Sound-generating (sonic) motor system in a teleost fish (Porichthys notatus): Sexual polymorphism in the ultrastructure of myofibrils

1989 ◽  
Vol 286 (2) ◽  
pp. 141-153 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew H. Bass ◽  
Margaret A. Marchaterre
2013 ◽  
Vol 216 (15) ◽  
pp. 2821-2832 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Bucking ◽  
C. M. R. LeMoine ◽  
P. M. Craig ◽  
P. J. Walsh

2018 ◽  
Vol 91 (2) ◽  
pp. 82-96 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian G.G. Pengra ◽  
Margaret A. Marchaterre ◽  
Andrew H. Bass

Motivated by studies of speech deficits in humans, several studies over the past two decades have investigated the potential role of a forkhead domain transcription factor, FoxP2, in the central control of acoustic signaling/vocalization among vertebrates. Comparative neuroanatomical studies that mainly include mammalian and avian species have mapped the distribution of FoxP2 expression in multiple brain regions that imply a greater functional significance beyond vocalization that might be shared broadly across vertebrate lineages. To date, reports for teleost fish have been limited in number and scope to nonvocal species. Here, we map the neuroanatomical distribution of FoxP2 mRNA expression in a highly vocal teleost, the plainfin midshipman (Porichthys notatus). We report an extensive overlap between FoxP2 expression and vocal, auditory, and steroid-signaling systems with robust expression at multiple sites in the telencephalon, the preoptic area, the diencephalon, and the midbrain. Label was far more restricted in the hindbrain though robust in one region of the reticular formation. A comparison with other teleosts and tetrapods suggests an evolutionarily conserved FoxP2 phenotype important to vocal-acoustic and, more broadly, sensorimotor function among vertebrates.


Author(s):  
Markus Krüger ◽  
Horst Krist

Abstract. Recent studies have ascertained a link between the motor system and imagery in children. A motor effect on imagery is demonstrated by the influence of stimuli-related movement constraints (i. e., constraints defined by the musculoskeletal system) on mental rotation, or by interference effects due to participants’ own body movements or body postures. This link is usually seen as qualitatively different or stronger in children as opposed to adults. In the present research, we put this interpretation to further scrutiny using a new paradigm: In a motor condition we asked our participants (kindergartners and third-graders) to manually rotate a circular board with a covered picture on it. This condition was compared with a perceptual condition where the board was rotated by an experimenter. Additionally, in a pure imagery condition, children were instructed to merely imagine the rotation of the board. The children’s task was to mark the presumed end position of a salient detail of the respective picture. The children’s performance was clearly the worst in the pure imagery condition. However, contrary to what embodiment theories would suggest, there was no difference in participants’ performance between the active rotation (i. e., motor) and the passive rotation (i. e., perception) condition. Control experiments revealed that this was also the case when, in the perception condition, gaze shifting was controlled for and when the board was rotated mechanically rather than by the experimenter. Our findings indicate that young children depend heavily on external support when imagining physical events. Furthermore, they indicate that motor-assisted imagery is not generally superior to perceptually driven dynamic imagery.


2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
F. Waszak ◽  
S. Schuetz-Bosbach ◽  
C. Weiss ◽  
L. Ticini

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julie Carranza ◽  
Matthew Bachman ◽  
Michael P. Kaschak ◽  
Edward M. Bernat ◽  
John L. Jones ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document