoever on either visual memory or
visual serial-order behavior. These findings indicate that the ST
cortex plays a role in auditory processing and retention similar to
that played by the inferior temporal cortex for visual processing and
retention.
Key words:
auditory cortex;
auditory memory;
visual memory;
delayed matching-to-sample;
serial-order task;
pattern discrimination;
frequency discrimination
INTRODUCTION
Much of what we know regarding the neural basis of
information processing in the primate brain is based on studies of the
visual system. For example, it is well established that damage to the
inferior temporal (IT) cortex, a high-level visual area, results in
impairments on both visual discrimination and visual memory tasks
(Gross, 1973 ; Mishkin, 1982 ). Less well established is the role played
by the superior temporal (ST) cortex, a high-level auditory area, in
the processing and retention of auditory information in monkeys. In
fact, despite similarities between the visual and auditory cortex in
terms of their cortical projection patterns (Pandya and Kuypers, 1969 ;
Jones and Powell, 1970 ; Pandya et al., 1988 ; Felleman and Van Essen,
1991 ), there is little evidence that ST cortex lesions in monkeys
impair performance on auditory-discrimination tasks, and there is no
evidence that such lesions impair performance on auditory memory
tasks.
The reason that ST cortex lesions have been found to have little effect
on auditory behavior in monkeys may be traced to procedural problems
with the auditory tasks used. Consider, for example, the findings that
auditory cortex lesions have little effect on auditory discriminative
behavior in monkeys. One problem may be that in most studies monkeys
were trained to discriminate on the basis of differences in the
frequency of two tones. Such simple frequency discriminations survive
not only ST cortex lesions (Weiskrantz and Mishkin, 1958 ; Iversen and
Mishkin, 1973 ; Pratt and Iversen, 1978 ), but in many cases they can
also survive extensive damage to primary auditory cortex (Evarts, 1952 ;
Jerison and Neff, 1953 ; Wegener, 1968 ; Dewson et al., 1969 ; Pratt and
Iversen, 1978 ). By contrast, much greater deficits are observed after
auditory cortex lesions when monkeys are trained to discriminate on the
basis of differences in acoustic patterns rather than between
differences in frequency (Jerison and Neff, 1953 ; Neff, 1961a ,b; Dewson
et al., 1969 ; Pratt and Iversen, 1978 ; Heffner and Heffner, 1984 ,
1986a ). Unfortunately, the extent to which the ST cortex alone is
necessary for auditory pattern discriminations is unclear, because in
most studies the lesions either were restricted to primary auditory
cortex (Pratt and Iversen, 1978 ) or included primary auditory cortex in
addition to ST cortex (Jerison and Neff, 1953 ; Neff, 1961a ,b).
A procedural-based explanation can also be offered for the finding that
in contrast to the visual memory deficits that follow IT cortex lesions
in monkeys (Mishkin, 1982 ), there is no evidence that auditory memory
in monkeys is impaired by ST cortex lesions. Part of the problem may be
that the tasks used to tap auditory memory could have been solved using
visual or spatial memory rather than auditory memory. The reason is as
follows. In most memory/lesion studies, memory is assessed using the
delayed matching-to-sample (DMS) procedure. Although there are many
variations of the DMS procedure, the basic task is quite
straightforward. A sample stimulus is presented to the subject for a
brief period of time and then removed. After a retention period, two
comparison stimuli are presented, one the same as the sample stimulus
and one different from the sample stimulus, and the subject is required
to choose the comparison stimulus that matches the previously displayed
sample stimulus. In the studies that have examined the effects of IT
cortex lesions on visual memory, the monkeys were trained on visual DMS
tasks in which the sample stimuli and the comparison stimuli
were visual. In contrast, in all previous studies that examined the
effects of ST cortex lesions on auditory memory, monkeys were trained
on DMS procedures in which the sample stimuli were auditory but the
comparison stimuli were either visual (auditory-visual DMS procedures:
Dewson, 1977, 1978, 1979; Costalupes, 1984 ) or spatial
(auditory-spatial DMS procedures: Dewson et al., 1970 ; Cowey and
Dewson, 1972 ; Cowey and Weiskrantz, 1976 ; Pratt and Iversen, 1978 ).
It is well known that monkeys can solve DMS tasks by engaging in
retrospective processing, i.e., remembering aspects of the sample
stimulus during the delay period (D'Amato, 1973 ; Roberts and Grant,
1976 ), or by engaging in prospective processing, i.e., remembering
aspects of the comparison stimuli during the delay period (Gaffan,
1977 ; Honig, 1978 ; Roitblat, 1980 ; Honig and Thompson, 1982 ; Colombo
and Graziano, 1994 ). If the monkeys in the ST cortex lesion studies
were engaging in retrospective processing, then the auditory-visual
and auditory-spatial DMS tasks indeed would have tapped auditory
memory. If the monkeys were using auditory memory, then the findings
that ST cortex lesions had no effect on auditory-visual or
auditory-spatial DMS memory performance would indicate correctly that
the ST cortex does not play a role in auditory memory. On the other
hand, if the monkeys were engaging in prospective processing, then the
auditory-visual and auditory-spatial DMS tasks would have tapped
visual and spatial memory, respectively, and not auditory
memory. If the monkeys were bypassing auditory memory, then the
findings that ST cortex lesions had little or no effect on performance
of the auditory-visual and auditory-spatial DMS tasks would not be
surprising, and in fact, would be
expected.1
The main purpose of the present experiment was to examine whether ST
cortex lesions impaired auditory memory in monkeys using a task that
was known to tap auditory memory. This was achieved by training monkeys
on an auditory DMS task in which the sample and comparison stimuli were
both auditory. With such a task, whether the monkeys engage
in retrospective or prospective processing is irrelevant, because in
both cases the task would require auditory memory. A second purpose was
to examine whether ST cortex lesions impaired auditory pattern
discrimination in monkeys. As a control for the auditory DMS task, all
of the monkeys were also trained on a procedurally identical visual DMS
task. In addition, the monkeys were also trained on a visual
serial-order task.
Parts of this paper have been published previously (Colombo et al.,
1990 ).
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Subjects
Three laboratory-born New World monkeys (Cebus
apella), ranging in age from 7 to 9 years at the start of the
study, served as subjects. The study took ~1 year to complete. During
that time, the subjects were housed individually with water available
continuously and maintained on a 12 hr light/dark cycle with lights on
at 7 A.M. They received one feeding per day (Purina Monkey Chow 5045),
2-3 hr after a test session, in an amount adjusted to support reliable
and stable performance. The daily rations were sufficient to maintain
the monkeys at ~90% of their free-feeding body weights. Their diet
was supplemented with fresh fruit and raisins.
With the exception of the frequency-discrimination task, all three
monkeys had been trained for a period of 5 years on all of the tasks
used in the present study. Their first experience was in an auditory
study discriminating various tunes (D'Amato and Salmon, 1982 , 1984 ).
All three monkeys were then trained on visual and then auditory DMS
tasks with delays ranging from 0 to 32 sec (D'Amato and Colombo, 1985 ;
D'Amato et al., 1985 ; Colombo and D'Amato, 1986 ). They next
participated in another auditory study discriminating between a series
of ascending and descending tones (D'Amato and Colombo, 1988a ).
Finally, before the present study, all three monkeys were trained on
the visual serial-order task.
Apparatus
All testing was conducted in two Lehigh Valley monkey-operant
chambers (Model 1317). The front panel (Fig. 1) of each
box housed five inline visual stimulus projectors (IEE Model 1071)
arranged at the midpoint and four corners of a 12 cm square. Each
projector was fitted with a transparent plastic button that served as
the response mechanism for the visual tasks. Situated 16 cm on either
side of the two bottom projectors were levers that served as the
response mechanisms for the auditory tasks. Beneath each lever was a
speaker (3 W, 10.2 cm, 8 ohm, Realistic Model FE-103) that was used to
deliver the acoustic stimuli. Located directly below the projector
array was a microswitch that was used to initiate the trials on the
serial-order and auditory-discrimination tasks.
Fig. 1.
Diagram of the front panel of the monkey operant
chamber. P refers to the visual stimulus projectors used for
the visual DMS task and visual serial-order task. S and
L refer to the speakers and levers, respectively, used for
the auditory DMS, pattern-discrimination, and frequency-discrimination
tasks. MS refers to a microswitch that was used to initiate
trials on the serial-order, pattern-discrimination, and
frequency-discrimination tasks.
[View Larger Version of this Image (9K GIF file)]
Each chamber was illuminated by an overhead houselight, a 25 W
soft-white light bulb situated behind a transparent plastic shield. The
houselight could be dimmed by adding a 500 ohm resistor in series with
the bulb. Extraneous sounds were masked by white noise and an exhaust
fan, which together measured 75 dB. Noyes banana-flavored pellets (190 mg), delivered to a food cup on the lower part of the right wall,
served as reinforcers. The programming of trial events, presentation of
stimuli, and data recording were controlled by a PDP 8/e minicomputer
(Digital Equipment Corporation) and a Commodore PET microcomputer
(series 2001) and disk unit (Model 8050).
Visual stimuli. The visual stimuli consisted of colors and
simple geometric forms such as a circle, a plus sign, a vertical line,
a red disk, a dot, and an hourglass. All form stimuli appeared as white
figures on a black background and were composed of lines 1.5 mm
wide × 17 mm long. The circle, also composed of a 1.5 mm wide
line, was 17 mm in diameter. The solid dot and red disk were 6 mm and
25 mm in diameter, respectively.
Auditory stimuli. With one exception noted below, all of the
auditory stimuli consisted of square-wave tones of different
frequencies. The sounds were generated by a Commodore Pet (series 2001)
microcomputer and amplified by the amplifier portion of an MTU D/A
converter (Model K-1002). On one brief occasion, monkey T was tested
with sine-wave tones rather than square-wave tones. These sounds were
generated by a Heath-Schlumberger (Model SG-18A) sine-wave generator
and amplified by a Realistic (Model SA-10) stereo amplifier. The
intensity of all the acoustic stimuli ranged from 78 to 85 dB, as
measured on the C scale (slow setting) of a Simpson sound lever meter
(Model 886) placed 15 cm in front of the center of the right speaker
and 23 cm above the chamber floor.
Behavioral tasks
Auditory DMS. The main stimuli used on the auditory
DMS task consisted of a high-frequency tone (HT) of 3676 Hz and a
low-frequency tone (LT) of 243 Hz. The monkeys were trained on a
Konorski (1959) successive go/no-go asymmetrically reinforced matching
procedure. The sequence of events on an auditory matching trial was as
follows. At the end of a 20 sec intertrial interval (ITI), the
houselight was illuminated, and 2 sec later a sample stimulus was
played from the speaker located beneath the right lever. After a 2 sec
listening period, the first response to the right lever terminated the
sample stimulus, extinguished the houselight, and initiated a delay
interval. At the end of the delay, the houselight was illuminated
concurrently with presentation of the comparison stimulus from the
speaker situated under the left lever. After a 0.4 sec listening
period, the comparison stimulus continued to play until a response was
made to the left lever, or until an additional 2.6 sec (the response
window) elapsed.
On matching trials (HT-HT and LT-LT), a correct response was defined
as pressing the left lever during the response window, which resulted
in termination of the comparison stimulus, delivery of reward, and
entry into the ITI, signaled by dimming of the overhead houselight. On
nonmatching trials (HT-LT and LT-HT), a correct response required
withholding presses to the left lever during the response window. Such
action resulted in termination of the comparison stimulus and entry
into the ITI, but no reward pellet was delivered. Withholding a
response on matching trials, or responding on nonmatching trials, both
defined as incorrect responses, resulted in a 60 sec time-out period,
during which the houselight was turned off. The time-out period was
followed by the ITI.
All auditory DMS sessions consisted of 39 trials, the first three of
which served to familiarize the subject with the conditions of the task
and therefore were not included in the data analysis. The remaining 36 trials were divided equally among the four possible sample/comparison
configurations with the only restriction that no more than three
matching or three nonmatching trials appear in succession.
The auditory DMS task was administered in two different formats. In the
``baseline'' format, the delay for all trials was set at 0.5 sec in
duration. In the ``retention'' format, three delay periods were used
(0.5, 4, and 32 sec), with 12 trials dedicated to each delay period,
intermixed quasirandomly; the only restriction was that no more than
three delays of a kind or three matching or nonmatching trials appear
in succession. Throughout the study, eight different pseudorandomly
constructed sequences of trials were used for baseline DMS testing, and
12 different pseudorandomly constructed sequences were used for the
retention DMS testing.
Visual DMS. The stimuli used on the visual DMS task
consisted of a plus and a circle. Procedurally, the visual and auditory
DMS tasks were identical, with the exception that the sample and
comparison visual stimuli were presented on the bottom right and left
projectors, respectively, and the monkeys responded to the visual
stimuli by directly pressing the plastic buttons that faced the
projectors.
Auditory pattern and frequency discriminations. Two
different types of stimuli were used for auditory-discrimination
testing. For the auditory-pattern discrimination, the animals were
trained to discriminate between an ascending (S+:
2688-3012-3378-3788 Hz) and a descending (S :
4808-4237-3788-3378 Hz) series of tones, which correspond to
exemplars A1 and D3 of the D'Amato and Colombo (1988a) study. The
duration of each tone was 140 msec separated by an 80 msec silent
period for a total playing time of 800 msec. Consecutive playing times
were separated by an 800 msec silent period. For the frequency
discrimination, the animals were required to discriminate between
either two high-frequency notes (S+, 4808 Hz; S , 2688 Hz) or two
low-frequency notes (S+, 613 Hz; S , 306 Hz). None of the animals had
any experience with the frequency-discrimination task before the start
of this study.
Only the right lever and the right speaker were used for the pattern
and frequency-discrimination tasks. The monkeys were trained on an
asymmetrically rewarded go/no-go procedure to press the lever in the
presence of the S+ sound and to refrain from pressing when the S
sound was presented. The sequence of events on a discrimination trial
was as follows. At the end of a 15 sec ITI, the houselight was
illuminated, and after four presses to the microswitch, the auditory
stimulus was played from the speaker situated beneath the right lever.
The stimulus was played for both a listening period, during which
responses to the lever were ineffective, and a response period, during
which responses were effective. For the pattern-discrimination task,
the listening and response periods were 2.5 sec and 3.1 sec,
respectively; for the frequency-discrimination task, these values were
0.4 sec and 2.6 sec, respectively.
On S+ trials, a correct response, defined as pressing the lever during
the response period, resulted in termination of the S+ stimulus,
delivery of the reward pellet, and entry into the ITI, signaled by
dimming of the overhead houselight. A correct response on an S trial
required withholding a response to the lever for the duration of the
response period, which resulted in entry into the ITI but no reward.
Failure to press during S+ trials or pressing during S trials, both
defined as incorrect responses, resulted in a 60 sec time-out period,
during which the houselight was turned off.
Each session consisted of 48 trials, 24 S+ and 24 S trials intermixed
randomly, with the only restriction being that no more than three S+ or
three S trials occurred in succession. Five different pseudorandomly
constructed sequences of S+ and S presentations were used for the
pattern-discrimination task, and five different pseudorandomly
constructed sequences were used for the frequency-discrimination
task.
Visual serial order. The stimuli used on the serial-order
task consisted of a vertical line, a red disk, a dot, and an hourglass,
which for ease of exposition will hereafter be referred to as A, B, C,
and D, respectively. A serial-order trial proceeded in the following
manner. At the end of a 15 sec ITI, the houselight was illuminated, and
after completion of four presses to the microswitch, all four stimuli
were presented simultaneously on any four of the five projectors. A
correct response required pressing the four stimuli in the order
A B C D. Such correct responses resulted in termination of the
stimulus display, delivery of reward, and entry into the ITI, signaled
by dimming of the overhead houselight. Any deviation from the
A B C D response sequence (e.g., by committing a forward error
such as A B D, or a backward error such as A B C B) was
considered an incorrect response and resulted in termination of the
trial and commencement of a 60 sec time-out period, during which the
houselight was turned off. The ITI followed the time-out period.
Immediately repeating a response to a stimulus (e.g.,
A B B C D) was not considered an error. Each session consisted
of 40 trials, with the four stimuli appearing in different spatial
locations on each trial. If a stimulus array is defined as the
arrangement of the four stimuli on the five projectors, then 120 different spatial arrays are possible. A subset of 40 arrays were
chosen randomly from the complete set, and four different
pseudorandomly constructed sequences of these 40 arrays were used
throughout the experiment.
Once the monkeys learned the ABCD serial-order task, they were tested
for their knowledge of serial order using a pairwise test. The
procedure for the pairwise test was identical to that described for the
serial-order task, with the exception that only two of four stimuli
were presented on a trial; which two stimuli were presented changed
from trial to trial. A correct response required that the monkeys
respond to the two stimuli in the order in which they appeared in the
original sequence. A pairwise test session consisted of 36 trials, with
six trials dedicated to each of the six possible pairs of stimuli that
can be generated from the ABCD series (AB, AC, AD, BC, BD, and CD).
Experimental design
All three animals were tested preoperatively on the following
tasks in the following order: visual DMS, auditory DMS, pattern
discrimination, and serial order. After establishing baseline
performance on these tasks, the animals received a two-stage lesion of
the ST cortex with testing after each operation. Postoperatively the
animals were tested in the same order as described for preoperative
testing, with the exception that testing on the frequency- and
pattern-discrimination tasks occurred only after the second
operation.
Visual and auditory DMS tasks. For both visual and auditory
DMS tasks, the subjects were first required to satisfy a criterion of
one session with at least 32 of 36 correct responses (88.9% correct)
on the baseline DMS task in which all of the delays were set at 0.5 sec. The animals were then tested on the retention DMS task with delays
of 0.5, 4, and 32 sec. The first two sessions of visual and auditory
retention DMS testing served to familiarize the subject with the task
and were therefore not included in the data analysis. Testing continued
in replications of four sessions, with the performance during each
replication averaged to yield a retention gradient. Preoperatively,
testing continued until stable retention gradients were generated.
After the operations, testing continued until the postoperative
retention performance at each delay was within one correct
response (2.1%) of the mean preoperative retention gradient
performance.
Pattern-discrimination task. After auditory DMS testing, the
animals were tested on the pattern-discrimination task until they
satisfied a criterion of one session with at least 43 out of 48 correct
responses (89.6% correct).
Serial-order task. After pattern-discrimination testing, the
animals were tested on the serial-order task until they satisfied a
criterion of one session with at least 32 out of 40 correct responses
(80% correct). Once this was achieved, the animals were given two
pairwise tests separated by 3 d of testing on the ABCD
serial-order task.
Surgery
Before surgery, the monkeys were treated with atropine sulfate
(0.5 ml/kg, i.m.), furosemide (0.5 ml/kg, i.m.), and ketamine
hydrochloride (20 mg/kg, i.m.) and then given halothane via an
endotracheal tube to maintain deep anesthesia. The monkeys were then
placed in a headholder, immobilized with pancurium bromide (0.02 mg·kg 1·hr 1),
respirated with 68.5% nitrous oxide and 30.0% oxygen, and
anesthetized with 1.5% halothane.
All surgery was conducted under aseptic conditions. An incision was
first made in the scalp exposing the dorsal surface of the skull. The
temporal muscle was then retracted, and the bone overlying the ST
cortex was removed with rongeurs. The dura was then cut and retracted,
and the cortical tissue was removed by subpial aspiration with the aid
of an operating microscope. On completion of tissue removal, the dura
was sutured closed, and the temporal muscle was sewn back in place. The
scalp incision was then closed in anatomical layers, and a topical
analgesic (Xylocaine) was administered to the wound. On recovery of
spontaneous breathing, the monkey was maintained in a heated padded
cage, observed until it was alert and mobile, and then placed in its
home cage for the remainder of the postoperative recovery period.
Aspirin in liquid form was given immediately on recovery and continued
for several days postoperatively.
Monkeys B and T received lesions of the left ST cortex first, whereas
monkey M received lesions of the right ST cortex first. The lesions
were intended to remove auditory ``association'' cortex (area TA) but
to spare primary (area TC) and secondary (area TB) auditory cortex. In
terms of the architectonic parcellation scheme of Sanides (1972) and
Pandya and Sanides (1973) , the intention was to remove areas Ts1, Ts2,
Ts3, and Tpt, sparing the proisocortex of the temporal pole (Pro),
auditory koniocortex (Kam and Kalt), parakoniocortex (paAc, paAlt, and
paAr), and prokoniocortex (proA), as well as areas in the caudal and
rostral parinsular location (reIt and
paI).2 The anterior boundary of the
auditory cortex was taken to be a vertical line drawn from the tip of
the superior temporal sulcus to the lateral sulcus.
Histology
At the end of the experiment, each animal was euthanized with an
overdose of sodium pentobarbital and then perfused transcardially with
normal saline followed by 10% formalin. The head was then removed and
placed in a 10% formalin solution. Seven days later, the head was
mounted in a stereotaxic device, and vertical and horizontal pins were
passed through the brain, the resulting tracks of which served as
reference points for the cortical reconstruction. The brain was then
removed, photographed, and placed in a 30% sucrose and 10% formalin
solution and allowed to sink twice. It was then frozen and sectioned at
50 µm, and every tenth section was stained with cresyl violet.
RESULTS
Extent of lesions
Cortical reconstructions and representative cross-sections for
each monkey are shown in Figure 2. The lesions were
largely as intended and generally included the rostral and caudal
portions of the lower bank of the lateral sulcus, most of the ST
cortex, sparing a small section in its mid-caudal extent, and about
half of the upper bank of the superior temporal sulcus. The extent of
the lesion corresponded closely with area TA of Bonin and Bailey (1947)
and areas Ts1, Ts2, Ts3, and Tpt of Sanides (1972) and Pandya and
Sanides (1973) .
Fig. 2.
Flattened cortical reconstructions and
representative cross-sections for monkeys M, T, and B. The shaded
region represents the extent of the lesion. The top
portion of the figure illustrates how the flattened reconstructions
were generated.
[View Larger Version of this Image (57K GIF file)]
The area of cortex removed was measured from the flattened
reconstructions, and the amount of damage sustained to the different
components of the auditory cortex on the right and left sides is shown
in Table 1. The overall amount of auditory cortex
removed was similar for all three animals (range, 49.8-54.3%) as was
the amount of cortex removed in the ST cortex (range, 82.3-90.1%).
For monkeys B and T, the amount of cortex removed in the superior
temporal sulcus (44.2% and 39.3%) and the lateral sulcus (30.7% and
27.8%) was similar. Relative to these two monkeys, monkey M had more
cortex removed in the superior temporal sulcus (58.3%) and less
removed in the lateral sulcus (14.7%). With the exception of monkey M,
who sustained asymmetrical damage to the STS, there was very little
difference between the right and left lesions.
Table 1.
Percentage of auditory cortex
damaged
|
Monkey
M
|
Monkey T
|
Monkey
B
|
| Right |
Left |
Total |
Right |
Left |
Total |
Right |
Left |
Total |
|
| LS |
14.9 |
14.5 |
14.7 |
33.2 |
22.6 |
27.8 |
36.8 |
24.7 |
30.7 |
| ST
cortex |
90.0 |
90.2 |
90.1 |
85.9 |
78.7 |
82.3 |
89.0 |
87.9 |
88.5 |
| STS |
89.2 |
29.3 |
58.3 |
38.8 |
39.9 |
39.3 |
40.1 |
48.2 |
44.2 |
| All
areas |
63.3 |
43.3 |
53.4 |
53.1 |
46.5 |
49.8 |
56.2 |
52.4 |
54.3 |
|
|
LS, Lower bank of lateral sulcus; ST, superior temporal; STS,
upper bank of superior temporal sulcus.
|
|
Visual DMS
Neither unilateral nor bilateral ST cortex lesions had any effect
on visual DMS performance. The performance of each monkey on the
baseline (0.5 sec) and retention (0.5, 4, and 32 sec) DMS tasks
preoperatively and after each operation is shown in Figure
3. Preoperatively, all three monkeys required only one
session to attain criterion on the baseline DMS task. Postoperatively,
the monkeys required between one and two sessions after the unilateral
lesion, and only one session after the bilateral lesion, to achieve the
criterion on the baseline DMS task.
Fig. 3.
Performance on the visual DMS task preoperative
(PRE) and after the first (UNI) and second
(BIL) ST cortex lesions for monkeys M (top), T
(middle), and B (bottom). Baseline DMS sessions,
which used delays of 0.5 sec, are represented by a single
circle. Retention DMS sessions, which used delays of 0.5, 4, and
32 sec, are represented by three symbols (circle,
square, and triangle) connected by a vertical
line. Each baseline DMS session is based on 1 d of testing,
whereas each retention DMS session is based on the average performance
over 4 d of testing. Shown at the bottom are the number of days
after each operation when testing was initiated. The preoperative
value, representing the number of days before the first operation when
testing was initiated, is shown as a negative number. The dotted
line represents chance levels of performance.
[View Larger Version of this Image (15K GIF file)]
The number of replications required to achieve stable retention DMS
performance preoperatively and after each operation is also shown in
Figure 3. Preoperatively, all three animals required only two
replications to achieve stable retention gradients. Postoperatively,
the monkeys required only one to two replications after the unilateral
lesion and two to three replications after the bilateral lesion to
achieve preoperative retention performance
levels.3
Auditory DMS
Unilateral lesions
The effects of ST cortex lesions on auditory DMS behavior is shown
in Figure 4. Preoperatively, the monkeys required only
one session to reach criterial levels on the baseline DMS task and two
replications to generate stable preoperative retention gradients. After
the unilateral ST cortex lesions, the monkeys required one to three
sessions to satisfy the criterion on the baseline DMS task. Monkeys M
and T then required five and six replications, respectively, to achieve
preoperative retention DMS performance levels. Despite satisfying the
criterion on the baseline DMS task, monkey B was unable to reach
preoperative retention DMS levels after eight replications, and because
there was little evidence of improvement, testing was terminated. A
single-subject factorial ANOVA, with operation (2), delay (3), and days
(4) as factors, applied to performance on the eighth replication
revealed, as expected, a significant drop in performance compared with
preoperative levels [F(1,18) = 8.24, p < 0.05]. In addition to examining whether the
operation affected the overall levels of DMS performance, we were also
interested in evaluating whether the operation affected the rate of
forgetting, i.e., whether there were any differences between the slopes
of the preoperative and postoperative retention gradients. The
operation × delay interaction, which compares the slopes of the
preoperative and postoperative retention gradients, was not significant
(p = 0.23), indicating that there were equal
rates of forgetting before and after the operation.
Fig. 4.
Performance on the auditory DMS task
preoperatively (PRE) and after the first (UNI)
and second (BIL) ST cortex lesions for monkeys M
(top), T (middle), and B (bottom).
Baseline DMS sessions, which used delays of 0.5 sec, are represented by
a single circle. Retention DMS sessions, which used delays
of 0.5, 4, and 32 sec, are represented by three symbols
(circle, square, and triangle)
connected by a vertical line. Each baseline DMS session is based on
1 d of testing, whereas each retention DMS session is based on the
average performance over 4 d of testing. Shown at the bottom are
the number of days after each operation when testing was initiated. The
preoperative value, representing the number of days before the first
operation when testing was initiated, is shown as a negative number.
P refers to proportional testing in which the proportion of
short-delay trials was increased relative to medium- and long-delay
trials; S refers to testing with sine waves. The
dotted line represents chance levels of performance.
[View Larger Version of this Image (25K GIF file)]
The auditory DMS performance of monkey B was again evaluated 114 d
after the first operation (48 d after the termination of the eighth
replication). Despite requiring only one session to achieve criterial
performance on the baseline DMS task, there was no evidence for
improvement on the retention DMS task. In fact, performance on this
retest replication was worse than performance on the first retention
DMS replication after the operation. A single-subject factorial ANOVA
applied to the retest replication data again revealed a significant
drop in performance compared with preoperative levels
[F(1,18) = 27.51, p < 0.01], and again no difference in the preoperative and postoperative
rates of forgetting (p = 0.70).
Bilateral lesions
Ablation of the ST cortex in the remaining hemisphere resulted in
severe auditory DMS impairments in all three monkeys. Although monkey M
required only four sessions to relearn the baseline DMS task to
criterion, she was unable to recover retention DMS performance to
preoperative levels after six consecutive replications. A
single-subject factorial ANOVA comparing the sixth replication and
preoperative data indicated a significant overall impairment in
auditory DMS performance [F(1,18) = 45.88, p < 0.01]. The operation × delay interaction,
however, was not significant (p = 0.59),
indicating that the rate of forgetting after the second operation was
similar to the preoperative rate of forgetting.
The fact that the short-delay performance averaged over the six
consecutive replications was only 82% correct is particularly
interesting given that monkey M averaged 91.7% correct on the baseline
DMS criterial session immediately before DMS retention gradient
testing. One possible explanation for the reason that short-delay
performance suffered during retention DMS testing was that monkey M may
have been operating in a ``medium- and long-delay set'' and that the
rapid onset of the comparison stimulus on short-delay trials was
unexpected, thus impairing performance. To test this idea, after the
completion of the sixth replication, monkey M was returned to the
baseline DMS task and satisfied the baseline criterion in one session.
Monkey M was then tested on the retention DMS task. To encourage a
``short-delay set,'' however, the constitution of a retention DMS
session was changed from 12 trials at each delay to 24 short-, 6 medium-, and 6 long-delay trials. The results of changing the
proportion of short, medium, and long delays are also presented in
Figure 4 (indicated as P). To a certain degree, the
manipulation had the predicted effect, with overall short-delay
performance improving to a level higher than that reported in any of
the previous six retention DMS replications [88.5 vs 82.0%;
t(5) = 3.93, p < 0.05].
Despite the elevation in performance at the short delay, however, there
was no significant improvement in performance at the medium-delay
interval (72.9 vs 70.9%; p = 0.38), and performance at
the long-delay period was significantly worse than in the six previous
retention DMS replications [60.4 vs 65.0%;
t(5) = 3.08, p < 0.05].
As a result of the improvement in performance at the short-delay
interval, a single-subject factorial ANOVA revealed a significant
operation × delay interaction
[F(2,18) = 3.95, p < 0.05], suggesting a faster rate of forgetting postoperatively.
A final assessment of the retention DMS performance of monkey M was
made 112 d after the second operation. In the hope of further
elevating short-delay performance, monkey M was first returned to the
baseline auditory DMS task until she satisfied the criterion for four
consecutive sessions. This difficult criterion was achieved in six
sessions, with monkey M averaging 91.7, 88.9, 94.4, and 97.2% correct
on the final four criterial sessions. After this training, monkey M was
administered one final retention DMS replication and the results are
again shown in Figure 4. Although short-delay performance rose to a
level higher than that recorded for any other replication after the
second operation [91.7%, t(5) = 5.86, p < 0.01], there was no noticeable improvement in
performance at the medium- (p = 0.11) or
long-delay (p = 0.16) intervals. Despite the
increase in performance at the short delay, a single-subject factorial
ANOVA revealed that the operation × delay interaction was not
significant (p = 0.27), again indicating
similar rates of forgetting between the preoperative and this final
retention DMS replication.
The auditory DMS deficits were even more pronounced for monkeys B and
T. The performances of each monkey on the baseline auditory DMS task
during three different 10-session periods after the second operation
are shown in Figure 4. Despite various attempts at retraining the
monkeys during a 4- to 5-month period, there was little indication that
either animal would be able to relearn the baseline auditory DMS task.
For example, the average performance of monkey T generated 167-176 d
after the second operation showed very little change over performance
generated 33-44 d postoperatively (69.4 vs 65.6%, respectively,
p = 0.32). Likewise for monkey B, a one-way ANOVA
comparing baseline auditory DMS performance generated 24-33 d
(67.8%), 91-100 d (63.9%), and 119-128 d (66.7%) after the second
operation indicated no significant change in level of performance
(p = 0.57).
Degree of impairments across delays
To characterize further the auditory DMS impairments, we examined
the effects that the lesions had on the short-, medium-, and long-delay
periods by comparing the postoperative performance for each delay
across all replications (omitting the criterial replication where
applicable) to the average of the two corresponding preoperative delay
values, using one-sample t tests. After the first operation,
across the first four replications monkey M was impaired only at the
long-delay interval [t(3) = 9.30, p < 0.01]. For monkey T, performance across the first
five replications revealed impairments at both the medium-
[t(4) = 4.74, p < 0.01]
and long-delay [t(4) = 4.00, p < 0.05] intervals. Finally, across all nine
replications, monkey B was impaired at the short-
[t(8) = 3.40, p < 0.01],
medium- [t(8) = 13.03, p < 0.01], and long-delay [t(8) = 8.80, p < 0.01] intervals. A similar examination made for
monkey M after the second operation revealed that across all eight
replications monkey M was impaired at the short-
[t(7) = 7.02, p < 0.01],
medium- [t(7) = 12.65, p < 0.01], and long-delay [t(7) = 13.13, p < 0.01] periods.
Of the three animals after the first operation, monkey B was clearly
the most impaired, followed by monkey T, and then monkey M. Monkey B
was not only impaired at the short-, medium-, and long-delay intervals,
but within the time allotted for testing, monkey B was unable to
achieve preoperative levels of performance at any of the three delay
periods when tested on the retention DMS task. In this respect, the
impairments of monkey B were quite similar to those of monkey M after
the second operation, in that monkey M was also impaired at all three
delay intervals, and within the time allotted for testing also seemed
unable to achieve preoperative levels of performance at any of the
three delay periods on the retention DMS task. (Note that both animals
were able to attain preoperative levels on the baseline DMS task.) To
examine whether there was any difference in the overall levels of
impairment between monkeys B and M, we first computed the percentage
drop in performance compared with preoperative levels for each delay
for each postoperative replication. Planned comparisons based on a
factorial ANOVA with subject (2: monkeys B and T) and percentage drop
at each delay (3: short, medium, and long) as factors revealed that
monkey M was more impaired than monkey B at both the short-delay
[t(45) = 6.76, p < 0.01]
and medium-delay [t(45) = 2.79, p < 0.01] intervals, but not at the long-delay
(p = 0.08) interval.
Auditory DMS: other tests
Sine waves
Because square waves are known to generate a large number of
harmonics of the fundamental frequency, one possible explanation for
the poor auditory DMS performance was that the lesions simply made the
monkeys more sensitive to the interfering effects of the harmonics. To
evaluate this possibility, monkey T was tested with the HT and LT
stimuli delivered as sine waves rather than as square waves, and the
results are shown in Figure 4 (marked as S). Testing with
sine waves resulted in lower performance levels (56.1%) than testing
with square waves either immediately before (72.2%) or after (65.3%),
a result that likely is attributable to a generalization decrement
associated with the different quality of sound produced by the sine
waves compared with square waves. Nevertheless, there was little
indication, at least for monkey T, that sensitivity to the harmonics
generated by the square-wave sounds was responsible for the auditory
DMS impairments.
Transfer tests
In the original auditory DMS study, D'Amato and Colombo (1985)
reported that when monkeys B, M, and T learned to match-to-sample with
a particular pair of auditory stimuli, they then transferred responding
to novel pairs of auditory stimuli, indicating that they possessed a
``matching concept'' in the auditory modality. Given that monkey M
was able to perform the baseline auditory DMS task to criterial levels,
we retested this animal on her ability to transfer responding to the
same stimuli to which she showed high levels of transfer in the
original study. The results of these transfer tests, along with her
original transfer levels from the D'Amato and Colombo (1985) study,
are shown in Figure 5.
Fig. 5.
Transfer ability of monkey M to different stimuli
after the second (bilateral) ST cortex lesion. Also shown are the
transfer levels attained by monkey M in an earlier study. The acoustic
stimuli of Test 1 were the HT (3676 Hz) and a Gliss tune
ranging in frequency between 1437 and 8333 Hz. In Test 2,
the stimuli were an alternating (0.7 Hz) HT and LT (243 Hz) and a
steady MT (947 Hz). The tempo difference between the stimuli used in
Test 2 was eliminated in Test 3 by using
alternating (4 Hz) doublets of the HT and LT and a pulsating (4 Hz)
MT.
[View Larger Version of this Image (25K GIF file)]
For the first transfer test, the stimuli consisted of the standard HT
stimulus and a ``Gliss'' tune composed of 11 monotonically ascending
and 11 monotonically descending frequencies ranging between 1437 and
8333 Hz. The duration of one complete playing of the Gliss tune was 1.5 sec. In the original study, monkey M averaged 88.2% correct over a
six-session period, whereas in this current study she was able to
average only 77.3% correct during a similar period
[t(10) = 3.04, p < 0.05]. The second transfer test used an alternating HT and LT (0.7 Hz)
stimulus and a steady 947 Hz medium-frequency tone (MT) stimulus. In
the original study, monkey M averaged 93.8% correct over a
three-session period. In this current study, monkey M performed at
comparable levels, averaging 90.7% correct over a similar period
(p = 0.42). One explanation for this high
level of transfer was that rather than relying on the frequency
differences, monkey M was relying on the tempo differences between the
alternating HT/LT and steady MT sounds. Thus, in the third transfer
test, this tempo difference was eliminated by testing monkey M with a
pulsed (4 Hz) MT and a pulsed (4 Hz) alternating series of HT and LT
doublets (HT.HT/LT.LT). With the tempo difference removed, over a
three-session period monkey M performed much more poorly in this
current study compared with the original transfer study (63.9 vs
91.0%; t(5) = 10.41, p < 0.01). In summary, the ability of monkey M to transfer responding to
auditory-based features of stimuli to which she had shown high levels
of transfer in a previous study was severely compromised after
bilateral ST cortex lesions.
Latency measures
Although all of the animals were required to listen to the
auditory sample stimulus for at least 2 sec, longer postoperative
latencies might indicate, for example, that the ST cortex lesions
affected the motivation levels of the monkeys. To evaluate this
possibility, we computed the median latency to respond to the sample
stimulus for each auditory baseline DMS session after the second
operation, and we compared these values with the median latency of the
two preoperative sessions using one-sample t tests. There
was no significant difference between the latency to respond to the
auditory sample stimulus preoperatively or after the second ST cortex
lesion for monkey M (2.30 vs 2.34 sec; p = 0.10),
monkey T (3.00 vs 3.06 sec; p = 0.60), or monkey B
(2.18 vs 2.37 sec; p = 0.07). These results indicate
that bilateral damage to the ST cortex did not alter the latency to
respond to the sample stimulus on the baseline auditory DMS task.
Auditory pattern discrimination
The ability of all three monkeys to perform the auditory
pattern-discrimination task, i.e., to discriminate between an ascending
(2688-3012-3378-3788 Hz) and a descending (4808-4237-3788-3378
Hz) series of tones, was also impaired by the bilateral ST cortex
lesions. The number of sessions required to satisfy the criterion
preoperatively and after the bilateral lesion are shown in Figure
6. Despite not having been exposed to the task for
196-206 d, preoperatively all three monkeys relearned the pattern
discrimination in two to three sessions. After bilateral ST cortex
lesions, all three monkeys were impaired in their ability to perform
the pattern-discrimination task. Monkey M required 13 sessions to
relearn the task and showed a steady improvement in performance over
the course of that period. In contrast, monkeys B and T showed very
little evidence of improvement, averaging 54.2% correct and 54%
correct over the course of 8 and 15 sessions of testing,
respectively.
Fig. 6.
Performance on the pattern-discrimination task
preoperatively and after the second (bilateral) ST cortex lesion for
monkeys M, T, and B. The top and bottom dotted
lines represent criterial and chance levels of performance,
respectively.
[View Larger Version of this Image (17K GIF file)]
Frequency discrimination
A critical question is whether the monkeys, in particular monkeys
B and T, could discriminate the HT (3676 Hz) and LT (243 Hz) sounds
used in the auditory DMS task. To examine this issue, all three monkeys
were first tested on their ability to discriminate between two sounds
in the HT frequency range: 4808 Hz (S+) and 2688 Hz (S ). The results
are shown in Figure 7, top. Monkeys M and T required one
and seven sessions, respectively, to satisfy the criterion of one
session with at least 43 out of 48 (89.6%) correct responses. Monkey
B, on the other hand, showed very little evidence of improvement over
the course of the first 12 sessions, averaging 57.8% correct. When
tested again 55 d later, monkey B was still unable to satisfy the
criterion despite 15 sessions of testing, although overall performance
did improve to 72.9% correct.
Fig. 7.
Performance on the high-range (2688 vs 4808 Hz)
and low-range (306 vs 613 Hz) frequency-discrimination tasks
preoperatively and after the second (bilateral) ST cortex lesion for
monkeys M, T, and B. The top and bottom dotted
lines represent criterial and chance levels of performance,
respectively.
[View Larger Version of this Image (25K GIF file)]
The monkeys were also trained to discriminate between two sounds in the
LT frequency range, 613 Hz (S+) and 306 Hz (S ), and the results are
shown in Figure 7, bottom. Monkeys M and T required 5 and 15 sessions,
respectively, to learn the task to criterion. Paralleling the deficits
experienced with the high-frequency sounds, monkey B had difficulty
discriminating between the two low-frequency sounds, but was able to
average 74.2% correct over the last 10 of 20 sessions when testing was
terminated because of time constraints.
Serial-order task
Neither unilateral nor bilateral ST cortex lesions had any effect
on performance of the visual serial-order task. Preoperatively the
monkeys required between two and three sessions to achieve criterion on
the baseline ABCD serial-order task. Postoperatively, the monkeys
required between three and seven sessions after the unilateral lesions
and between two and three sessions after the bilateral lesions to
achieve criterial levels on the ABCD serial-order task.
In a previous study, D'Amato and Colombo (1988b) reported that latency
to respond to the first item of a test pair increased as a function of
the position of the item in the series (first-item latency effect) and
that the latency to respond to the second item of a pair increased as a
function of the number of missing items separating the first and second
items (second-item latency effect). The first-item and missing-item
latencies generated preoperatively and after each operation are shown
in Figure 8. A within-subjects ANOVA was applied to the
first-item and missing-item latency data. Planned polynomial contrasts
revealed a significant linear trend for the first-item latencies
[F(1,4) = 9.82, p < 0.05] and missing-item latencies [F(1,4) = 12.07, p < 0.05], indicating that the first-item
and missing-item latency effects noted in the original D'Amato and
Colombo (1988b) study were apparent in the current study. Although
there were changes in the speed with which the task was solved, which
is common with repeated exposure to the pairwise test (D'Amato and
Colombo, 1988b ; Colombo et al., 1993 ), there was no indication that
either unilateral or bilateral ST cortex lesions affected the overall
pattern of the first-item (p = 0.77) or
missing-item (p = 0.07) latency effects.
Fig. 8.
The first-item latency effect (top) and
missing-items latency effect (bottom) generated
preoperatively and after the first (unilateral) and second
(bilateral) ST cortex lesions. In the top, the
response latency is to the first item of a test pair as a function of
whether the first item is stimulus A (pairs AB, AC, and AD), B (pairs
BC and BD), or C (pair CD). In the bottom, the response
latency is to the second item of a test pair as a function of whether
the number of missing items is 0 (pairs AB, BC, and CD), 1 (pairs AC
and BD), or 2 (pair AD). The figures are collapsed across all three
monkeys and across the two preoperative, two unilateral, and two
bilateral test sessions.
[View Larger Version of this Image (35K GIF file)]
DISCUSSION
Summary of findings
Neither unilateral nor bilateral ST cortex lesions had any effect
on visual DMS or visual serial-order behavior. In contrast, the
unilateral and bilateral ST cortex lesions resulted in moderate and
severe impairments, respectively, on the auditory DMS task.
Preoperatively the three monkeys required only one session to attain
criterial levels on the baseline DMS task and only two replications to
generate stable retention gradients. After the unilateral ST cortex
lesion, monkeys M and T required between one and two sessions,
respectively, to attain criterion on the baseline DMS task, and five
and six replications, respectively, to attain preoperative levels on
the retention DMS task. Although monkey B was able to attain criterion
on the baseline DMS task in three sessions, he was unable to attain
preoperative levels on the retention DMS task despite testing over a
period of ~3 months. Paralleling the deficits in relearning the
retention DMS task, relative to preoperative performance levels monkey
M was impaired at only the short-delay interval, monkey T was impaired
at both the short- and medium-delay intervals, and monkey B was
impaired at all three delay intervals.
After the bilateral lesions, only monkey M was able to attain criterial
levels on the baseline DMS task. Despite a number of attempts over a
period of ~4 months, however, there was no indication that monkey M
was able to attain preoperative levels on the retention DMS task at any
of the three delay intervals. The situation for monkeys B and T was
even more serious. Despite testing over a period of ~4-5 months,
neither animal was able to attain criterial levels on the baseline DMS
task. Although all three monkeys were impaired in performing the
auditory DMS task with two stimuli separated by almost four octaves,
monkey M was able to discriminate with little difficulty between two
high-frequency sounds separated by only one octave and between two
low-frequency sounds also separated by only one octave; monkey T was
able to attain criterial levels on both frequency discriminations but
required substantially more sessions to do so than monkey M; and monkey
B was unable to discriminate between the high- and low-frequency
stimuli to criterial levels but nevertheless was significantly above
chance levels.
In addition to impairments on the auditory DMS task, after the
bilateral ST cortex lesions all three monkeys were also impaired in
their ability to relearn the auditory pattern-discrimination task.
Despite not having been exposed to the auditory pattern-discrimination
task for >6 months, preoperatively the monkey required only two to
three sessions to relearn the task to criterial levels. After the
bilateral lesions, monkey M was able to relearn the task to criterial
levels, showing a steady improvement over the 13 sessions required to
do so. Neither monkey B nor monkey T showed any improvement in
performing the auditory pattern-discrimination task over 8 and 15 sessions, respectively, and their performance during these periods was
virtually at chance levels.
The auditory DMS and pattern-discrimination deficits were apparent
despite the fact that preoperatively all three monkeys were extensively
overtrained on both these tasks. This was particularly so for the
auditory DMS task, where all three animals were trained for a period of
3-4 years before the start of the current experiment.
During that time, they accumulated ~11,000-19,000 auditory DMS
trials, with delays ranging from 0 to 32 sec. Yet despite this
extensive overtraining, and despite the fact that overtraining has
often been shown to reduce the effects of lesions to IT cortex (Chow
and Survis, 1958 ; Orbach and Fantz, 1958 ), the ST cortex lesions
resulted in severe impairments in auditory DMS behavior. In contrast,
the monkeys received much less training on the visual DMS task, with
delays ranging from 0 to 32 sec (~3000-8000 trials), yet visual DMS
behavior was not affected in the least by the ST cortex lesions.
Relation between lesion site and behavioral deficits
It was the intention in this study to lesion auditory
association cortex (area TA), sparing both primary auditory koniocortex
(area TC) and secondary auditory parakoniocortex (area TB). In terms of
the architectonic parcellation scheme of Sanides (1972) and Pandya and
Sanides (1973) , the intention was to lesion areas Ts1, Ts2, Ts3, and
Tpt on the ST cortex, as well as the extensions of these regions into
the lateral sulcus and superior temporal sulcus. For the most part, the
actual lesions were very close to the intended lesion. Thus for all
three animals, the lesions included the rostral and caudal ends of the
lower bank of the lateral sulcus, most of the ST cortex sparing a
portion in its mid-caudal extent, and approximately half of the upper
bank of the superior temporal sulcus.
Despite general similarities in the pattern of the lesions, it was
clear after the second operation that the three monkeys were impaired
to differing degrees on the baseline auditory DMS,
pattern-discrimination, and frequency-discrimination tasks. Monkey M,
for example, was the least impaired of the three subjects, being able
to relearn the baseline auditory DMS and pattern-discrimination tasks
as well as rapidly acquiring the frequency-discrimination task. In
contrast, monkeys B and T both showed little indication of being able
to relearn the baseline auditory DMS or pattern-discrimination tasks,
and relative to monkey M, both were certainly more impaired on the
frequency-discrimination task.
The differing degree of behavioral impairments noted in the three
monkeys does not seem to be related to the amount of damage sustained
by either the ST cortex or the superior temporal sulcus. Indeed, if
anything, monkey M sustained more damage to these two regions than did
monkeys B or T, yet was least impaired on the auditory tasks. Rather,
the degree of behavioral impairments seems to correlate with the amount
of damage sustained to the lower bank of the lateral sulcus, with
monkeys B and T receiving about twice as much damage to this region as
monkey M. In addition, the critical area within the lateral sulcus
seems to be the anterior rather than the posterior region. The reason
is that monkeys B and T, who were most impaired on the auditory tasks,
both received more than twice as much damage to the anterior lateral
sulcus (24.5 and 24.9%, respectively) compared with monkey M (11.4%).
In contrast, although monkey B received the largest amount of damage to
the posterior lateral sulcus (6.2%), there was little difference
between the amount of damage sustained to this region for monkeys M and
T (3.3 and 2.9%, respectively).
Hemispheric asymmetries
Both behavioral (Petersen et al., 1978 ; Hauser and Andersson,
1994 ) and neural (Dewson, 1977; Heffner and Heffner, 1984 , 1986a ;
Gaffan and Harrison, 1991 ) studies have indicated that the left ST
cortex in the monkey brain is specialized for processing auditory
information. It is interesting to note, therefore, that after the first
operation, monkey B and to a lesser extent monkey T, both of whom
sustained left ST cortex lesions, were more impaired on the auditory
DMS task than monkey M, who sustained a right ST cortex lesion.
Although this might be viewed as support for the notion of hemispheric
asymmetry of auditory function, perhaps a more parsimonious
interpretation in the current situation is that the degree of
impairment after the unilateral lesion was related to the amount of
damage sustained in the lower bank of the lateral sulcus (24.7, 22.6, and 14.9%, for monkeys B, T, and M, respectively). This is not to say
that the auditory cortex is not lateralized along the dimensions
specified by others, but merely that in this current situation
asymmetry of function is not the only or most parsimonious
interpretation of the data.
Issues of asymmetry aside, that monkey B was impaired on the auditory
DMS task after the unilateral lesion merits further consideration. Of
particular interest is the fact that the auditory DMS impairments
sustained by monkey B after the unilateral lesions were similar to the
auditory DMS impairments sustained by monkey M after the bilateral
lesions. For example, although both subjects were able to achieve
criterial levels of performance on the baseline (0.5 sec) DMS task,
both experienced difficulty at all three delay intervals on the
retention DMS task, and indeed within the time allotted for testing,
both were unable to recover retention DMS performance to preoperative
levels. Despite these similarities, it was clear that after the second
operation monkey M was quantitatively more impaired at the
short- and medium-delay intervals than monkey B after the first
operation. Although scant evidence exists, similar suggestions from the
IT cortex lesion literature indicate that unilateral disruption of IT
cortex does impair visual DMS performance (Kovner and Stamm, 1972 ), and
these impairments are generally less severe than those observed after
bilateral disruption to IT cortex (Fuster et al., 1981 ).
Comparison with previous auditory memory studies
In contrast to previous studies that have failed to find any
effects of ST cortex lesions on auditory memory (Dewson et al., 1970 ;
Cowey and Dewson, 1972 ; Cowey and Weiskrantz, 1976 ; Dewson, 1977, 1978, 1979; Pratt and Iversen, 1978 ; Costalupes, 1984 ), the results of this
current study indicate that when monkeys are trained on a DMS task
using auditory sample, and auditory comparison stimuli in
particular, then bilateral ST cortex lesions result in severe
impairments in auditory memory. It seems likely, therefore, that the
failure of previous attempts to obtain auditory memory deficits after
ST lesions might indeed have been because the monkeys were engaging in
prospective processing, i.e., remembering visual and spatial rather
than auditory information during the delay period of the
auditory-visual and auditory-spatial DMS tasks, respectively.
That monkeys would recode auditory information into a visual code on an
auditory-visual DMS task is consistent with a number of studies
showing that animals tend to display superior retention when
information is processed through their dominant sensory modality
(Herman, 1980 ; Wallace et al., 1980 ; Herman and Forestell, 1985 ;
Colombo and D'Amato, 1986 ). In view of this modality bias, it seems
likely that when exposed to an auditory-visual DMS task, the visually
dominant monkey would recode the auditory sample information into the
correct visual comparison stimulus and remember visual information
throughout the delay period. In support of this, we have shown that
auditory-visual DMS performance in monkeys is much more sensitive to
delay-interval visual interference than to delay-interval auditory
interference, an outcome that can be explained only if the monkeys were
converting the auditory sample information into a visual code and
remembering visual information throughout the delay period (Colombo and
Graziano, 1994 ).
Although it is unclear from the perspective of a modality bias the
weight that a monkey would assign to auditory and spatial information,
the fact that monkeys learn spatial tasks with apparently greater ease
than they learn auditory tasks also would seem to indicate a preference
for processing spatial over auditory information. Regardless of whether
monkeys would prefer to recode auditory information into a spatial
code, the auditory-spatial DMS task presents a second interpretational
problem beyond that of processing strategy. That is, not only is it
possible for monkeys to bypass auditory memory by prospectively
processing spatial information on an auditory-spatial DMS task, but
the nature of a spatial response is such that an animal could bypass
memory altogether by adopting a correct body orientation
during the delay period (Hunter, 1913 ; Kojima, 1980 ). For example, in
the Pratt and Iversen study (1978), the required response was to press
either a right or a left lever after a delay period. To solve such a
task without using memory, the subjects need only to have heard the
auditory stimulus and then immediately situate themselves in front of
the proper response key during the delay period. In summary, the
adoption of either a prospective strategy or a body orientation
strategy would make it such that ST cortex lesions would have little or
no effect on auditory-spatial DMS performance.
Comparison with previous auditory
pattern-discrimination studies
In contrast to previous pattern-discrimination/lesion studies,
which typically included damage to primary auditory koniocortex, the
results from this current study indicate that in addition to causing
impairments in auditory memory, ST cortex lesions that seemed to spare
primary auditory koniocortex also caused impairments in the ability to
discriminate between an ascending and a descending pattern of tones.
These deficits were apparent despite the fact that the monkeys received
considerable preoperative experience discriminating between the two
auditory patterns, and despite the fact that preoperatively they were
able to relearn the task within two to three sessions even though they
had not been exposed to the task for >6 months.
Although the results of this current study suggest that damage sparing
auditory koniocortex can result in auditory pattern-discrimination
impairments, the extent to which the pattern-discrimination deficits
arise from damage restricted to ST cortex alone as opposed to
encroachment onto parakoniocortical regions in the anterior lower bank
of the lateral sulcus remains unclear. Wegener (1976) , for example, has
shown that lesions of the anterior lower bank of the lateral sulcus
(area Ts3 and parakoniocortical areas paAr and PaI) also produce
auditory pattern-discrimination impairments in monkeys. Although it is
difficult to determine with reference to the architectonic parcellation
scheme of Sanides (1972) and Pandya and Sanides (1973) the extent to
which the current lesions encroached onto parakoniocortical areas, it
is clear that monkeys B and T, who were most impaired on the auditory
pattern-discrimination task, also received greater amounts of damage to
the anterior portion of the lower bank of the lateral sulcus than
monkey M, who was least impaired on the auditory pattern-discrimination
task.
It is worth noting that although the auditory pattern-discrimination
task could have been solved on the basis of the ascending
(2688-3012-3378-3788 Hz) and descending (4808-4237-3788-3378 Hz)
overall pattern of the sounds, it could also have been
solved on the basis of the fact that the first two notes of the
ascending series were different from and did not overlap with the first
two notes of the descending series, thus reducing the task to a
frequency discrimination. Likewise, although there was complete overlap
of the notes used in the pattern-discrimination studies of Neff and
colleagues (Jerison and Neff, 1953 ; Neff, 1961a , 1961b ) (800-1000-800
Hz vs 1000-800-1000 Hz) and the Pratt and Iversen (1978) study
(2400-300-2400 Hz vs 300-2400-300 Hz), the pattern discriminations
could have been based on the first note of the two sounds, which were
always different, again reducing the task to a frequency
discrimination. In fact, there is little evidence that monkeys are able
to extract pattern from nonspecies-specific sounds and often rely on
local frequency differences in the patterns to solve
``pattern''-discrimination tasks (D'Amato and Salmon, 1982 , 1984 ;
D'Amato and Colombo, 1988a ). If this is true, then the results of this
current study and those of earlier pattern-discrimination/lesion
studies may indicate that ST cortex is not so much critical for pattern
discriminations as for any complex frequency discrimination.
The mechanisms disrupted by ST cortex lesions
A number of factors can be ruled out as the basis for the auditory
DMS impairments observed in the present study. For example, two
variables that are known to affect the behavior of animals are their
motivation (Hull, 1943 ) and attention levels (Sutherland and
Mackintosh, 1971 ; Wagner, 1981 ). The modality-specific nature of the
impairments, however, rules out the possibility that general
motivational factors accounted for the auditory DMS deficits.
Furthermore, because the response latencies to initiate a trial did not
change from preoperative levels, it is difficult to argue that the ST
cortex lesions impaired the ability of the monkeys to attend to the
auditory stimuli.
Another factor that could account for the auditory DMS impairments is a
potential loss of hearing caused by the ST cortex lesions. In a series
of elegant experiments, Heffner and Heffner (1986b , 1990) showed that
damage to the auditory cortex in monkeys can result in a permanent
hearing loss (~40 dB) in the 250 Hz to 16 kHz range, a frequency
range that encompasses the HT and LT stimuli used in the auditory DMS
task. It seems unlikely, however, that the ST cortex lesions could have
caused a hearing loss sufficient to account for the auditory memory
impairments in the present study. First, the hearing losses
characterized by Heffner and Heffner (1986b , 1990) seem to occur only
after extensive removal of primary auditory cortex (Heffner and
Heffner, 1989 ). In addition, the results from a number of other studies
also indicate that auditory thresholds in the 300-900 Hz (Iversen and
Mishkin, 1973 ), 500-1000 Hz (Massopust et al., 1967 ), and 4000-5000 Hz
(Massopust et al., 1970 ) frequency ranges are not impaired by damage
restricted to the ST cortex. It seems likely, therefore, that ST cortex
lesions produce little, if any, hearing loss.
Auditory memory failure?
One possibility is that the ST cortex lesions have impaired
auditory memory. Such a statement, however, carries with it the
implication that the deficit is in simply remembering auditory
information, and that other aspects of auditory processing are intact.
The results of this study suggest that more than just the ability to
remember auditory information was affected by the ST cortex lesions.
For example, note some of the auditory DMS findings shown with monkey M
after the second operation. A pure memory disorder is difficult to
reconcile with the fact that (1) in most cases there was little
difference between the preoperative and postoperative rates of
forgetting, indicating that the lesions impaired performance equally
across all three delay periods; (2) performance at the 0.5 sec delay
period during retention DMS testing with delays of 0.5, 4, and 32 sec
was significantly lower than performance at the 0.5 sec delay period
during baseline DMS testing with delays of only 0.5 sec; and (3) there
was little evidence of transfer to stimuli to which there were high
levels of transfer in a previous study.
There are other lines of evidence that also argue against the
suggestion that the ST cortex lesions affected just auditory memory.
For example, all three monkeys were impaired to some degree on the
auditory pattern-discrimination task. Although one might argue that the
ability to distinguish between an ascending and a descending series of
tones requires retention of each element in the series and hence the
use of auditory memory, monkeys B and T were impaired on the high- and
low-range frequency discriminations, which certainly rely less on the
type of memory that might be required to solve the
pattern-discrimination task. In sum, there are a number of lines of
evidence, which suggests that the ST cortex lesions caused more than
simply an inability to remember auditory information.
A similar argument that more than just memory is affected can also be
made with respect to the effects of IT cortex lesions on visual DMS
behavior in monkeys. Indeed, in many respects the effects of ST and IT
cortex lesions on auditory DMS and visual DMS behavior, respectively,
are quite similar. For example, the performance drop at all delay
periods noted in this present study, particularly the shortest delay,
is exactly the same result that appears in IT cortex lesion studies,
and is apparent regardless of whether the visual DMS task is
trial-repetitive or trial-unique, or matching or nonmatching, and is
independent of whether the stimuli are colors, two-dimensional forms or
three-dimensional objects (Dean, 1974 , 1976 , 1982 ; Sahgal and Iversen,
1978a ,b; Fuster et al., 1981 ; Horel and Pytko, 1982 ; Mishkin, 1982 ;
Horel et al., 1984 ; but see Eacott et al., 1994 , for evidence that
rhinal cortex lesions, i.e., lesions to anterior and ventral IT cortex,
differentially affect trial-unique and trial-repetitive visual DMS
tasks and may not cause impairments at the shortest delay period). In
fact, IT cortex lesions even impair performance under conditions of
simultaneous matching in which the sample and comparison stimuli are
present at the same time on the displays (Ibuka et al., 1974 ; Sahgal
and Iversen, 1978a ,b; Fuster et al., 1981 ).
Levels of processing failure?
A second possible explanation of the auditory DMS deficits noted
in the present study is that the ST cortex lesions caused impairments
in the ability to process auditory information and that the auditory
memory impairments are a product of this processing failure. Such a
mechanism would be consistent with what has been referred to in the
human literature as a ``levels of processing'' effect. This view,
originally espoused by Craik and Lockhart (1972) , proposes that memory
is an emergent quality of information processing and that the level at
which information is processed will determine how long information is
remembered. Given that the degree of perceptual impairment would
constrain the level at which information can be processed, the degree
of perceptual impairment therefore would determine the degree of memory
impairment. It is clear that in the current study the ST cortex lesions
caused some degree of auditory perceptual impairments. More to the
point, the degree of memory loss across the three animals was
clearly related to their degree of perceptual loss. For example,
monkey M exhibited the least impairment on the frequency and
pattern-discrimination tasks and also the least impairment on the
auditory DMS task, whereas monkeys B and T exhibited much greater
frequency and pattern-discrimination impairments and also much greater
auditory DMS impairments.
A similar ``levels of processing'' argument can account for the
effects of IT cortex lesions on visual memory in monkeys. For example,
it is well established that IT cortex lesions do not produce visual
field defects (Cowey and Weiskrantz, 1963 , 1967 ) or impair basic
visual-sensory capacities (Weiskrantz and Cowey, 1963 ; Symmes, 1965 ;
Bender, 1973 ; Bender and Gross, 1981 ). Does this mean that IT animals
with visual memory impairments are normal in all other aspects of
visual perception and that they experience the visual world in the same
manner as unoperated animals? Not quite. In addition to impairments in
color vision (Heywood et al., 1995 ), studies of equivalence behavior in
which monkeys are trained with one class of stimuli and then tested
with slightly altered versions of that same class have shown that
monkeys with IT cortex lesions do not rely on the same cues for
discriminating stimuli as normal animals do (Butter et al., 1965 ;
Butter and Gekoski, 1966 ; Butter, 1968 ; Butter and Doehrman, 1968 ;
Butter and Hirtzel, 1970 ; Iwai, 1985 ). It is possible, therefore, that
the visual memory impairments that accompany IT cortex lesions might
also be a product of disruptions in the processing of visual
information.4
The idea that perceptual problems might underlie the memory impairments
that follow IT cortex lesions has been expressed by a number of
investigators. For example, Dean (1976 , 1982) (see also Wilson, 1968 )
has suggested that IT lesions in monkeys result in impairments in the
ability to categorize visual information effectively such that the
resulting categories are either fewer or of lesser precision. Although
the mechanisms by which perceptual impairments may result in memory
impairments are far from clear, the available evidence from IT cortex
studies and this study, as well as emerging evidence from auditory
studies in humans (Zatorre, 1985 ; Samson and Zatorre, 1992 ; Peretz et
al., 1994 ; Zatorre et al., 1994 ), indicates that it may be difficult to
obtain memory deficits in the absence of perceptual deficits from
lesions of higher-order visual and auditory cortical areas.
Summary and conclusions
Anatomically, the visual and auditory systems are similar in terms
of both their internal and external projection patterns. For example,
both systems have quite similar outward sequentially organized
projections that originate and terminate in specific cortical layers
(Pandya and Yeterian, 1985 ). In addition, both system have similar
extrinsic projection patterns to frontal, limbic, and parietal cortex
(Pandya and Kuypers, 1969 ; Jones and Powell, 1970 ; Van Hoesen et al.,
1972 ; Chavis and Pandya, 1974 , 1976 ; Van Hoesen and Pandya, 1975 ;
Seltzer and Pandya, 1976 ; Barbas and Mesulam, 1981 , 1985 ; Morel et al.,
1993 ; Romanski et al., 1995 ).
In addition to anatomical similarities, the results of this current
experiment indicate that the auditory behavioral impairments that
follow damage to the ST cortex are similar in nature to the visual
behavioral impairments that follow damage to the IT cortex. This is
particularly so when one examines the effects of ST cortex and IT
cortex lesions on auditory DMS and visual DMS behavior, respectively.
In both cases, the lesions generally have little effect on the rate of
forgetting; i.e., the rate at which information is forgotten across the
delay periods changes very little from preoperative levels. Rather, ST
cortex and IT cortex lesions generally tend to depress performance
across all of the delay periods, including the shortest, indicating
that both types of lesions result in more than simply an inability to
remember auditory and visual information, respectively. Together, the
anatomical and behavioral data support the suggestion raised by Mishkin
(1982) that the ST cortex plays a role in auditory information
processing similar to that played by the IT cortex for visual
information processing.
One consequence of the idea that the neural basis of information
processing in the visual and auditory systems may be similar is that it
may offer a certain degree of predictive power. For example, the visual
system seems to be arranged hierarchically into two cortical pathways,
a ventral stream that projects to IT cortex that is primarily involved
in object recognition, and a dorsal stream that projects to parietal
cortex that is primarily responsible for spatial and visuomotor
functions (Mishkin et al., 1983 ; Ungerleider, 1986 ; Eacott and Gaffan,
1991 ) From a behavioral standpoint, monkeys with lesions of the ventral
stream are impaired on object- but not spatial-discrimination tasks,
with the reverse deficit holding true for monkeys with lesions to the
dorsal stream (Mishkin et al., 1983 ).
A similar organization might be present in the auditory system. For
example, primary auditory cortex (Kam and Kalt) projects to the
surrounding parakoniocortex, in particular area PaAlt (Pandya et al.,
1969 ; Pandya and Kuypers, 1969 ; Pandya and Vignolo, 1969 ; Jones and
Powell, 1970 ; Morel et al., 1993 ). From this point, one can envision
two pathways, a ``ventral'' stream consisting of projections to areas
Ts3, Ts2, and Ts1 that is responsible for the recognition of sounds,
and a ``dorsal'' system consisting of projections to Tpt and then
area PG of the parietal lobe that is responsible for the processing of
information related to the spatial localization of a sound source. In
fact, it has been noted that Tpt seems architectonically more similar
to PG than to Ts3, its neighboring region on the ST cortex (Sanides,
1972 ; Pandya and Sanides, 1973 ), and in addition, area Tpt projects to
the parahippocampal cortex (Tranel et al., 1988 ), which is thought to
be important for spatial information processing (Suzuki, 1994 ; Suzuki
and Amaral, 1994 ). Furthermore, electrophysiological recordings of area
Tpt in monkeys (Leinonen et al., 1980 ) have shown that the activity of
cells in this region are significantly influenced by the location of
the sound source with respect to the monkey's head. Thus, Tpt might be
one station in a dorsal auditory pathway responsible for the spatial
localization of a sound source.
Behaviorally, there is some evidence in favor of two auditory streams.
For example, just as lesions to the dorsal visual stream have no effect
on visual-pattern discrimination, lesions to Tpt and area PG, which
constituted the hypothesized analogous dorsal stream in the auditory
modality, do not affect the ability of monkeys to discriminate
species-specific calls (Heffner and Heffner, 1984 , 1986a ). On the other
hand, discrimination of species-specific sounds is impaired after
lesions to the entire ST cortex, which houses all of the components of
the proposed ventral system. It will be experiments of this sort and
those such as the recent electrophysiological examinations of ST cortex
(Rauschecker et al., 1995 ) that will ultimately determine the
similarities or differences in how information is processed in the
auditory and visual cortical areas.
FOOTNOTES
Received Dec. 14, 1995; revised April 22, 1996; accepted May 3, 1996.
1 One study that seemed free of the recoding
interpretational problem was that of Stepien et al. (1960) , in which
monkeys were trained on a DMS task to match auditory pulsed stimuli of
5 and 20 Hz. According to the study, bilateral ``superior temporal''
lesions resulted in an apparent inability to perform the auditory DMS
task. Unfortunately, the results are inconclusive with respect to
auditory memory for several reasons. First, it is unclear whether click
rate requires uniquely auditory processing, because a general mechanism
may exist for encoding repetitive stimuli independent of the associated
modality (Ravizza and Belmore, 1978 ). Consistent with this possibility
is the finding that before the operation, the animals generalized
immediately from auditory clicks to visual flashes of the same
frequency. Second, and more importantly, a 2-year follow-up study
(Cordeau and Mahut, 1964 ) revealed no auditory DMS deficit but rather a
visual DMS impairment, a finding not surprising given that the
``auditory cortex'' lesion actually included the dorsal part of IT
cortex and the temporal pole and in fact very little of the ST
cortex.
2 We have adopted the architectonic parcellations
of Sanides (1972) and Pandya and Sanides (1973) merely for ease of
exposition and as a guide to give the reader an appreciation of the
location and extent of the lesions, and not to indicate that such
areas, which are based on studies with rhesus monkeys, are necessarily
present in the cebus monkey. Nevertheless, it is worthwhile to note
that in terms of external morphology, the brains of the rhesus and
cebus monkeys are remarkably similar. In addition, the placements of
areas TA, TB, and TC in the cebus monkey (Bonin, 1938) are virtually
identical to the placements of these areas in the rhesus monkey (Bonin
and Bailey, 1947).
4 Inferior temporal cortex is usually divided into
two major subdivisions, areas TEO (more posterior) and TE (more
anterior), which differ in their architecture (Bonin and Bailey, 1947;
Boussaoud et al., 1991 ), anatomical connections (Webster et al., 1991 ;
Gross et al., 1993 ; Webster et al., 1994 , 1995 ), visuotopic
organization (Gross et al., 1969 ; Desimone and Gross, 1979 ; Boussaoud
et al., 1991 ; Gross et al., 1993 ), single neuron properties (Iwai,
1985 ; Tanaka et al., 1991 ; Gross et al., 1993 ), and development
(Webster et al., 1991 ; Gross and Rodman, 1992 ; Rodman, 1994 ). These
regions also differ in terms of the behavioral effects after lesions,
with damage to area TEO resulting in greater perceptual deficits and
damage to area TE resulting in greater memory deficits (Iwai and
Mishkin, 1968 , 1969 ; Cowey and Gross, 1970 ; Iwai, 1985 ). Thus one might
argue that IT lesions impair equivalence behavior in monkeys because
such lesions, which include area TEO, impaired perceptual processes.
Perhaps if the damage had been confined to area TE, then performance on
tests of equivalence behavior would have been normal. In fact, damage
to area TE also results in visual perceptual deficits such as
impairments in global stereopsis (Cowey and Porter, 1979 ), object
transforms (Weiskrantz and Saunders, 1984 ), and transfer from a
three-dimensional object to a two-dimensional representation of the
object (Holmes and Gross, 1984 ). Thus even animals with area TE damage
probably do not perceive the world in exactly the same manner as normal
animals do.
This research was supported by National Science Foundation Grant
8417383 to M. R. D'Amato and National Institutes of Health Grant
MH-19420 to C.G.G. We thank M. R. D'Amato for providing valuable input
during all phases of this project, L. Kuseryk for help with the
histology, and E. Yeterian and D. Pandya for providing assistance with
the cortical reconstructions.
Correspondence should be addressed to Michael Colombo, Department of
Psychology, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.
Dr. Rodman's present address: Department of Psychology, Emory
University, Atlanta, GA 30322.
3 Monkey T, which required only two replications
to achieve preoperative performance levels on the retention DMS task
after the unilateral ST cortex lesion, was tested inadvertently for
another two replications. Criterial performance was maintained on both
of these replications.
REFERENCES
-
Barbas H,
Mesulam M-M
(1981)
Organization of afferent
input to subdivisions of area 8 in the rhesus monkey.
J Comp Neurol
200:407-431 .
-
Barbas H,
Mesulam M-M
(1985)
Cortical afferent input to the
principalis region of the rhesus monkey.
Neuroscience
15:619-637 .
-
Bender DB
(1973)
Visual sensitivity following inferotemporal
and foveal prestriate lesions in the rhesus monkey.
J Comp Physiol Psychol
84:613-621 .
-
Bender DB,
Gross CG
(1981)
Backward masking in monkeys after
foveal prestriate and inferior temporal cortex lesions.
Physiol Psychol
9:257-259.
-
Boussaoud D,
Desimone R,
Ungerleider LG
(1991)
Visual
topography of area TEO in the macaque.
J Comp Neurol
306:554-575 .
-
Butter CM
(1968)
The effect of discrimination training on
pattern equivalence in monkeys with inferotemporal and lateral striate
lesions.
Neuropsychologia
6:27-40.
-
Butter CM,
Doehrman SR
(1968)
Size discrimination and
transposition in monkeys with striate and temporal lesions.
Cortex
4:35-46.
-
Butter CM,
Gekoski WL
(1966)
Alterations in pattern
equivalence following inferotemporal and lateral striate lesions in
rhesus monkeys.
J Comp Physiol Psychol
61:309-312 .
-
Butter CM,
Hirtzel M
(1970)
Impairment in sampling visual
stimuli in monkeys with inferotemporal lesions.
Physiol Behav
5:369-370 .
-
Butter CM,
Mishkin M,
Rosvold HE
(1965)
Stimulus
generalization in monkeys with inferotemporal and lateral occipital
lesions.
In: Stimulus generalization
(Mostofsky, DI,
eds)
, p. 119. Stanford, CA: Stanford UP.
-
Chavis D,
Pandya DN
(1974)
Frontal lobe projections of the
cortical sensory association areas of the rhesus monkey.
Trans Am Neurol Assoc
99:192-195 .
-
Chavis DA,
Pandya DN
(1976)
Further observations on
corticofrontal connections in the rhesus monkey.
Brain Res
117:369-386 .
-
Chow KL,
Survis J
(1958)
Retention of overlearned visual
habit after temporal cortical ablation in monkey.
Arch Neurol Psychiatry
79:640-646.
-
Colombo M,
D'Amato MR
(1986)
A comparison of visual and
auditory short-term memory in monkeys (Cebus apella).
Q J Exp Psychol [B]
38:425-448 .
-
Colombo M,
Graziano M
(1994)
Effects of auditory and visual
interference on auditory-visual delayed matching to sample in monkeys
(Macaca fascicularis).
Behav Neurosci
108:636-639 .
-
Colombo M, D'Amato MR, Rodman HR, Gross CG (1990) Auditory
association cortex lesions impair auditory short-term memory in
monkeys. Science 247:336-338.
-
Colombo M,
Eickhoff AE,
Gross CG
(1993)
The effects of
inferior temporal and dorsolateral frontal lesions on serial-order
behavior and visual imagery in monkeys.
Cog Brain Res
1:211-217 .
-
Cordeau JP,
Mahut H
(1964)
Some long-term effects of temporal
lobe resections on auditory and visual discrimination in monkeys.
Brain
87:177-190.
-
Costalupes JA
(1984)
Superior temporal lesions and delayed
auditory matching in monkeys.
Exp Neurol
84:478-483 .
-
Cowey A,
Dewson JH
(1972)
Effects of unilateral ablation of
superior temporal cortex on auditory sequence discrimination in
Macaca mulatta.
Neuropsychologia
10:279-289.
-
Cowey A,
Gross CG
(1970)
Effects of foveal prestriate and
inferotemporal lesions on visual discrimination by rhesus monkeys.
Exp Brain Res
11:128-144 .
-
Cowey A,
Porter J
(1979)
Brain damage and global stereopsis.
Proc R Soc Lond [Biol]
204:399-407 .
-
Cowey A,
Weiskrantz L
(1963)
A perimetric study of visual
field defects in monkeys.
Q J Exp Psychol
15:91-115.
-
Cowey A,
Weiskrantz L
(1967)
A comparison of the effects of
inferotemporal and striate cortex lesions on the visual behavior of
rhesus monkeys.
Q J Exp Psychol
19:246-253 .
-
Cowey A,
Weiskrantz L
(1976)
Auditory sequence discrimination
in Macaca mulatta: the role of the superior temporal cortex.
Neuropsychologia
14:1-10 .
-
Craik FIM,
Lockhart RS
(1972)
Levels of processing: a
framework for memory research.
J Verb Learn Verb Behav
11:671-684.
-
D'Amato MR
(1973)
Delayed matching and short-term memory in
monkeys.
In: The psychology of learning and motivation: advances in theory and research,
(Bower, GH,
eds)
, Vol 7, p. 227. New York: Academic.
-
D'Amato MR,
Colombo M
(1985)
Auditory matching-to-sample in
monkeys (Cebus apella).
Anim Learn Behav
13:375-382.
-
D'Amato MR,
Colombo M
(1988a)
On tonal pattern perception in
monkeys (Cebus apella).
Anim Learn Behav
16:417-424.
-
D'Amato MR,
Colombo M
(1988b)
Representation of serial order
in monkeys (Cebus apella).
J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Processes
14:131-139.
-
D'Amato MR,
Salmon DP
(1982)
Tune discrimination in monkey
(Cebus apella) and in rats.
Anim Learn Behav
10:126-134.
-
D'Amato MR,
Salmon DP
(1984)
Processing of complex auditory
stimuli (tunes) by rats and monkeys (Cebus apella).
Anim Learn Behav
12:184-194.
-
D'Amato MR,
Salmon DP,
Colombo M
(1985)
Extent and limits of
the matching concept in monkeys (Cebus apella).
J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Processes
11:35-51.
-
Dean P
(1974)
Choice reaction times for pattern
discriminations in monkeys with inferotemporal lesions.
Neuropsychologia
12:465-476 .
-
Dean P
(1976)
Effects of inferotemporal lesions on the
behavior of monkeys.
Psychol Bull
83:41-71 .
-
Dean P
(1982)
Visual behavior in monkeys with inferotemporal
lesions.
In: Analysis of visual behavior
(Ingle, DJ,
Goodale, MA,
Mansfield, RJW,
eds)
, p. 587. Cambridge, MA: MIT.
-
Desimone R,
Gross CG
(1979)
Visual areas in the temporal
cortex of the macaque.
Brain Res
178:363-380 .
-
Dewson III JH (1977) Preliminary evidence of hemispheric
asymmetry of auditory function in monkeys. In: Lateralization in the
nervous system (Harnard S, Doty RW, Goldstein L, Jaynes J, Krauthamer
G, eds), pp 63-71). New York: Academic.
-
Dewson III JH (1978) Some behavioral effects of removal of
superior temporal cortex in the monkey. In: Recent advances in
primatology, Vol 1: Behavior (Chivers DJ, Herbert J, eds), pp 763-768.
London: Academic.
-
Dewson III,
JH
(1979)
Toward an animal model of auditory
cognitive function.
In: The neurological basis of language disorders in children: methods and directions for research
(Ludlow, CL,
Doran-Quine, ME,
eds)
, p. 19. Washington, DC: GPO.
-
Dewson III,
JH,
Cowey A,
Weiskrantz L
(1970)
Disruptions of
auditory sequences by unilateral and bilateral cortical ablations of
superior temporal gyrus in the monkey.
Exp Neurol
28:529-548.
-
Dewson III,
JH,
Pribram KH,
Lynch JC
(1969)
Effects of
ablations of temporal cortex upon speech sound discrimination in the
monkey.
Exp Neurol
24:579-591.
-
Eacott MJ,
Gaffan D
(1991)
The role of monkey inferior
parietal cortex in visual discrimination of identity and orientation of
shapes.
Behav Brain Res
46:95-98 .
-
Eacott MJ,
Gaffan D,
Murray EA
(1994)
Preserved recognition
memory for small sets, and impaired stimulus identification for large
sets, following rhinal cortex ablations in monkeys.
Eur J Neurosci
6:1466-1478 .
-
Evarts EV
(1952)
Effect of auditory cortex ablation on
frequency discrimination in monkey.
J Neurophysiol
15:443-448.
-
Felleman DJ,
Van Essen DC
(1991)
Distributed hierarchical
processing in the primate cerebral cortex.
Cereb Cortex
1:1-47 .
-
Fuster JM,
Bauer RH,
Jervey JP
(1981)
Effects of cooling
inferotemporal cortex on performance of visual memory tasks.
Exp Neurol
71:398-409 .
-
Gaffan D
(1977)
Response coding in recall of colours by
monkeys.
Q J Exp Psychol
29:597-605 .
-
Gaffan D,
Harrison S
(1991)
Auditory-visual associations,
hemispheric specialization and temporal-frontal interaction in the
rhesus monkey.
Brain
114:2133-2144 .
-
Gross CG
(1973)
Inferotemporal cortex and vision.
In: Progress in physiological psychology,
(Stellar, E,
Sprague, JM,
eds)
, Vol 5, p. 77. New York: Academic.
-
Gross CG,
Rodman HR
(1992)
Inferior temporal cortex: neuronal
properties and connections in adult and infant macaques.
In: The visual system from genesis to maturity
(Lent, R,
eds)
, p. 245. Boston: Birkhauser.
-
Gross CG,
Bender DB,
Rocha-Miranda CE
(1969)
Visual receptive
fields of neurons in inferotemporal cortex of the monkey.
Science
166:1303-1306 .
-
Gross CG,
Rodman HR,
Gochin PM,
Colombo MW
(1993)
Inferior
temporal cortex as a pattern recognition device.
In: Computational learning and cognition
(Baum, EB,
eds)
, p. 44. Philadelphia: Siam.
-
Hauser MD,
Andersson K
(1994)
Left hemispheric dominance for
processing vocalizations in adult, but not infant, rhesus monkeys:
field experiments.
Proc Natl Acad Sci
91:3946-3948 .
-
Heffner HE,
Heffner RS
(1984)
Temporal lobe lesions and
perception of species-specific vocalizations by macaques.
Science
226:75-76 .
-
Heffner HE,
Heffner RS
(1986a)
Effect of unilateral and
bilateral auditory cortex lesions on the discrimination of
vocalizations by Japanese macaques.
J Neurophysiol
56:683-701.
-
Heffner HE,
Heffner RS
(1986b)
Hearing loss in Japanese
macaques following bilateral auditory cortex lesions.
J Neurophysiol
55:256-271 .
-
Heffner HE,
Heffner RS
(1989)
Effect of restricted cortical
lesions on absolute thresholds and aphasia-like deficits in Japanese
macaques.
Behav Neurosci
103:158-169 .
-
Heffner HE,
Heffner RS
(1990)
Effect of bilateral auditory
cortex lesions on absolute thresholds in Japanese macaques.
J Neurophysiol
64:191-205 .
-
Herman LM
(1980)
Cognitive characteristics of dolphins.
In: Cetacean behavior: mechanisms and function
(Herman, LM,
eds)
, p. 363. New York: Wiley.
-
Herman LM, Forestell PH (1985) Short-term memory in pigeons:
modality-specific or code-specific effects? Anim Learn Behav
13:463-465.
-
Heywood CA,
Gaffan D,
Cowey A
(1995)
Cerebral achromatopsia
in monkeys.
Eur J Neurosci
7:1064-1073 .
-
Holmes EJ,
Gross CG
(1984)
Stimulus equivalence after
inferior temporal lesions in monkeys.
Behav Neurosci
98:898-901 .
-
Honig WK
(1978)
Studies of working memory in the pigeon.
In: Cognitive processes in animal behavior
(Hulse, SE,
Fowler, H,
Honig, WK,
eds)
, p. 211. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence ErlbaumAssociates.
-
Honig WK, Thompson RKR (1982) Retrospective and prospective
processing in animal working memory. In: The psychology of learning and
motivation: advances in research and theory, Vol 16 (Bower GH, ed), pp
239-283). New York: Academic.
-
Horel JA,
Pytko DE
(1982)
Behavioral effect of local cooling
in temporal lobe of monkeys.
J Neurophysiol
47:11-22 .
-
Horel JA,
Voytko ML,
Salsbury KG
(1984)
Visual learning
suppressed by cooling the temporal pole.
Behav Neurosci
98:310-324 .
-
Hull CL
(1943)
Principles of behavior.
.
-
Hunter WS (1913) The delayed reaction in animals and
children. Behavior Monographs 2, Serial Number 6.
-
Ibuka N,
Kubota K,
Iwai E
(1974)
Ablation of a small
circumscribed portion of the inferotemporal cortex and a delayed
matching-to-sample task.
In: Contemporary primatology
(Ibuka, N,
eds)
, p. 224. Basel, Switzerland: Karger.
-
Iversen SD,
Mishkin M
(1973)
Comparison of superior temporal
and inferior prefrontal lesions on auditory and non-auditory tasks in
rhesus monkeys.
Brain Res
55:355-367 .
-
Iwai E
(1985)
Neuropsychological basis of pattern vision in
macaque monkeys.
Vision Res
25:425-439 .
-
Iwai E,
Mishkin M
(1968)
Two visual foci in the temporal lobe
of monkeys.
In: Neuropsychological basis of learning and behavior
(Yoshii, N,
Buchwald, NA,
eds)
, p. 23. Osaka, Japan: Osaka UP.
-
Iwai E,
Mishkin M
(1969)
Further evidence of the locus of the
visual area in the temporal lobe of the monkey.
Exp Neurol
25:585-594 .
-
Jerison HJ,
Neff WD
(1953)
Effect of cortical ablation in the
monkey on discrimination of auditory patterns.
Fed Proc
12:73-74.
-
Jones EG,
Powell TPS
(1970)
An anatomical study of converging
sensory pathways within the cerebral cortex of the monkey.
Brain
93:793-820 .
-
Kojima S
(1980)
Short-term memory in the rhesus monkey: a
behavioral analysis of delayed-response performance.
J Exp Anal Behav
33:359-368.
-
Konorski J
(1959)
A new method of physiological investigation
of recent memory in animals.
Bull Acad Polonaise Sci [Biol]
7:115-117.
-
Kovner R,
Stamm JS
(1972)
Disruption of short-term visual
memory by electrical stimulation of inferotemporal cortex in the
monkey.
J Comp Physiol Psychol
81:163-172 .
-
Leinonen L,
Hyvarinen J,
Sovijarvi ARA
(1980)
Functional
properties of neurons in the temporo-parietal association cortex of
awake monkey.
Exp Brain Res
39:203-215 .
-
Massopust LC Jr,
Wolin LR,
Frost V
(1970)
Increases in
auditory middle frequency discrimination thresholds after cortical
ablations.
Exp Neurol
28:299-307 .
-
Massopust LC Jr,
Wolin LR,
Meder R,
Frost V
(1967)
Changes in
auditory frequency discrimination thresholds after temporal cortex
ablations.
Exp Neurol
19:245-255 .
-
Mishkin M
(1982)
A memory system in the monkey.
Philos Trans R Soc Lond [Biol]
298:85-92.
-
Mishkin M,
Ungerleider LG,
Macko KA
(1983)
Object vision and
spatial vision: two cortical pathways.
Trends Neurosci
6:414-417.
-
Morel A,
Garraghty PE,
Kaas JH
(1993)
Tonotopic organization,
architectonic fields, and connections of auditory cortex in macaque
monkeys.
J Comp Neurol
335:437-459 .
-
Neff WD
(1961a)
Discriminatory capacity of different
divisions of the auditory system.
In: Brain and behavior,
(Brazier, MAB,
eds)
, Vol 1, p. 205. Washington, DC: AIBS.
-
Neff WD
(1961b)
Neural mechanisms of auditory discrimination.
In: Sensory communication
(Rosenblith, WA,
eds)
, p. 259. New York: Wiley.
-
Orbach J,
Fantz RL
(1958)
Differential effects of temporal
neocortical resections on overtrained and nonovertrained visual habits
in monkeys.
J Comp Physiol Psychol
51:126-129.
-
Pandya DN,
Kuypers HGJM
(1969)
Cortico-cortical connections
in the rhesus monkey.
Brain Res
13:13-36 .
-
Pandya DN,
Sanides F
(1973)
Architectonic parcellation of the
temporal operculum in rhesus monkey and its projection pattern.
Z Anat Entwicklungsgesch
139:127-161 .
-
Pandya DN,
Vignolo LA
(1969)
Interhemispheric projections of
the parietal lobe in the rhesus monkey.
Brain Res
15:49-65 .
-
Pandya DN, Yeterian EH (1985) Architecture and connections of
cortical association areas. In: Cerebral cortex, Vol 4, Association and
auditory cortices (Peters A, Jones EG, eds), pp 3-61. New York:
Plenum.
-
Pandya DN,
Hallett M,
Mukherjee SK
(1969)
Intra- and
interhemispheric connections of the neocortical auditory system in the
rhesus monkey.
Brain Res
14:49-65 .
-
Pandya DN, Seltzer B, Barbas H (1988) Input-output
organization of the primate cerebral cortex. In: Comparative primate
biology, Vol 4, Neurosciences (Steklis HD, Erwin J, eds), pp 39-80.
New York: Alan Liss.
-
Peretz I,
Kolinsky R,
Tramo M,
Labrecque R,
Hublet C,
Demeurisse G,
Belleville S
(1994)
Functional dissociations following
bilateral lesions of auditory cortex.
Brain
117:1283-1301 .
-
Petersen M,
Beecher M,
Zoloth S,
Moody D,
Stebbins W
(1978)
Neural lateralization of species-specific
vocalizations by Japanese macaques (Macaca fuscata).
Science
202:324-327 .
-
Pratt SR, Iversen SD (1978) Selective cortical lesions and
auditory behavior in the monkey. In: Recent advances in primatology,
Vol 1, Behavior (Chivers DJ, Herbert J, eds), pp 807-809. London:
Academic.
-
Rauschecker JP, Tian B, Hauser M (1995) Processing of complex
sounds in the macaque nonprimary auditory cortex. Science
268:111-114.
-
Ravizza RJ, Belmore SM (1978) Auditory forebrain: evidence
from anatomical and behavioral experiments involving human and animal
subjects. In: Handbook of behavioral neurobiology, Vol 1, Sensory
integration (Masterson RB, ed), pp 459-501. New York: Plenum.
-
Roberts WA,
Grant DS
(1976)
Studies of short-term memory in
the pigeon using the delayed matching-to-sample procedure.
In: Processes of animal memory
(Medin, DL,
Roberts, WA,
Davis, RT,
eds)
, p. 79. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
-
Rodman HR
(1994)
Development of inferior temporal cortex in
the monkey.
Cereb Cortex
5:484-498.
-
Roitblat HL
(1980)
Codes and coding processes in pigeon
short-term memory.
Anim Learn Behav
8:341-351.
-
Romanski LM,
Bates JF,
Goldman-Rakic PS
(1995)
Selective
connections of the superior temporal auditory region with the
prefrontal cortex in the macaque monkey.
Soc Neurosci Abstr
21:932.
-
Sahgal A,
Iversen SD
(1978a)
Categorization and retrieval
after selective inferotemporal lesions in monkeys.
Brain Res
146:341-350 .
-
Sahgal A,
Iversen SD
(1978b)
The effects of foveal prestriate
and inferotemporal lesions on matching to sample behavior in monkeys.
Neuropsychologia
16:391-406 .
-
Samson S,
Zatorre RJ
(1992)
Learning and retention of melodic
and verbal information after unilateral temporal lobectomy.
Neuropsychologia
30:815-826 .
-
Sanides F (1972) Representation in the cerebral cortex and
its areal lamination patterns. In: The structure and function of
nervous tissue, Vol V, Structure III and physiology III (Bourne GH,
ed), pp 329-453. New York: Academic.
-
Seltzer B,
Pandya DN
(1976)
Some cortical projections to the
parahippocampal area in the rhesus monkey.
Exp Neurol
50:146-160 .
-
Stepien LS,
Cordeau JP,
Rasmussen T
(1960)
The effects of
temporal lobe and hippocampal lesions on auditory and visual recent
memory in monkeys.
Brain
83:470-489.
-
Sutherland NS,
Mackintosh NJ
(1971)
Mechanisms of animal
discrimination learning.
.
-
Suzuki WA (1994) What can neuroanatomy tell us about the
functional components of the hippocampal memory system? Behav Brain
Sci 17:496-498.
-
Suzuki WA,
Amaral DG
(1994)
Perirhinal and
parahippocampal cortices of the macaque monkey: cortical afferents.
J Comp Neurol
350:497-533 .
-
Symmes D
(1965)
Flicker discrimination by brain-damaged
monkeys.
J Comp Physiol Psychol
60:470-473 .
-
Tanaka K,
Saito H-A,
Fukada Y,
Moriya M
(1991)
Coding visual
images of objects in the inferotemporal cortex of the macaque monkey.
J Neurophysiol
66:170-189 .
-
Tranel D,
Brady DR,
Van Hoesen GW,
Damasio AR
(1988)
Parahippocampal projections to posterior auditory
association cortex (area Tpt) in old-world monkeys.
Exp Brain Res
70:406-416 .
-
Ungerleider LG
(1986)
The corticocortical pathways for object
recognition and spatial perception.
Exp Brain Res
11:21-37.
-
Van Hoesen GW,
Pandya DN
(1975)
Some connections of the
entorhinal (area 28) and perirhinal (area 35) cortices of the rhesus
monkey. I. Temporal lobe afferents.
Brain Res
95:1-24.
-
Van Hoesen GW,
Pandya DN,
Butters N
(1972)
Cortical afferents
to the entorhinal cortex of the rhesus monkey.
Science
175:1471-1473 .
-
von Bonin G
(1938)
The cerebral cortex of the cebus monkey.
J Comp Neurol
69:181-227.
-
von Bonin G, Bailey P (1947) The neocortex of Macaca
mulatta. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois.
-
Wagner AR
(1981)
SOP: a model of automatic memory processing
in animal behavior.
In: Information processing in animals: memory mechanisms
(Spear, NE,
Miller, RR,
eds)
, p. 5. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence ErlbaumAssociates.
-
Wallace J,
Steinert PA,
Scobie SR,
Spear NE
(1980)
Stimulus
modality and short-term memory in rats.
Anim Learn Behav
8:10-16.
-
Webster MJ,
Bachevalier J,
Ungerleider LG
(1994)
Connections
of inferior temporal areas TEO and TE with parietal and frontal cortex
in macaque monkeys.
Cereb Cortex
5:470-483.
-
Webster MJ,
Bachevalier J,
Ungerleider LG
(1995)
Transient
subcortical connections of inferior temporal areas TE and TEO in infant
macaque monkeys.
J Comp Neurol
352:213-226 .
-
Webster MJ,
Ungerleider LG,
Bachevalier J
(1991)
Connections
of inferior temporal areas TE and TEO with medial temporal-lobe
structures in infant and adult monkeys.
J Neurosci
11:1095-1116 .
-
Wegener JG
(1968)
The effect of cortical lesions on auditory
and visual discrimination behavior in monkeys.
Cortex
4:203-232.
-
Wegener JG
(1976)
Auditory and visual discrimination
following lesions of the anterior supratemporal plane in monkeys.
Neuropsychologia
14:161-173 .
-
Weiskrantz L,
Cowey A
(1963)
Striate cortex lesions and
visual acuity of the rhesus monkey.
J Comp Physiol Psychol
56:225-231.
-
Weiskrantz L,
Mishkin M
(1958)
Effects of temporal and
frontal cortical lesions on auditory discrimination in monkeys.
Brain
81:406-414.
-
Weiskrantz L,
Saunders RC
(1984)
Impairments of visual object
transforms in monkeys.
Brain
107:1033-1072 .
-
Wilson M
(1968)
Inferotemporal cortex and the processing of
visual information in monkeys.
Neuropsychologia
6:135-140.
-
Zatorre RJ
(1985)
Discrimination and recognition of tonal
melodies after unilateral cerebral excisions.
Neuropsychologia
23:31-41 .
-
Zatorre RJ, Evans AC, Meyer E (1994) Neural mechanisms
underlying melodic perception and memory for pitch. J Neurosci
14:1908-1919.
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
A. Brechmann, B. Gaschler-Markefski, M. Sohr, K. Yoneda, T. Kaulisch, and H. Scheich
Working Memory Specific Activity in Auditory Cortex: Potential Correlates of Sequential Processing and Maintenance
Cereb Cortex,
November 1, 2007;
17(11):
2544 - 2552.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
J. Fritz, M. Mishkin, and R. C. Saunders
In search of an auditory engram
PNAS,
June 28, 2005;
102(26):
9359 - 9364.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
E. F. Rabinowicz, G. Silipo, R. Goldman, and D. C. Javitt
Auditory Sensory Dysfunction in Schizophrenia: Imprecision or Distractibility?
Arch Gen Psychiatry,
December 1, 2000;
57(12):
1149 - 1155.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
A. Bischoff-Grethe, S. M. Proper, H. Mao, K. A. Daniels, and G. S. Berns
Conscious and Unconscious Processing of Nonverbal Predictability in Wernicke's Area
J. Neurosci.,
March 1, 2000;
20(5):
1975 - 1981.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
Y. E. Cohen, G. L. Miller, and E. I. Knudsen
Forebrain Pathway for Auditory Space Processing in the Barn Owl
J Neurophysiol,
February 1, 1998;
79(2):
891 - 902.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
|

|