QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s):
Home     Help     Feedback     Subscriptions     Archive     Search     Table of Contents

First published online September 9, 2005
Journal of Experimental Biology 208, 3533-3542 (2005)
Published by The Company of Biologists 2005
doi: 10.1242/jeb.01809

This Article Summary Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Amoser, S. Articles by Ladich, F. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Amoser, S. Articles by Ladich, F. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Are hearing sensitivities of freshwater fish adapted to the ambient noise in their habitats?

Sonja Amoser^* and Friedrich Ladich

University of Vienna, Department of Neurobiology and Behavior, Althanstrasse 14, 1090 Vienna, Austria

View larger version (21K): [in a new window]   Fig. 1. Sound power spectra of the different ambient noise types recorded in the four habitats and used as masking noise. DR, Danube river; TS, Triesting stream; BW, backwater; LN, Lake Neusiedl. Note the linear frequency axis scaling in this figure and the logarithmic scaling in Figs 2 and 4.

View larger version (24K): [in a new window]   Fig. 2. Mean hearing thresholds of Cyprinus carpio (solid lines) under laboratory conditions (baseline) and in the presence of the different ambient noise types. Broken lines show the cepstrum-smoothed sound power spectra of the corresponding noise types (Fig. 1 shows the absolute amplitude spectra). DR, Danube river; TS, Triesting stream; BW, backwater; LN, Lake Neusiedl.

View larger version (22K): [in a new window]   Fig. 3. Differences in hearing thresholds between the baseline audiogram of C. carpio and the masked audiograms. Values are means ± S.E.M. (N=6). Colours indicate the differences for the respective habitats according to Fig. 1. Blue, Danube river; red, Triesting stream; green, backwater; orange, Lake Neusiedl.

View larger version (20K): [in a new window]   Fig. 4. Mean hearing thresholds of Perca fluviatilis (solid lines) under laboratory conditions (baseline) and in the presence of the different ambient noise types. Broken lines show the cepstrum-smoothed sound power spectra of the corresponding habitat noise (Fig. 1 shows the absolute amplitude spectra). DR, Danube river; TS, Triesting stream; BW, backwater; LN, Lake Neusiedl.

View larger version (17K): [in a new window]   Fig. 5. Differences hearing thresholds between the baseline audiogram of P. fluviatilis and the masked audiograms. Values are means ± S.E.M. (N=6). Colours indicate the differences for the respective habitats according to Fig. 4. Blue, Danube river; red, Triesting stream; green, backwater; orange, Lake Neusiedl.

View larger version (17K): [in a new window]   Fig. 6. Threshold-to-noise ratios for masked thresholds of (A) C. carpio (T/N-ratio = signal frequencyx0.0093+9.14, r=0.789, P<0.001) and (B) P. fluviatilis (T/N-ratio = signal frequency x0.0214+20.128, r=0.456, P<0.001). Colours indicate the T/N ratios for the respective habitats according to Fig. 1.

CiteULike

Complore

Connotea

Del.icio.us

Digg

Reddit

Technorati

Twitter