Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-31T17:08:04.365Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Receptor activity in the utriculus of the sprat

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 May 2009

E. J. Denton  and
J. A. B. Gray
E. J. Denton
Affiliation:
The Laboratory, Marine Biological Association, Citadel Hill, Plymouth
J. A. B. Gray
Affiliation:
The Laboratory, Marine Biological Association, Citadel Hill, Plymouth
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Electrical responses were obtained from the utriculus of the sprat (Sprattus sprattus L). during stimulation by bursts of oscillatory pressures ranging in frequency from 2·5 to 880 Hz and in amplitude from 0·12 to 220 N m−2 (28–93 dB above threshold). These responses had double the frequency of the stimulus and we argue that they were given by two major groups of utricular receptors, one group (decompression or d-receptors) responding to movements of the utricular floor away from the fenestra of the auditory bulla, the other group (compression or c-receptors) responding to movements of the utricular floor towards the fenestra. These groups were identified with oppositely oriented groups of utricular hair cells coupled mechanically by the rigid base on which they lie. Responses grew with increasing stimulus strength over a range of over 100 dB, the slope of the log-log relation decreasing with the larger stimuli. Above 40 Hz the delays between responses and mechanical displacements were very small and the amplitude of response depended only on the amplitude of displacement and not on frequency. Below 40 Hz the sensitivity declined more steeply with reduction of frequency than would be expected from the mechanical responses of the utricular floor. When stimulating frequencies were mixed the responses were not those expected on the hypothesis that different groups of receptors were excited by the different frequencies but those expected if all displacements of the utriculus towards or away from the fenestra from a rest position gave responses in either one or other of two major groups of receptors. The response to mixed frequency pressure waves was such that high peaks were exaggerated and information about polarity preserved. The response of the utriculus to the first cycle of a burst of sinusoidal pressure stimuli was usually larger than that to subsequent cycles.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom , Volume 60 , Issue 3 , August 1980 , pp. 717 - 740
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 1980

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allen, J. M., Blaxter, J. H. S. & Denton, E. J., 1976. The functional anatomy and development of the swimbladder-inner ear-lateral line system in herring and sprat. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 56, 471–486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Best, A. C. G. & Gray, J. A. B., 1980. Morphology of the utricular recess in the sprat. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 60, 703–715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaxter, J. H. S. & Parrish, B. B., 1958. The effect of artificial light on fish and other marine organisms at sea. Marine Research, 1958, no. 2, 24 pp.Google Scholar
Crawford, A. C. & Fettiplace, R., 1978. Ringing responses in cochlea hair cells of the turtle. Journal of Physiology, 284, 120P-122P.Google ScholarPubMed
Denton, E. J. & Blaxter, J. H. S., 1976. The mechanical relationships between the clupeid swimbladder, inner ear and lateral line. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 56, 787–807.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Denton, E. J. & Gray, J. A. B., 1979. The analysis of sound by the sprat ear. Nature, London, 282, 406–407.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Denton, E. J., Gray, J. A. B. & Blaxter, J. H. S., 1979. The mechanics of the clupeid acoustico-lateralis system: frequency responses. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 59, 27–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Enger, P. S., 1967. Hearing in the herring. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology, 22, 527–538.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Enger, P. S. & Anderson, R., 1967. An electrophysiological field study of hearing in fish. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology, 22, 517–525.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Enger, P. S., Hawkins, A. D., Sand, O. & Chapman, C. J., 1973. Directional sensitivity of saccular microphonic potential in haddock. Journal of Experimental Biology, 59, 425–433.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fay, R. R., 1978. Sound detection and sensory coding by the auditory systems of fishes. In The Behavior of Fish and Other Aquatic Animals (ed. D. I., Mostofsky), pp. 197–236. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Flock, A., 1965. Electron microscopic and electrophysiological studies on the lateral line canal organ. Ada oto-laryngologica, supplement 199, 90 pp.Google Scholar
Gray, J. A. B. & Denton, E. J., 1979. The mechanics of the clupeid acoustico-lateralis system: low frequency measurements. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 59, 11–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Helmholtz, H. L. F., 1877. On the Sensations of Tone as a Physiological Basis for the Theory of Music, 2nd English edition. New York: Dover Publications.Google Scholar
Parvulescu, A., 1964. Problems of propagation and processing. In Marine Bio-Acoustics (ed. W. N., Tavolga), pp. 87–100. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Piddington, R. W., 1972. Auditory discrimination between compressions and rarefactions by goldfish. Journal of Experimental Biology, 56, 403–419.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Russell, I. J. & Sellick, P. M., 1978. Intracellular studies of hair cells in the mammalian cochlea. Journal of Physiology, 284, 261–290.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schmidt, R. S. & Fernandez, C., 1962. Labyrinthine D.C. potentials in representative vertebrates. Journal of Cellular and Comparative Physiology, 59, 311–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schuijf, A., 1976. The phase model of directional hearing in fish. In Sound Reception in Fish (ed. A., Schuijf and A. D., Hawkins), pp. 63–86. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Stevens, S. S. & Davis, H., 1938. Hearing; its Psychology and Physiology. 489 pp. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar