Chickens have excellent sound localization ability.

The mechanisms of sound localization are actively debated, especially which cues are predominately used and why. Our study provides behavioural data in chickens (Gallus gallus) and relates these to estimates of the perceived physical cues. Sound localization acuity was quantified as the minimum audible angle (MAA) in azimuth. Pure-tone MAA was 12.3, 9.3, 8.9 and 14.5 deg for frequencies of 500, 1000, 2000 and 4000 Hz, respectively. Broadband-noise MAA was 12.2 deg, which indicates excellent behavioural acuity. We determined 'external cues' from head-related transfer functions of chickens. These were used to derive 'internal cues', taking into account published data on the effect of the coupled middle ears. Our estimates of the internal cues indicate that chickens likely relied on interaural time difference cues alone at low frequencies of 500 and 1000 Hz, whereas at 2000 and 4000 Hz, interaural level differences may be the dominant cue.

Water does not catalyze the reaction of OH radicals with ethanol.

Recent experiments suggested that water catalyzes the reaction of OH radicals with alcohols, while another work showed the opposite result. Here, we resolve this disagreement and show that heterogeneous oxidation systematically biased the work showing the catalytic effect and corroborate that water does not catalyze the reaction of OH with alcohols.

The barn owls' Minimum Audible Angle.

Interaural time differences (ITD) and interaural level differences (ILD) are physical cues that enable the auditory system to pinpoint the position of a sound source in space. This ability is crucial for animal communication and predator-prey interactions. The barn owl has evolved an exceptional sense of hearing and shows abilities of sound localisation that outperform most other species. So far, behavioural studies in the barn owl often used reflexive responses to investigate aspects of sound localisation. Furthermore, they predominately probed the higher frequencies of the owl's hearing range (> 3 kHz). In the present study we used a Go/NoGo paradigm to measure the barn owl's behavioural sound localisation acuity (expressed as the Minimum Audible Angle, MAA) as a function of stimulus type (narrow-band noise centred at 500, 1000, 2000, 4000 and 8000 Hz, and broad-band noise) and sound source position. We found significant effects of both stimulus type and sound source position on the barn owls' MAA. The MAA improved with increasing stimulus frequency, from 14° at 500 Hz to 6° at 8000 Hz. The smallest MAA of 4° was found for broadband noise stimuli. Comparing different sound source positions revealed smaller MAAs for frontal compared to lateral stimulus presentation, irrespective of stimulus type. These results are consistent with both the known variations in physical ITDs and variation in the width of neural ITD tuning curves with azimuth and frequency. Physical and neural characteristics combine to result in better spatial acuity for frontal compared to lateral sounds and reduced localisation acuity at lower frequencies.

Barn owls have ageless ears.

We measured the auditory sensitivity of the barn owl (Tyto alba), using a behavioural Go/NoGo paradigm in two different age groups, one younger than 2 years (n = 4) and another more than 13 years of age (n = 3). In addition, we obtained thresholds from one individual aged 23 years, three times during its lifetime. For computing audiograms, we presented test frequencies of between 0.5 and 12 kHz, covering the hearing range of the barn owl. Average thresholds in quiet were below 0 dB sound pressure level (SPL) for frequencies between 1 and 10 kHz. The lowest mean threshold was -12.6 dB SPL at 8 kHz. Thresholds were the highest at 12 kHz, with a mean of 31.7 dB SPL. Test frequency had a significant effect on auditory threshold but age group had no significant effect. There was no significant interaction between age group and test frequency. Repeated threshold estimates over 21 years from a single individual showed only a slight increase in thresholds. We discuss the auditory sensitivity of barn owls with respect to other species and suggest that birds, which generally show a remarkable capacity for regeneration of hair cells in the basilar papilla, are naturally protected from presbycusis.

Moving Objects in the Barn Owl's Auditory World.

Barn owls are keen hunters of moving prey. They have evolved an auditory system with impressive anatomical and physiological specializations for localizing their prey. Here we present behavioural data on the owl's sensitivity for discriminating acoustic motion direction in azimuth that, for the first time, allow a direct comparison of neuronal and perceptual sensitivity for acoustic motion in the same model species. We trained two birds to report a change in motion direction within a series of repeating wideband noise stimuli. For any trial the starting point, motion direction, velocity (53-2400°/s), duration (30-225 ms) and angular range (12-72°) of the noise sweeps were randomized. Each test stimulus had a motion direction being opposite to that of the reference stimuli. Stimuli were presented in the frontal or the lateral auditory space. The angular extent of the motion had a large effect on the owl's discrimination sensitivity allowing a better discrimination for a larger angular range of the motion. In contrast, stimulus velocity or stimulus duration had a smaller, although significant effect. Overall there was no difference in the owls' behavioural performance between "inward" noise sweeps (moving from lateral to frontal) compared to "outward" noise sweeps (moving from frontal to lateral). The owls did, however, respond more often to stimuli with changing motion direction in the frontal compared to the lateral space. The results of the behavioural experiments are discussed in relation to the neuronal representation of motion cues in the barn owl auditory midbrain.