2128 lines
No EOL
74 KiB
Text
2128 lines
No EOL
74 KiB
Text
University of Southern Denmark
|
||
|
||
Universal mechanisms of sound production and control in birds and mammals
|
||
Elemans, Coen; Rasmussen, Jeppe Have; Herbst, Christian T.; Düring, Daniel Normen;
|
||
Zollinger, Sue Anne; Brumm, Henrik ; Srivastava, K.; Svane, Niels; Ding, Ming; Larsen, Ole
|
||
Næsbye; Sober, Sam J. ; Svec, Jan G.
|
||
Published in:
|
||
Nature Communications
|
||
DOI:
|
||
10.1038/ncomms9978
|
||
Publication date:
|
||
2015
|
||
Document version:
|
||
Final published version
|
||
Document license:
|
||
CC BY
|
||
Citation for pulished version (APA):
|
||
Elemans, C., Rasmussen, J. H., Herbst, C. T., Düring, D. N., Zollinger, S. A., Brumm, H., Srivastava, K., Svane,
|
||
N., Ding, M., Larsen, O. N., Sober, S. J., & Svec, J. G. (2015). Universal mechanisms of sound production and
|
||
control in birds and mammals. Nature Communications, 6, Article 8978. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms9978
|
||
|
||
Go to publication entry in University of Southern Denmark's Research Portal
|
||
|
||
Terms of use
|
||
This work is brought to you by the University of Southern Denmark.
|
||
Unless otherwise specified it has been shared according to the terms for self-archiving.
|
||
If no other license is stated, these terms apply:
|
||
• You may download this work for personal use only.
|
||
• You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain
|
||
• You may freely distribute the URL identifying this open access version
|
||
If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details and we will investigate your claim.
|
||
Please direct all enquiries to puresupport@bib.sdu.dk
|
||
|
||
Download date: 28. May. 2026
|
||
|
||
ARTICLE
|
||
Received 24 Mar 2015 | Accepted 22 Oct 2015 | Published 27 Nov 2015
|
||
|
||
DOI: 10.1038/ncomms9978
|
||
|
||
OPEN
|
||
|
||
Universal mechanisms of sound production
|
||
and control in birds and mammals
|
||
C.P.H Elemans1,2,3, J.H. Rasmussen1,*, C.T. Herbst4,*, D.N. Düring1,*, S.A. Zollinger5, H. Brumm5, K. Srivastava6,7,
|
||
N. Svane1, M. Ding8, O.N. Larsen1, S.J. Sober6 & J.G. Švec4
|
||
|
||
As animals vocalize, their vocal organ transforms motor commands into vocalizations for
|
||
social communication. In birds, the physical mechanisms by which vocalizations are produced
|
||
and controlled remain unresolved because of the extreme difficulty in obtaining in vivo
|
||
measurements. Here, we introduce an ex vivo preparation of the avian vocal organ that allows
|
||
simultaneous high-speed imaging, muscle stimulation and kinematic and acoustic analyses to
|
||
reveal the mechanisms of vocal production in birds across a wide range of taxa. Remarkably,
|
||
we show that all species tested employ the myoelastic-aerodynamic (MEAD) mechanism,
|
||
the same mechanism used to produce human speech. Furthermore, we show substantial
|
||
redundancy in the control of key vocal parameters ex vivo, suggesting that in vivo vocalizations
|
||
may also not be specified by unique motor commands. We propose that such motor
|
||
redundancy can aid vocal learning and is common to MEAD sound production across birds
|
||
and mammals, including humans.
|
||
|
||
1 Department of Biology, University of Southern Denmark, Campusvej 55, 5230 Odense, Denmark. 2 QuanTM program, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia
|
||
30322, USA. 3 Université de Saint-Etienne/Lyon, ENES/CNPS CNRS UMR8195, Saint-Etienne 42023, France. 4 Faculty of Science, Department of Biophysics,
|
||
Voice Research Lab, Palacky University, Olomouc 77146, Czech Republic. 5 Communication and Social Behaviour Group, Max Planck Institute for Ornithology,
|
||
Seewiesen 82319, Germany. 6 Department of Biology, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia 30332, USA. 7 Coulter Department of Biomedical Engineering,
|
||
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia 30332, USA. 8 Department of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology, Odense University Hospital, University
|
||
of Southern Denmark, Odense 5230, Denmark. * These authors contributed equally to this work. Correspondence and requests for materials should be
|
||
addressed to C.P.H.E. (email: coen@biology.sdu.dk).
|
||
|
||
NATURE COMMUNICATIONS | 6:8978 | DOI: 10.1038/ncomms9978 | www.nature.com/naturecommunications
|
||
|
||
1
|
||
|
||
ARTICLE
|
||
|
||
NATURE COMMUNICATIONS | DOI: 10.1038/ncomms9978
|
||
|
||
n contrast to laryngeally vocalizing mammals, B10,000
|
||
species of extant birds vocalize with a uniquely avian vocal
|
||
organ, the syrinx, located at the tracheobronchial junction and
|
||
suspended in an air sac of the respiratory system1. The syrinx is
|
||
structurally highly diverse across species1, but how morphological
|
||
diversity reflects functional diversity remains unexplored. In
|
||
addition, while songbirds are a widely used experimental animal
|
||
model for neural mechanisms underlying vocal imitation
|
||
learning2,3, we lack the empirical evidence to precisely map
|
||
motor function onto neural circuitry4. Addressing these questions
|
||
requires empirical quantification of syringeal dynamics as a
|
||
function of control parameters in different species under
|
||
physiologically realistic, controlled conditions. However,
|
||
imaging the syrinx in vivo remains a challenge5,6, and we thus
|
||
still lack this quantification of syringeal dynamics and control
|
||
parameters.
|
||
Earlier endoscopic imaging identified syringeal vibratory
|
||
tissues in songbirds and non-songbirds5,6, arguing against
|
||
purely aerodynamical whistle mechanisms in which sound is
|
||
produced without periodic movement of the vocal apparatus.
|
||
Many mathematical models for birdsong7–11 assume that
|
||
syringeal sound production is based on a myoelasticaerodynamic (MEAD) system12–15. However, conclusive
|
||
empirical evidence for MEAD is lacking4,16. The MEAD
|
||
framework explains the physical mechanism underlying
|
||
laryngeal sound production in mammals12–15,17. In brief,
|
||
self-sustaining laryngeal vocal fold oscillations are maintained
|
||
through fluid-tissue interactions and (myo)elastic restoring
|
||
forces generated within the tissues12–15, preventing the
|
||
need for muscle contractions at the rate of tissue vibration or
|
||
other periodic input18. Expiratory airflow is mechanically
|
||
converted by vocal folds into pulse-like airflow, which
|
||
causes air pressure disturbances constituting the acoustic
|
||
excitation of the system13. The mechanical properties and
|
||
recruitment of different layers of vibrating tissues affect
|
||
their resonance properties, which in combination with
|
||
aerodynamic driving forces determine the frequency and mode
|
||
of oscillation19–22.
|
||
According to MEAD theory, the medio-lateral vibration of the
|
||
inner vocal fold surface (vibrational component 1 (VC1)) that
|
||
gates airflow23 can only be self-sustaining if moving around a
|
||
stable equilibrium position and if no net energy loss occurs per
|
||
oscillation cycle13,24. The latter requires the presence of an
|
||
aerodynamic force that changes magnitude with direction of
|
||
vocal fold motion and thus is asymmetric over the oscillation
|
||
cycle13. One possibility is that during self-sustained vocal fold
|
||
vibration the required asymmetric aerodynamic force is produced
|
||
by time-varying supraglottal pressure due to inertia of air in
|
||
the vocal tract23. Such a mechanism would result in uniform
|
||
medio-lateral vibration of the vocal folds24. However, models
|
||
suggest that this mechanism limits the range of fundamental
|
||
frequencies (F0) produced14. Another, more robust possibility is
|
||
that the asymmetric aerodynamic force during self-sustained
|
||
vocal fold vibration is produced by out-of-phase motion of the
|
||
superior and inferior edge of the vibrating tissue (vibrational
|
||
component 2 (VC2))13,25. VC1 and VC2 are the respective
|
||
medio-lateral and caudo-cranial components of a tissue surface
|
||
wave, or mucosal wave, that travels on the inner vocal fold surface
|
||
along the expiratory air stream and facilitates aerodynamic energy
|
||
transfer into tissue24. The wave phase changes cause the vocal
|
||
folds to change shape from convergent during opening to
|
||
divergent during closing parts of the cycle24. Because the
|
||
intraglottal pressure is higher for the convergent shape than for
|
||
the divergent shape26,27, the vocal folds are pushed apart during
|
||
opening and pulled together during closing14,24,25. VC2 presence
|
||
thus indicates that intraglottal pressure forms the asymmetric
|
||
|
||
I
|
||
|
||
2
|
||
|
||
forcing function over opening and closing phases of vibration25
|
||
essential to self-sustained oscillation. Sound excitation events in
|
||
mammals occur mainly at glottal closure and/or opening, when
|
||
airflow abruptly stops or starts28–30.
|
||
Although isolated aspects of syringeal dynamics have been
|
||
studied in birds5,6,31–35, the asymmetric forcing function essential
|
||
to maintain self-sustained oscillation has not yet been identified,
|
||
and the caudo-cranial tissue-wave component VC2—a crucial
|
||
underlying assumption in modelling studies7,9,36—has not been
|
||
demonstrated experimentally in the intact syrinx under
|
||
appropriate physiological conditions16. Furthermore, it is
|
||
unknown how syringeal dynamics relate to sound generating
|
||
events within a single oscillatory cycle. These essential features of
|
||
syringeal dynamics required to confirm MEAD have yet to be
|
||
established16.
|
||
The translation of vocal motor commands into acoustic output
|
||
depends on neural activity, musculature, morphology and
|
||
physical mechanism of sound production4,16,37. These variables
|
||
define a multi-dimensional parameter space that the brain needs
|
||
to explore and navigate to control vocal output. In birds, these
|
||
control variables have been studied in vivo by correlating
|
||
acoustical parameters, for example, F0, with physiological
|
||
parameters, for example, lung pressure or muscle activity,
|
||
taking advantage of the highly stereotyped vocal patterns
|
||
employed by adult birds38. This approach can inform us about
|
||
a particular solution an individual uses to control its vocal output.
|
||
However, if the control space is redundant (that is, there is more
|
||
than one possible solution to achieve a specific vocal target, for
|
||
example, F0), as commonly observed in motor control systems39,
|
||
studying stereotyped in vivo behaviour provides limited insight in
|
||
the behaviour of the entire system as we only observe the final
|
||
solution the individual uses that may not be unique. Furthermore
|
||
if vocal control parameters covary it may be difficult to establish
|
||
causal relationships. To understand how the brain controls vocal
|
||
behaviour therefore requires systematic quantification of the
|
||
system’s behaviour across its multi-dimensional parameter space.
|
||
However, we currently lack an experimental paradigm to
|
||
systematically study physiological control of the vocal system
|
||
in birds.
|
||
Here, we present a novel ex vivo paradigm of the syrinx, which
|
||
allows unprecedented experimental control and high-resolution
|
||
imaging during sound production. First, to investigate if the
|
||
MEAD physical mechanism of self-sustained oscillations as
|
||
observed in mammals is applicable to birds, we test the
|
||
hypotheses that a caudo-cranial travelling tissue surface wave is
|
||
present and that this tissue wave is associated with sound
|
||
production events. Second, to determine whether vocalizations
|
||
are encoded by unique motor commands we test the hypothesis
|
||
that the physiological control space of the syrinx ex vivo is
|
||
redundant for key acoustic parameters. We show that birds
|
||
employ the MEAD mechanism for sound production and that
|
||
key vocal parameters exhibit redundant control ex vivo. We
|
||
propose that motor redundancy may accelerate vocal learning
|
||
and is common to MEAD sound production across birds and
|
||
mammals.
|
||
Results
|
||
Physical mechanism of sound production. We developed an
|
||
experimental paradigm that allows imaging of syringeal dynamics
|
||
under controlled conditions ex vivo (Methods section;
|
||
Supplementary Fig. 1). To test our first hypothesis, if the
|
||
MEAD physical mechanism of self-sustained oscillations is
|
||
applicable to birds (Fig. 1a), we took advantage of the diversity in
|
||
syringeal morphology across species and first studied the
|
||
domestic pigeon syrinx (Fig. 1b) because of its relatively simple
|
||
|
||
NATURE COMMUNICATIONS | 6:8978 | DOI: 10.1038/ncomms9978 | www.nature.com/naturecommunications
|
||
|
||
ARTICLE
|
||
|
||
NATURE COMMUNICATIONS | DOI: 10.1038/ncomms9978
|
||
|
||
VC1
|
||
|
||
VC2
|
||
|
||
Trachea
|
||
ICAS membrane
|
||
|
||
psupra
|
||
|
||
Muscle
|
||
|
||
pICAS
|
||
|
||
T4
|
||
Lateral vibratory
|
||
mass (LVM)
|
||
|
||
T2
|
||
psub
|
||
Larynx
|
||
|
||
Closing
|
||
|
||
Syrinx
|
||
|
||
Right
|
||
LVM
|
||
|
||
T1
|
||
Opening
|
||
|
||
Bronchus
|
||
Cranial
|
||
|
||
Left
|
||
LVM
|
||
|
||
T4
|
||
Ch B
|
||
|
||
DKG1
|
||
T2
|
||
|
||
Δy
|
||
|
||
DKG2
|
||
|
||
T1
|
||
Ch A
|
||
|
||
1 mm
|
||
Closing/divergent
|
||
|
||
Caudal
|
||
|
||
Collision
|
||
|
||
Opening/convergent
|
||
|
||
DKG1
|
||
|
||
Syringeal opening
|
||
|
||
Left
|
||
|
||
ΔtDKG
|
||
|
||
Right
|
||
|
||
DKG2
|
||
|
||
Left
|
||
|
||
Right
|
||
|
||
μEGG
|
||
|
||
Ch A
|
||
Ch B
|
||
|
||
Position
|
||
|
||
2
|
||
|
||
1 mm
|
||
|
||
Cranial
|
||
Min
|
||
|
||
VC2 mucosal wave
|
||
|
||
2
|
||
2 ms
|
||
|
||
4
|
||
0
|
||
|
||
6
|
||
|
||
LVM displacement
|
||
(mm)
|
||
|
||
ΔtEGG
|
||
|
||
Glottovibrogram
|
||
GVG
|
||
|
||
3
|
||
Opening / closing / opening cranial edge
|
||
|
||
2
|
||
|
||
Cranial edge
|
||
|
||
1
|
||
|
||
Caudal edge
|
||
|
||
0
|
||
|
||
Syringeal opening
|
||
(mm)
|
||
|
||
Caudal
|
||
|
||
Closing/opening caudal edge
|
||
Right
|
||
|
||
Sound (Pa)
|
||
|
||
Tracheal
|
||
VKG
|
||
|
||
Closing caudal edge
|
||
Mediolateral mucosal wave
|
||
|
||
Left
|
||
|
||
Opening/closing cranial edge
|
||
|
||
0
|
||
|
||
5
|
||
|
||
0
|
||
Excitation
|
||
10
|
||
|
||
15
|
||
|
||
20
|
||
|
||
25
|
||
|
||
30
|
||
|
||
35
|
||
|
||
Time (ms)
|
||
|
||
morphology. We found self-sustained syringeal oscillations when
|
||
both bronchial and air sac pressures were 40.5 kPa (N ¼ 12).
|
||
The lateral vibratory masses (LVMs)7 were visualized using
|
||
transillumination of the syrinx (Fig. 1c). Within an oscillation
|
||
|
||
cycle the LVM inner wall changed shape from divergent
|
||
during closing, rectangular during full collision and to
|
||
convergent during opening (Fig. 1c, Supplementary Movie 1).
|
||
A consistent phase shift in LVM position, confirmed by
|
||
|
||
NATURE COMMUNICATIONS | 6:8978 | DOI: 10.1038/ncomms9978 | www.nature.com/naturecommunications
|
||
|
||
3
|
||
|
||
ARTICLE
|
||
|
||
NATURE COMMUNICATIONS | DOI: 10.1038/ncomms9978
|
||
|
||
simultaneous micro-electroglottography (mEGG) recordings
|
||
(Methods section), was present along the caudo-cranial
|
||
axis (Fig. 1d). Spatiotemporal analysis of the LVM inner wall
|
||
displacement and syringeal opening identified both components
|
||
VC1 and VC2 of a tissue travelling wave along the caudo-cranial
|
||
axis (Fig. 1e). Furthermore, we observed medio-lateral, that is,
|
||
laterally travelling, tissue waves on the cranial surface of the
|
||
LVMs (Fig. 1f), which are continuations of the caudo-cranial
|
||
waves accompanying the LVM opening, and commonly observed
|
||
on mammalian vocal folds (Supplementary Fig. 2). Sound
|
||
pressure excitation occurred both during opening and closing
|
||
events (Fig. 1g). The presence of both VC1 and VC2 components
|
||
confirms our hypotheses that a caudo-cranial travelling tissue
|
||
surface wave is present and that this wave is associated with
|
||
sound producing events in pigeons.
|
||
To test whether the presence of a tissue surface wave is a shared
|
||
trait across birds, we studied syringeal oscillatory behaviour in six
|
||
additional bird species from five orders. We selected species
|
||
ranging in size (B15 g–200 kg) and vocal complexity, each with
|
||
highly divergent syrinx morphologies, containing one or two
|
||
paired oscillators and controlled by zero to seven pairs of intrinsic
|
||
syringeal muscles (Figs 2 and 3). We reconstructed threedimensional geometries including bone, soft tissue and muscle
|
||
based on micro-computed tomography (CT) scans (Figs 2a
|
||
and 3a). Our study species included the largest extant bird
|
||
(ostrich), a phylogenetically basal paleognathid bird (elegantcrested tinamou) and several neognathids: a parrot (cockatiel),
|
||
dove (Barbary dove) and two songbirds (zebra finch and
|
||
Bengalese finch). Medio-lateral vibration components (VC1)
|
||
were observed in each species using tracheal endoscopy (Figs 2c
|
||
and 3c). These VC1 vibrations resulted in complete syringeal
|
||
closure within an oscillatory cycle in each species except for the
|
||
ostrich, where full closure was never observed, more closely
|
||
resembling human breathy phonation40.
|
||
In each species, regardless of syringeal morphology, we
|
||
confirmed the presence of the caudo-cranial component (VC2)
|
||
of a travelling tissue wave using spatiotemporal analysis of
|
||
syringeal inner wall displacement, syringeal opening and/or
|
||
mEGG (Figs 2d and 3d, Supplementary Movies 1–6). To further
|
||
test if the tissue wave was present over a range of fundamental
|
||
frequencies, we subjected the syrinx to bronchial pressure ramps
|
||
and measured the direction and speed of the tissue wave when
|
||
present (Methods section). During self-sustained oscillations over
|
||
a range of F0 values, the tissue wave was always present (Fig. 4)
|
||
and running from caudal to cranial (indicated by all velocities
|
||
being positive in Fig. 4). The wave speed did either not vary
|
||
(pigeon and tinamou; linear regression, P ¼ 0.56 (n ¼ 10) and
|
||
P ¼ 0.26 (n ¼ 10), respectively) or increased significantly with
|
||
F0 (zebra finch and cockatiel; linear regression, Po0.001
|
||
(n ¼ 11) and Poo0.001 (n ¼ 118) respectively) within a range of
|
||
0.5–4.0 m s 1.
|
||
|
||
Furthermore, to investigate the relationship between tissue
|
||
motion dynamics and sound generation events within a single
|
||
oscillatory cycle, we quantified the delay between sound
|
||
excitation events and first opening and closing events of the
|
||
syringeal passage over a range of F0 values (Fig. 5). In the pigeon,
|
||
both opening and closing events were precisely accompanied by
|
||
an acoustic excitation at very short delays of 170 and 90 ms,
|
||
respectively (Fig. 5a), which are both below the 250 ms temporal
|
||
accuracy of the opening and closing event timing (that is, one
|
||
frame duration of high-speed video). The tinamou showed a
|
||
strong acoustic excitation on syringeal opening, with a delay of
|
||
100 ms, also below the 250 ms temporal accuracy of the opening
|
||
and closing event timing (Fig. 5b). A second, often weaker,
|
||
excitation occurred 1.63 ms after closing. The zebra finch showed
|
||
a very precisely timed strong acoustic excitation on syringeal
|
||
closing at a delay of 40 ms (at a temporal accuracy of 33 ms;
|
||
Fig. 5c).
|
||
In conclusion, these data confirm our first hypothesis that a
|
||
caudo-cranial travelling tissue surface wave is present across a
|
||
range of syringeal morphologies and sizes. Furthermore, our data
|
||
confirm a close association between opening/closing event timing
|
||
and sound generation events within single oscillatory cycles
|
||
across a range of species. Collectively, our data thus provide the
|
||
essential lacking demonstrations of syringeal dynamics and sound
|
||
generation events required to conclusively show that MEAD
|
||
theory is applicable to sound production in birds.
|
||
Vocal control redundancy ex vivo. To test our second hypothesis
|
||
that the physiological control space of the vocal organ is
|
||
redundant for key acoustic parameters, we systematically
|
||
investigated the relationship between syringeal control parameters and acoustic output ex vivo. In mammals, the brain can
|
||
control bronchial pressure and laryngeal muscle activity to
|
||
modulate aerodynamic forces and vocal fold tissue properties (for
|
||
example, geometry and elasticity) and attain a target fundamental
|
||
frequency (F0)12–15. In birds, in addition to bronchial pressure,
|
||
pressure in the interclavicular air sac (ICAS) enclosing the syrinx
|
||
also affects F0, as suggested by models7,9,10 and experimental
|
||
manipulations10. We first quantified syringeal oscillatory
|
||
behaviour in different species as a function of bronchial and air
|
||
sac pressure (Figs 6 and 7a–c). For each species the F0 ranges
|
||
produced ex vivo corresponded well to the lower-end distribution
|
||
of spontaneous vocalizations (Figs 6 and 7b,c). We further found
|
||
that in each investigated species, multiple different combinations
|
||
of bronchial and ICAS pressures could achieve the same target
|
||
frequency (iso-F0 contours in Figs 6 and 7c), indicating that F0
|
||
control is redundant within the pressure control space. To
|
||
investigate how much two other important vocal parameters, that
|
||
is, sound pressure level (SPL) and sound quality, changed with F0,
|
||
we quantified the SPL and Wiener entropy (WE) along evenly
|
||
|
||
Figure 1 | The MEAD theory explains sound production in the domestic pigeon (Columba livia) syrinx. (a) Schematic illustration of vocal organs in
|
||
mammals (larynx) and birds (syrinx) showing the two vibrational components essential to MEAD theory: medio-lateral oscillation (VC1), and caudo-cranial
|
||
phase differences (VC2). The latter are related to a tissue surface wave moving cranially and cause the inner wall of the vibratory tissue to be divergent during
|
||
closing (solid line, black arrows) and convergent during opening motion (dashed line, white arrows). The syrinx is suspended in the ICAS. Three pressures act
|
||
on the syrinx: subsyringeal (psub), suprasyringeal (psupra) and ICAS pressure (pICAS). (b) Annotated micro-CT scan of the pigeon syrinx showing LVM (yellow)
|
||
and their inner edges (right, green; left, red), muscle (pink) and tracheal rings (T1–4). (c) Transilluminated syrinx filmed at 4 kHz with traced outlines of right
|
||
(green) and left (red) LVM during closing, collision and opening phases of oscillation. The region shown is indicated by the dotted box in b. White
|
||
arrows indicate movement. Circles indicate mEGG electrode pairs channel A (cyan fill) and B (black fill). (d) Two DKG (compiled at dotted lines in c) and
|
||
simultaneous mEGG recordings show consistent caudo-cranial time delay of syringeal closure between the caudal line DKG2 and cranial line DKG1 (DtDKG) as
|
||
well as between the caudal and cranial mEGG signals (DtmEGG). (e) Spatiotemporal displacement analysis of the left LVM (top) shows a caudo-cranial travelling
|
||
tissue wave (dashed line), which is also present in the glottovibrogram of syringeal opening (bottom). (f) Simultaneous tracheal endoscopic VKG confirms
|
||
opening and closing event timing of the cranial LVM edge, and reveals tissue waves (arrowheads) travelling mediolaterally over the epithelia. (g) Abrupt
|
||
positive and negative excitation of the acoustic waveform aligns with opening and closing of the LVM cranial edge.
|
||
4
|
||
|
||
NATURE COMMUNICATIONS | 6:8978 | DOI: 10.1038/ncomms9978 | www.nature.com/naturecommunications
|
||
|
||
ARTICLE
|
||
|
||
NATURE COMMUNICATIONS | DOI: 10.1038/ncomms9978
|
||
|
||
Ostrich
|
||
|
||
Tinamou
|
||
Muscle
|
||
ICAS
|
||
|
||
1m
|
||
|
||
Tracheal view
|
||
|
||
LVM
|
||
|
||
10 mm
|
||
|
||
ventral
|
||
|
||
Muscle
|
||
|
||
LVM
|
||
100 mm
|
||
|
||
1 mm
|
||
|
||
Ventral
|
||
|
||
1
|
||
|
||
Tracheal VKG
|
||
|
||
Right
|
||
|
||
Left
|
||
|
||
Pa
|
||
|
||
Left
|
||
|
||
Opening cranial edge
|
||
|
||
GVG
|
||
|
||
DKG
|
||
|
||
VC2 wave
|
||
|
||
Caudal (pos 1)
|
||
|
||
Sound
|
||
|
||
Closing
|
||
|
||
3
|
||
|
||
Cranial
|
||
|
||
Cranial (pos 2)
|
||
|
||
VC2
|
||
|
||
Right
|
||
|
||
VC2 wave
|
||
|
||
2 ms
|
||
|
||
Caudal
|
||
|
||
F0 = 150 Hz
|
||
|
||
0.4
|
||
|
||
1 mm
|
||
|
||
Tracheal VKG
|
||
|
||
VC1
|
||
|
||
DKG
|
||
|
||
0.2
|
||
|
||
0
|
||
|
||
Syringeal opening
|
||
(mm)
|
||
|
||
2
|
||
Dorsal
|
||
|
||
Left
|
||
LVM
|
||
|
||
Right
|
||
LVM
|
||
VKG
|
||
|
||
F0 = 310 Hz
|
||
|
||
0
|
||
|
||
0
|
||
|
||
2 ms
|
||
|
||
5 ms
|
||
|
||
–0.4
|
||
|
||
–0.2
|
||
Time
|
||
|
||
Time
|
||
|
||
Figure 2 | MEAD theory explains syringeal sound production in paleognaths. (a) Three-dimensional syrinx geometry of the ostrich (Struthio camelus) and
|
||
elegant-crested tinamou (Eudromia elegans) showing bone (grey), LVM (yellow) and muscles (pink). Both views are ventral. Muscle is rendered transparent
|
||
in tinamou syrinx to show vibratory tissue. (b) High-speed imaging stills of endoscopic tracheal (ostrich) and transilluminated frontal views (tinamou) of
|
||
the syrinx at two different phases during the oscillatory cycle. The region and location of these stills is indicated with a dotted box in a. For the ostrich the
|
||
position of VKG analysis (dotted horizontal line) and DKG analysis (solid white line from point 1–2) presented in panel c is indicated. Transillumination
|
||
provides sufficient detail to identify inner edges of right (green) and left (red) LVM in tinamou. (c) Evidence for medio-lateral vibrations (VC1) using
|
||
tracheal endoscopic VKG. In the ostrich predominantly the right side vibrated. Full opening and closure of the cranial edge can be observed in tinamou.
|
||
(d) Evidence for the caudo-cranial component (VC2) of the tissue wave as demonstrated by DKG for ostrich, and glottovibrogram for tinamou.
|
||
(e) Synchronised acoustic waveforms.
|
||
|
||
spaced iso-F0 contours. A point on the iso-F0 contour was
|
||
considered to be redundant in all three acoustic parameters if
|
||
neither SPL nor WE changed along the iso-F0 contour (Methods
|
||
section). The percentage of the explored control space that
|
||
demonstrated redundancy for the three vocal parameters
|
||
measured 79.8±21.4% (mean±s.d.) for pigeon (N ¼ 7),
|
||
83.0±7.7% for Barbary dove (N ¼ 3), 67.8±4.7% for tinamou
|
||
(N ¼ 3), 71.4±18.9% for cockatiel (N ¼ 2), 44.3% for zebra finch
|
||
right hemisyrinx, 62.4±13.3% for Bengalese finch left hemisyrinx
|
||
(N ¼ 6) and 71.6±18.6% for Bengalese finch left hemisyrinx
|
||
(N ¼ 6). These results demonstrate that F0 control by pressure
|
||
ex vivo is redundant in subspaces within the pressure control
|
||
space, and that this redundancy is conserved across species
|
||
exhibiting a wide range of syringeal morphologies. Therefore, in
|
||
the ex vivo preparation redundant acoustic output can be
|
||
achieved by modulating air pressure, without any active control
|
||
of syringeal muscles.
|
||
We furthermore examined whether muscular control
|
||
introduced an additional source of redundancy and quantified
|
||
the effect of syringeal muscle recruitment on F0 using local
|
||
micro-stimulation (Fig. 7d). Muscle stimulation caused an F0
|
||
increase of 300–750 Hz and 75–200 Hz for tinamou and zebra
|
||
finch, respectively (Fig. 7e). The F0 range achieved by pressure
|
||
|
||
and muscle recruitment overlapped within each species (tinamou
|
||
(N ¼ 1) and zebra finch (N ¼ 5)) and multiple different
|
||
combinations of muscle recruitment and bronchial pressure
|
||
resulted in the same F0. These results thus demonstrate that
|
||
muscular control of F0 is redundant in the ex vivo preparation.
|
||
Taken together, the above data confirm our second hypothesis
|
||
that the physiological control space of the vocal organ ex vivo is
|
||
redundant for key acoustic parameters across a range of syringeal
|
||
morphologies and sizes.
|
||
Discussion
|
||
Our data establish that birds use MEAD as the primary physical
|
||
mechanism for sound production with strong similarities to
|
||
mammalian MEAD systems: First, we demonstrate the presence
|
||
of a tissue wave that travels from the caudal to cranial end of the
|
||
syringeal vibratory tissue (Figs 1–4). This tissue wave thus causes
|
||
the syringeal vibratory tissue shape to be convergent when
|
||
opening, and divergent when closing during expiratory sound
|
||
production, and can be considered analogous to the caudo-cranial
|
||
mucosal wave observed in mammalian vocal folds. Our data
|
||
therefore strongly suggest that in birds, just as in mammals, the
|
||
dominant asymmetric forcing function over the opening and
|
||
|
||
NATURE COMMUNICATIONS | 6:8978 | DOI: 10.1038/ncomms9978 | www.nature.com/naturecommunications
|
||
|
||
5
|
||
|
||
ARTICLE
|
||
|
||
NATURE COMMUNICATIONS | DOI: 10.1038/ncomms9978
|
||
|
||
Zebra finch
|
||
|
||
Cockatiel
|
||
|
||
Muscle
|
||
Muscle
|
||
|
||
Medial
|
||
Labia
|
||
Lateral
|
||
Labia
|
||
|
||
B3
|
||
LVM
|
||
100 mm
|
||
|
||
10 mm
|
||
|
||
1 mm
|
||
|
||
1 mm
|
||
|
||
B3
|
||
Ch B
|
||
|
||
Ch B
|
||
|
||
Right
|
||
LL
|
||
|
||
Ch A
|
||
|
||
Right
|
||
|
||
Left
|
||
|
||
Closing
|
||
|
||
Opening cranial edge
|
||
|
||
Right
|
||
|
||
Closing
|
||
Midline
|
||
Opening cranial edge
|
||
|
||
Left
|
||
|
||
μEGG
|
||
|
||
μEGG
|
||
|
||
ΔtEGG
|
||
|
||
ΔtEGG
|
||
1
|
||
|
||
F0 = 1450 Hz
|
||
|
||
Sound
|
||
Pa
|
||
|
||
0.5
|
||
|
||
GVG
|
||
|
||
Ch A
|
||
Ch B
|
||
|
||
VC2
|
||
|
||
0.4
|
||
|
||
VC2 wave
|
||
|
||
0
|
||
|
||
Syringeal opening
|
||
(mm)
|
||
|
||
VC1
|
||
|
||
Tracheal VKG
|
||
|
||
Tracheal VKG
|
||
|
||
Ch A
|
||
|
||
6
|
||
F0 = 420 Hz
|
||
|
||
0
|
||
|
||
0
|
||
|
||
2 ms
|
||
|
||
1 ms
|
||
–0.4
|
||
|
||
–1
|
||
Time
|
||
|
||
Time
|
||
|
||
Figure 3 | MEAD theory explains syringeal sound production in neognaths. (a) Three-dimensional syrinx geometry of the cockatiel (Nymphicus hollandicus,
|
||
ventral view) and zebra finch (Taeniopygia guttata, dorsal view) showing bone (grey), LVM (yellow) and muscles (pink). Muscle is rendered transparent in
|
||
zebra finch right hemisyrinx to show vibratory tissue. (b) High-speed imaging stills of frontal transilluminated frontal views of the syrinx at two different phases
|
||
during the oscillatory cycle at view and location indicated with a dotted box in a. While transillumination does not provide detail on motion in the cockatiel
|
||
syrinx, it provides sufficient detail to identify inner edges of vibratory tissue in female zebra finches (green). Circles indicate location of mEGG electrodes (cyan,
|
||
channel A; black, channel B). (c) Tracheal endoscopic VKG shows opening and closing events and thus evidence for medio-lateral vibrations (VC1). In the
|
||
zebra finch sound production was induced in the right hemisyrinx. (d) Evidence for caudo-cranial component (VC2) of the tissue wave as demonstrated by
|
||
mEGG phase delays for cockatiel and zebra finch and glottovibrogram analysis for zebra finch. (e) Synchronised acoustic waveforms.
|
||
|
||
closing phases of vibration essential to maintain self-sustained
|
||
oscillation is not formed by the mass inertance of the air column
|
||
in the vocal tract23,24, but by the tissue-wave-induced intraglottal
|
||
pressure changes. This mechanism reduces the dependency of the
|
||
self-sustained syringeal oscillations on acoustic resonances of the
|
||
vocal tract and allows for an expanded F0 range of vocalization14,
|
||
which in addition to labial morphology41 could aid birds in
|
||
extending their F0 range. Second, the magnitude range of the
|
||
tissue-wave speed measured (0.5–3.0 m s 1) is in excellent
|
||
agreement with values reported for the mammalian larynx30,41–
|
||
46 (human41,43–45, 0.5–2.0 m s 1; dog42,46,47, 0.5–2 m s 1; calf45,
|
||
0.4 m s 1; and an African elephant30, 1.2 m s 1) suggesting that
|
||
no scaling effects occur. Third, our data show that in some species
|
||
(zebra finch, cockatiel) the tissue-wave speed increased with F0,
|
||
similar to what has been observed in humans47, whereas in other
|
||
species (pigeon, tinamou) the tissue-wave remained constant with
|
||
respect to F0 (Fig. 4). The different relationships are possibly
|
||
related to biomechanical properties of the tissue layers involved in
|
||
the vibrations or varying aerodynamic forces acting on the
|
||
vibrating structures. Future work will be required to establish the
|
||
respective causality. Last, our findings demonstrate that acoustic
|
||
excitation occurs at opening and/or closing of the syringeal
|
||
passage (Fig. 5), which strongly suggests a causal relation between
|
||
6
|
||
|
||
tissue vibration and generation of acoustic energy by modulating
|
||
the glottal airflow as found in the mammalian larynx28–30. While
|
||
in humans the maximum acoustic excitation has been shown to
|
||
occur mainly at the instant of glottal closure28,29, a recent study
|
||
reported that in an excised elephant larynx the maximum
|
||
acoustic excitation occurred at the instant of glottal opening30.
|
||
The mammalian larynx thus exhibits more diversity than
|
||
previously thought in what movements cause the predominant
|
||
acoustic excitation. Our work demonstrates that this diversity is
|
||
also present in birds and that more comparative studies are
|
||
needed to explain the causal link between airflow, tissue vibration
|
||
and acoustic excitation.
|
||
In conclusion, we find that despite the large diversity present in
|
||
syringeal morphology of the bird species included in this study,
|
||
all use MEAD as the primary physical mechanism of sound
|
||
production, supporting MEAD-based approaches to modelling
|
||
avian sound production7–11. Moreover, our findings suggest that
|
||
despite their different evolutionary origins1, laryngeally vocalizing
|
||
mammals and syringeally vocalizing birds have converged on the
|
||
same physical mechanism for vocalization.
|
||
Furthermore, our data show that key acoustic parameters, such
|
||
as particular F0 values, can be achieved by multiple distinct
|
||
combinations of respiratory pressure and syringeal muscle
|
||
|
||
NATURE COMMUNICATIONS | 6:8978 | DOI: 10.1038/ncomms9978 | www.nature.com/naturecommunications
|
||
|
||
ARTICLE
|
||
|
||
NATURE COMMUNICATIONS | DOI: 10.1038/ncomms9978
|
||
|
||
vVC2 (m s–1)
|
||
|
||
1.0
|
||
|
||
Pigeon
|
||
|
||
0.8
|
||
0.6
|
||
0.4
|
||
0.2
|
||
0
|
||
|
||
vVC2 (m s–1)
|
||
|
||
4
|
||
|
||
190
|
||
|
||
200
|
||
|
||
210
|
||
|
||
220
|
||
|
||
230
|
||
|
||
240
|
||
|
||
250
|
||
|
||
260
|
||
|
||
270
|
||
|
||
Tinamou
|
||
|
||
3
|
||
2
|
||
1
|
||
0
|
||
|
||
2
|
||
vVC2 (m s–1)
|
||
|
||
P = 0.56
|
||
180
|
||
|
||
P = 0.26
|
||
230
|
||
|
||
240
|
||
|
||
250
|
||
|
||
260
|
||
|
||
270
|
||
|
||
280
|
||
|
||
290
|
||
|
||
300
|
||
|
||
310
|
||
|
||
320
|
||
|
||
330
|
||
|
||
Zebra finch
|
||
|
||
1
|
||
|
||
P < 0.001
|
||
0
|
||
|
||
240
|
||
|
||
260
|
||
|
||
280
|
||
|
||
300
|
||
|
||
320
|
||
|
||
340
|
||
|
||
360
|
||
|
||
380
|
||
|
||
400
|
||
|
||
Cockatiel
|
||
vVC2 (m s–1)
|
||
|
||
3
|
||
2
|
||
1
|
||
P << 0.001
|
||
0
|
||
|
||
1,650
|
||
|
||
1,700 1,750 1,800 1,850 1,900
|
||
Fundamental frequency (Hz)
|
||
|
||
1,950
|
||
|
||
2,000
|
||
|
||
Figure 4 | The caudo-cranial tissue wave is present across a range of
|
||
fundamental frequencies. Magnitude of the caudo-cranial component
|
||
(vVC2) of the travelling tissue-wave’s velocity in (a) pigeon and (b) tinamou,
|
||
(c) zebra finch and (d) cockatiel. The positive velocity values indicate that
|
||
the wave travelled from caudal to cranial. Wave speed remained constant
|
||
with F0 in pigeon and tinamou (Linear regression, P ¼ 0.56 (n ¼ 10) and
|
||
P ¼ 0.26 (n ¼ 10), respectively), but increased significantly with F0 in zebra
|
||
finch and cockatiel (linear regression, Po0.001 (n ¼ 11) and Poo0.001
|
||
(n ¼ 118), respectively).
|
||
|
||
recruitment ex vivo (Figs 6 and 7). This finding thus supports the
|
||
hypothesis that subspaces within the entire physiological control
|
||
space of the vocal organ ex vivo are redundant for acoustic
|
||
parameters.
|
||
Our work represents the first systematic exploration of
|
||
syringeal behaviour in a controlled environment using pressure
|
||
differentials up to 2 kPa. Although it remains unresolved to what
|
||
degree birds can independently control bronchial pressure and
|
||
ICAS air sac pressure in vivo, ventilation flow across the lungs
|
||
requires the existence of pressure differences between different
|
||
parts of the respiratory system48–50. Especially in dynamic
|
||
situations such as vocal behaviour, the passive geometry of the
|
||
air sac system can lead to substantial pressure differences between
|
||
air sacs51,52 and indeed transient pressure differences up to
|
||
1.0 kPa occur during vocalizations in Barbary doves7,53. These
|
||
pressure fluctuations can result in local transmural pressure
|
||
differentials over the syringeal walls and thus in transmural forces
|
||
on the vibrating tissues7,37. The individual bird can either avoid
|
||
or exploit such regimes during vocalization. However, regardless
|
||
|
||
of pressure differentials, only bronchial pressure in combination
|
||
with different levels of recruitment in a single vocal muscle leads
|
||
to redundancy in F0 (Fig. 7e).
|
||
How acoustic redundancy of the vocal organ ex vivo reflects the
|
||
functional motor redundancy in vivo remains to be explored. The
|
||
speed at which consecutive motor commands can be executed
|
||
in vivo (either on the same side of the syrinx or when vocal
|
||
production switches rapidly from one side to the other within a
|
||
complex syllable) may cause a significant reduction of the
|
||
available functional redundancy, especially because at least some
|
||
songbirds possess superfast syringeal muscles that produce peak
|
||
force in o5 ms (refs 54,55). Here, we did not investigate the rapid
|
||
time-varying pressure and muscle recruitment patterns that occur
|
||
in vivo, and indeed for most species more detailed experimental
|
||
in vivo data are required to meaningfully explore the highdimensional control space ex vivo. On the other hand, we show
|
||
that redundancy emerges when only varying the activity level of a
|
||
single vocal muscle. Redundancy can thus be expected to
|
||
increase when the brain can produce a given acoustic output by
|
||
choosing from a large set of redundant motor commands when
|
||
coordinating the B16 syringeal muscles56 with several thousand
|
||
motor units57.
|
||
A recent study used zebra finch song acoustics to infer lowdimensional motor commands11, which were then used to
|
||
generate synthetic songs that closely resembled the acoustic
|
||
output of natural vocal behaviour, and evoked auditory responses
|
||
that closely resembled the pattern of premotor activity. These
|
||
results led the authors to suggest that premotor area HVC
|
||
encodes a low-dimensional forward model of gesture dynamics11.
|
||
In contrast, our data indicate that particular acoustic outputs can
|
||
be specified by multiple motor states, suggesting that motor
|
||
commands cannot be uniquely inferred from acoustics. It will
|
||
therefore be important for future studies to investigate whether
|
||
the method used in ref. 11 to infer motor commands from
|
||
acoustic data yields the actual combination of control parameters
|
||
employed by the bird to generate the sound, rather than a
|
||
different set of control parameters that redundantly produces the
|
||
same acoustic output. Similarly, future ex vivo studies employing
|
||
time-varying stimulus patterns across multiple muscles will allow
|
||
us to explore the limits of vocal redundancy during sophisticated
|
||
motor trajectories similar to those in behaving animals. Despite
|
||
the apparent conflict between our findings and elements of
|
||
ref. 11, it is important to note that the instantiation of a lowdimensional forward model within HVC—which is multiple
|
||
synapses upstream from the vocal and respiratory muscles—is
|
||
not incompatible with a redundant vocal organ. Indeed, one
|
||
strength of low-dimensional encoding in HVC is that it would
|
||
allow HVC to represent control parameters (for example, vocal
|
||
fold tension) without regard to the details of the redundant
|
||
combinations of muscle contraction states required to achieve
|
||
that tension.
|
||
In many fine motor control systems such as arm reaching, the
|
||
brain must negotiate the so-called motor redundancy problem39,
|
||
in which a particular behavioural target can be achieved by vast
|
||
numbers of motor commands. However, one potential advantage
|
||
to a redundant control space is that it allows the brain to find
|
||
subspaces of possible motor commands (for example, along the
|
||
iso-F0 contours in Figs 6 and 7c in our ex vivo paradigm) rather
|
||
than searching for unique motor commands to achieve the target.
|
||
Crucially, redundant control spaces allow variability in taskirrelevant directions58,59. In vocal production, the brain may
|
||
select from within this motor command space to meet other
|
||
demands, such as acoustic targets in future and/or past syllables.
|
||
Consequently, we speculate that vocal motor redundancy may
|
||
simplify trial-and-error learning during song acquisition by
|
||
allowing the brain to rapidly discover one of many motor
|
||
|
||
NATURE COMMUNICATIONS | 6:8978 | DOI: 10.1038/ncomms9978 | www.nature.com/naturecommunications
|
||
|
||
7
|
||
|
||
ARTICLE
|
||
|
||
NATURE COMMUNICATIONS | DOI: 10.1038/ncomms9978
|
||
|
||
Acoustic excitation with syringeal
|
||
Rock pigeon
|
||
|
||
Opening
|
||
|
||
350
|
||
|
||
150
|
||
|
||
50
|
||
0
|
||
180
|
||
|
||
200
|
||
|
||
220
|
||
|
||
240
|
||
|
||
Opening
|
||
|
||
100
|
||
|
||
No. observations per bin
|
||
|
||
200
|
||
|
||
Closing
|
||
|
||
Closed
|
||
|
||
250
|
||
|
||
Open
|
||
|
||
Phase ϕ (deg)
|
||
|
||
–90 μs
|
||
|
||
10
|
||
|
||
300
|
||
|
||
8
|
||
8
|
||
6
|
||
|
||
6
|
||
4
|
||
|
||
4
|
||
|
||
2
|
||
|
||
2
|
||
|
||
0
|
||
–1
|
||
|
||
260
|
||
|
||
Tinamou
|
||
|
||
0
|
||
|
||
0
|
||
–1
|
||
|
||
1
|
||
|
||
14
|
||
|
||
350
|
||
|
||
0
|
||
|
||
10
|
||
|
||
–100 μs
|
||
|
||
1
|
||
|
||
1.63 ms
|
||
|
||
250
|
||
200
|
||
Opening Closing
|
||
|
||
150
|
||
100
|
||
50
|
||
0
|
||
220
|
||
|
||
240
|
||
|
||
260
|
||
|
||
280
|
||
|
||
300
|
||
|
||
No. observations per bin
|
||
|
||
12
|
||
|
||
300
|
||
Phase ϕ (deg)
|
||
|
||
Closing
|
||
10
|
||
|
||
–170 μs
|
||
|
||
8
|
||
|
||
6
|
||
|
||
6
|
||
|
||
4
|
||
|
||
4
|
||
2
|
||
|
||
2
|
||
0
|
||
–1
|
||
|
||
320
|
||
|
||
8
|
||
|
||
10
|
||
|
||
0
|
||
|
||
0
|
||
|
||
1
|
||
|
||
0
|
||
|
||
1
|
||
|
||
2
|
||
|
||
3
|
||
|
||
Time after opening (ms)
|
||
Zebra finch
|
||
|
||
250
|
||
200
|
||
150
|
||
100
|
||
Opening
|
||
|
||
Phase ϕ (deg)
|
||
|
||
300
|
||
|
||
50
|
||
0
|
||
240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400
|
||
Fundamental frequency (Hz)
|
||
|
||
18
|
||
No. observations per bin
|
||
|
||
Closing
|
||
|
||
350
|
||
|
||
–40 μs
|
||
|
||
16
|
||
14
|
||
12
|
||
10
|
||
8
|
||
6
|
||
4
|
||
2
|
||
0
|
||
–1
|
||
0
|
||
1
|
||
Time after closing (ms)
|
||
|
||
Figure 5 | Sound excitation is associated with syringeal opening and closing events. The relative duration of the syrinx in open (white bar starting at
|
||
phase j ¼ 0°) and closed (grey bar) state within a single oscillatory cycle (full oscillation equals 360°) over a range of fundamental frequencies in
|
||
(a) pigeon, (b) tinamou and (c) zebra finch (left) based on transillumination data (Methods section). Sound excitation events are associated with opening
|
||
(red circles: mean±s.d.) and/or closing (blue circles: mean±s.d.) of the syrinx. The thick vertical black line at the base of each column indicates the
|
||
duration of a single movie frame relative to the cycle duration and thus the timing accuracy for determining a syringeal closing or opening event. Note that
|
||
in zebra finch the lines are short due to high frame-rates used (25 kHz). The histograms (right) show that timing of sound excitation is closely associated
|
||
with syringeal opening (red) and closing (blue) events.
|
||
|
||
solutions60 before learning how to further improve performance
|
||
by exploiting motor redundancy39. Vocal redundancy may
|
||
therefore have aided, or even been necessary for, the
|
||
evolutionary development of vocal learning. Future studies
|
||
might evaluate this speculation by quantifying whether learned
|
||
vocalizations exploit vocal redundancy. Furthermore, because
|
||
many species do not learn their vocalizations and many vocal
|
||
learners produce innate vocalizations in addition to learned ones,
|
||
future work might also determine whether innate vocal motor
|
||
programs similarly exploit redundancy to improve performance.
|
||
8
|
||
|
||
Our ex vivo results suggest that the redundant control of key
|
||
vocal parameters represents a significant aspect of avian vocal
|
||
control, and one that merits further investigation. Because
|
||
redundancy in F0 control by pressure and muscle recruitment
|
||
is also observed in various simplified computational models of the
|
||
human larynx13, and songbird syrinx9 as well as in ex vivo dog
|
||
larynx preparations61,62, we propose that vocal control
|
||
redundancy is a typical feature of MEAD sound production
|
||
systems and hence a common feature of vocal production and
|
||
control in mammals and birds.
|
||
|
||
NATURE COMMUNICATIONS | 6:8978 | DOI: 10.1038/ncomms9978 | www.nature.com/naturecommunications
|
||
|
||
ARTICLE
|
||
|
||
NATURE COMMUNICATIONS | DOI: 10.1038/ncomms9978
|
||
|
||
Airsac pressure (kPa)
|
||
|
||
Frequency (kHz)
|
||
|
||
Rock pigeon
|
||
0.8
|
||
|
||
0.4
|
||
|
||
0
|
||
|
||
Airsac pressure (kPa)
|
||
|
||
Frequency (kHz)
|
||
|
||
Barbary dove
|
||
|
||
0.5
|
||
|
||
0
|
||
500 ms
|
||
|
||
Airsac pressure (kPa)
|
||
|
||
Frequency (kHz)
|
||
|
||
Cockatiel
|
||
4
|
||
|
||
2
|
||
|
||
0
|
||
500 ms
|
||
|
||
2
|
||
R
|
||
1
|
||
0
|
||
|
||
Airsac pressure (kPa)
|
||
|
||
Frequency (kHz)
|
||
|
||
L
|
||
|
||
0.2
|
||
|
||
180
|
||
|
||
1
|
||
|
||
0.1
|
||
|
||
0
|
||
0
|
||
|
||
1
|
||
|
||
3
|
||
|
||
2
|
||
|
||
500
|
||
|
||
0.4
|
||
|
||
450
|
||
|
||
2
|
||
|
||
400
|
||
|
||
0.2
|
||
|
||
1
|
||
0
|
||
|
||
0
|
||
|
||
F0 (kHz)
|
||
|
||
3
|
||
|
||
0
|
||
|
||
1
|
||
|
||
2
|
||
|
||
3
|
||
|
||
0
|
||
|
||
F0 (kHz)
|
||
2
|
||
|
||
3
|
||
|
||
1,100
|
||
2
|
||
1
|
||
|
||
1,500
|
||
1,800
|
||
|
||
1
|
||
0
|
||
0
|
||
|
||
Left hemisyrinx
|
||
|
||
Bengalese finch
|
||
3
|
||
|
||
230
|
||
220
|
||
|
||
2
|
||
|
||
500 ms
|
||
|
||
1
|
||
|
||
F0 (kHz)
|
||
0.3
|
||
|
||
3
|
||
|
||
3
|
||
|
||
1
|
||
|
||
2
|
||
|
||
3
|
||
|
||
0
|
||
|
||
Right hemisyrinx
|
||
F0 (kHz)
|
||
900
|
||
|
||
2,350
|
||
1,900
|
||
1,500
|
||
|
||
2
|
||
1
|
||
0
|
||
0
|
||
|
||
1
|
||
|
||
2
|
||
|
||
800
|
||
1
|
||
|
||
700
|
||
|
||
1
|
||
2
|
||
2
|
||
30
|
||
Bronchial pressure (kPa)
|
||
|
||
3
|
||
|
||
0
|
||
|
||
200 ms
|
||
|
||
Frequency (kHz)
|
||
|
||
0.2
|
||
0.1
|
||
0
|
||
|
||
500 ms
|
||
|
||
0.3
|
||
0.2
|
||
0.1
|
||
|
||
pb (kPa)
|
||
|
||
Frequency (kHz)
|
||
|
||
Ostrich
|
||
0.3
|
||
|
||
0
|
||
|
||
2
|
||
|
||
Sound
|
||
500 ms
|
||
|
||
0
|
||
|
||
Figure 6 | Pressure control of F0 in sound production is redundant across avian taxa. Spectrograms and oscillograms of spontaneous vocalisation (left)
|
||
and representative pressure control spaces ex vivo (right) of (a) pigeon (Columba livia), (b) Barbary dove (Streptopelia risoria), (c) cockatiel and
|
||
(d) Bengalese finch (Lonchura striata domestica). The F0 ranges of sounds produced ex vivo (grey vertical bar right of spectrogram) correspond well to the
|
||
lower range of spontaneous vocalizations. Pressure control may allow higher F0 values, as indicated by the grey bar fading out. Iso-F0 contours (values in
|
||
Hz) are overlaid on the pressure control spaces and shown in white when redundant for all three acoustics parameters (F0, SPL and WE), or black when
|
||
not. In the Bengalese finch, the left hemisyrinx produces higher F0 than the right hemisyrinx, corroborating earlier in vivo studies70. (e) Spectrogram and
|
||
oscillogram (left) of ostrich mating call, and ex vivo sound production including bronchial pressure (pb) patterns underlying phonation (right). A complete
|
||
pressure control space was not obtained for this species.
|
||
|
||
NATURE COMMUNICATIONS | 6:8978 | DOI: 10.1038/ncomms9978 | www.nature.com/naturecommunications
|
||
|
||
9
|
||
|
||
ARTICLE
|
||
|
||
NATURE COMMUNICATIONS | DOI: 10.1038/ncomms9978
|
||
|
||
Tinamou
|
||
|
||
Zebra finch
|
||
ICAS
|
||
membrane
|
||
|
||
M. syringealis
|
||
|
||
Right
|
||
M. syringealis
|
||
ventralis
|
||
|
||
pICAS
|
||
|
||
Frequency (kHz)
|
||
|
||
psub
|
||
2
|
||
|
||
2
|
||
|
||
1
|
||
|
||
1
|
||
|
||
0
|
||
|
||
0
|
||
100 ms
|
||
|
||
200 ms
|
||
|
||
Time (s)
|
||
F0 (kHz)
|
||
Airsac pressure (kPa)
|
||
|
||
F0 (kHz)
|
||
0.6
|
||
|
||
2
|
||
|
||
3
|
||
|
||
450
|
||
|
||
0.4
|
||
2
|
||
|
||
450
|
||
350
|
||
|
||
1
|
||
|
||
0.4
|
||
|
||
400
|
||
1
|
||
0.2
|
||
|
||
0.2
|
||
|
||
300
|
||
300
|
||
|
||
Frequency (kHz)
|
||
|
||
0
|
||
|
||
0
|
||
|
||
1
|
||
|
||
2
|
||
|
||
0
|
||
|
||
0
|
||
|
||
3
|
||
0
|
||
Bronchial pressure (kPa)
|
||
|
||
2
|
||
|
||
2
|
||
|
||
1
|
||
|
||
1
|
||
|
||
0
|
||
|
||
0
|
||
|
||
1
|
||
|
||
2
|
||
|
||
0
|
||
|
||
F0stim
|
||
|
||
F0pre
|
||
100 ms
|
||
|
||
100 ms
|
||
Time (s)
|
||
|
||
1,200
|
||
F0stim
|
||
|
||
800
|
||
F0 (Hz)
|
||
|
||
1,000
|
||
700
|
||
|
||
800
|
||
600
|
||
|
||
600
|
||
F0Pre
|
||
|
||
400
|
||
1.6
|
||
|
||
2.0
|
||
|
||
500
|
||
1.0
|
||
2.4
|
||
Bronchial pressure (kPa)
|
||
|
||
2.0
|
||
|
||
Figure 7 | Motor control of F0 in sound production is redundant. (a) Three-dimensional geometry of the tinamou and zebra finch syrinx with pressure
|
||
control parameters; bronchial or subsyringeal (psub), and ICAS pressure (pICAS). Stimulated muscles are indicated. (b) Sound spectrogram (top) and
|
||
oscillogram (bottom) of a tinamou honksqueal call and zebra finch song motif. (c) Representative pressure control spaces ex vivo of one individual. Iso-F0
|
||
contour as in previous figure (values in Hz). (d) Sound spectrogram (top) and muscle stimulus (bottom) during syringeal muscle stimulation. Black dots
|
||
indicate measurements points. (e) Fundamental frequency (F0) is affected by muscle stimulation (blue dots, no stimulation; red dots, maximal stimulation)
|
||
and pressure. The grey bar indicates the individuals’ frequency range achieved by varying only pressure. Pressure control may allow higher F0 values, as
|
||
indicated by the grey bar fading out. Multiple different combinations result in the same frequency, for example, 500 and 650 Hz in tinamou and zebra finch,
|
||
respectively, (green horizontal line).
|
||
|
||
10
|
||
|
||
NATURE COMMUNICATIONS | 6:8978 | DOI: 10.1038/ncomms9978 | www.nature.com/naturecommunications
|
||
|
||
ARTICLE
|
||
|
||
NATURE COMMUNICATIONS | DOI: 10.1038/ncomms9978
|
||
|
||
Methods
|
||
Subjects. To study sound production mechanisms and the effect of muscle stimulation on sound production, we used 12 adult domestic pigeons (Columba livia;
|
||
order Columbiformes; nine males, three females), four domestic Barbary doves
|
||
(Streptopelia risoria; order Columbiformes; three males, one female), three elegantcrested tinamous (Eudromia elegans; order Tinamiformes; two males, one female),
|
||
two ostriches (Struthio camelus; order Struthioniformes; sex unknown), three
|
||
cockatiels (Nymphicus hollandicus; order Psittaciformes; two males, one female),
|
||
six Bengalese finches (Lonchura striata domestica; order Passeriformes; six males)
|
||
and 19 zebra finches (Taenopygia guttata, order Passeriformes; five adult males;
|
||
two juvenile males (B40 dph); 12 females). Ostrich syrinxes were obtained from a
|
||
local breeding farm. They were transferred to ice immediately after extraction, flash
|
||
frozen in liquid nitrogen and stored at 80 °C. Bengalese finches were kept in
|
||
indoor aviaries on a 14-h light:10-h dark light cycle with food and water ad libitum
|
||
(Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA). Zebra finches were kept in indoor aviaries
|
||
on a 12-h light:dark photoperiod with food and water ad libitum (University of
|
||
Southern Denmark (SDU), Odense, Denmark). All other animals were kept
|
||
in 3 6 2 m outdoor aviary with food and water ad libitum (SDU, Odense,
|
||
Denmark). Pigeons, doves, cockatiels and tinamous were obtained from local
|
||
breeders. Bengalese finch experiments were carried out at Emory University, and
|
||
all other experiments at SDU, Denmark. All experiments were conducted in
|
||
accordance with the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee of Emory
|
||
University and of SDU.
|
||
Surgical and mounting procedures. Animals were euthanized with isoflurane and
|
||
cooled on ice or icepacks. The syrinx and associated blood vessels were dissected
|
||
out using a stereoscope (M165-FC, Leica Microsystems) through a ventral incision
|
||
to the sternum while regularly flushing with oxygenated Ringers solution (5 °C,
|
||
recipe cf. refs 54–56), and transferred to a Sylgard-covered petri dish on ice
|
||
containing oxygenated Ringer solution. The syrinx was cleaned of fat and
|
||
connected to species–specific tubing assemblies of non-reactive polyethylene tubing
|
||
(Instech Salomon, PA, USA) in the experimental chamber with 10/0 nylon suture
|
||
(S&T, Neuhausen, Switzerland). Special care was taken to mount the syrinx of each
|
||
species in its natural position by leaving structural elements, such as bronchidesmus and collagen tissue strands, intact. Two pairs of mEGG electrodes (see
|
||
below) were inserted in tissue and fixed with 10/0 suture at locations indicated in
|
||
Figs 1 and 2. For muscle stimulation experiments ex vivo, perfusion pathways were
|
||
established in the zebra finch that allowed perfusion through the original syringeal
|
||
vasculature. All arteriole capillaries were localized and closed using 10/0 suture
|
||
immediately after exposure of the syrinx by a ventral incision to the sternum. The
|
||
syrinx was then transferred to a Sylgard-covered petri dish on ice and connected to
|
||
micro-perfusion lines, gravity fed with oxygenated Ringers. Perfusion pressure was
|
||
kept at 2–4 kPa until patent perfusion was observed and immediately reduced to
|
||
1–2 kPa. The syrinx was typically mounted ventral side up in the experimental
|
||
chamber to two bronchial and one tracheal connector (Supplementary Fig. 1).
|
||
Experimental chamber design. To study syringeal sound production, we
|
||
developed an experimental chamber that allowed for study of the syrinx ex vivo
|
||
(that is, intact perfused organ) under controlled conditions. This experimental
|
||
chamber was milled out of aluminium (temperature controlled) or PVC and
|
||
covered by an airtight glass lid that allowed pressurization and a clear view
|
||
(Supplementary Fig. 1). The glass was either coated with nano-particles (Percenta
|
||
AG, Germany) or heated to 10 °C above chamber temperature by a 18-mm
|
||
diameter Formvar coated Nichrome wire assembly (A-M Systems, Sequim, WA,
|
||
USA), to prevent droplet forming fogging up the glass. In the floor centre of the
|
||
chamber, a 1-mm raised edge with glass bottom covered in Sylgard allowed
|
||
transillumination of the syrinx. We separately controlled pressure in the bronchial
|
||
connectors (pb) and chamber (pICAS) with dual valve differential pressure PID
|
||
controllers (model PCD, 0–10 kPa, Alicat Scientific, AZ, USA), referenced to
|
||
atmospheric pressure, and a response time of 1 ms. Bronchial mass flow was
|
||
measured with micro-electro-mechanical system (MEMS) flow sensors of various
|
||
ranges (PMF series, Posifa Microsystems, San Jose, USA) and a response time of
|
||
1 ms. The supply of pressurized air to the controllers was heated and humidified
|
||
with deionised water in a pressure cooker. Excess vapour condensed in a downstream second pressure cooker. The pressure controllers were temperature controlled at 37 °C (HD4034 with PT100 sensor, Hotek Technologies, WA, USA)
|
||
ensuring pre-heated, fully humidified air to the syrinx. The temperature of the
|
||
aluminium experimental chamber was controlled with a recirculating water bath
|
||
(Julebo F12-ED, Seelbach, Germany) and logged at 1 s intervals with a 1-mm
|
||
diameter J-type miniature temperature probe (USBTC01, National Instruments,
|
||
TX, USA) 1–2 mm away from the syrinx. Perfusion fluids attained the same
|
||
temperature as the chamber due to physical contact with a platform in the chamber
|
||
(labelled ‘Perfusate platform’ in Supplementary Fig. 1). During the mounting
|
||
process the temperature of the chamber was kept at 7 °C.
|
||
Image acquisition and analysis. The syrinx was imaged through the chamber lid
|
||
with a high-speed camera (MotionPro-X4, 12 bit CMOS sensor, Integrated Design
|
||
Tools, Inc.; 4,000–25,000 frames s–1) mounted on a stereomicroscope (M165-FC,
|
||
Leica Microsystems). For the zebra finch, we also used a more light-sensitive 16 bit
|
||
|
||
high-speed camera (Fastcam SA1, Photron, San Diego, CA, USA; 20,000–35,000
|
||
frames s 1). We used a 1.2-mm (Schölly Fiberoptics, Denzlingen, Germany) and
|
||
300-mm (Advanced Inspection Technologies, Melbourne, FL, USA) diameter
|
||
flexible fiberscope for endoscopic imaging. The low-light images obtained with the
|
||
endoscopes were captured with a videokymographic (VKG) system (model 2156,
|
||
Cymo B.V., Groningen, The Netherlands), which combines a high-speed linescan
|
||
camera (7,200 line images s 1) with a full frame CMOS camera (25 frames s 1).
|
||
The analogue video output from the VKG was captured together with the
|
||
microphone and a synchronization signal using a capturing device (Intensity
|
||
Extreme, Black Magic Design, Australia). Light for transillumination was provided
|
||
by a 1,700 lumen LED (Luxeon S, Philips, The Netherlands) powered by a stable
|
||
power source (PS23023, HQ Power, Belgium) or plasma light source (HPLS200,
|
||
Thorlabs, Germany) through liquid light guides and reflected of a 45° angled silver
|
||
coated prism (MRA series, Thorlabs) to absorb heat.
|
||
Kymography. A kymogram displays pixel intensity over time along a set line in an
|
||
image. The VKG system used here generates a kymogram at the fixed position of
|
||
the linescan camera63. Digital kymograms (DKG) are kymograms along any
|
||
arbitrary line in a digital image64 and were extracted from high-speed image
|
||
recordings using Matlab (The Mathworks). Two kymograms in Supplementary
|
||
Fig. 2 were previously published: human from ref. 40, and elephant from ref. 30.
|
||
Micro-electroglottography. As an independent proxy for kinematics of the
|
||
syringeal vibratory tissues, we used EGG. This non-invasive technique measures
|
||
electrical impedance between electrodes and is commonly used to quantify vocal
|
||
fold contact area in the larynx65. mEGG electrodes consisting of single stranded
|
||
25 mm diameter Formvar coated Nichrome wires (A-M Systems) were inserted as
|
||
described above and connected to a modified two-channel electroglottograph
|
||
(model EG2, Glottal Enterprises Inc. NY, USA).
|
||
Data acquisition and synchronisation. Sound was recorded with a ½ inch
|
||
pressure microphone-pre-amplifier assembly (model 46AD with preamplifier type
|
||
26AH, G.R.A.S., Denmark), amplified and high-pass filtered (10 Hz, 3-pole
|
||
Butterworth filter, model 12AQ, G.R.A.S.). The microphone sensitivity was
|
||
measured before each experiment (sound calibrator model 42AB, G.R.A.S.).
|
||
The microphone was placed at 2–3 cm from the tracheal connector outlet in the
|
||
acoustic near field, and on a 45° angle to avoid the air jet from the tracheal outlet.
|
||
The sound signal was time shifted for the travelling distance from vibratory
|
||
membranes to microphone. Microphone, mEGG, pressure and flow signals were
|
||
low-pass filtered at 10 kHz (custom-built filter). These signals together with
|
||
synchronization signals from camera systems and muscle stimulators were
|
||
digitized at 50 kHz (USB 6259, 16 bit, National Instruments, Austin, TX, USA).
|
||
These signals were synchronized with all imaging systems with an accuracy of
|
||
o21 ms before each experiment. All control and analysis software was written in
|
||
Labview (National Instruments) or Matlab.
|
||
Tissue-wave imaging protocol and analysis. Transillumination successfully
|
||
visualized the inside outlines of vibratory tissues in the domestic pigeon, Barbary
|
||
dove, elegant-crested tinamou and zebra finch. High optical density of the ostrich
|
||
and cockatiel syrinx did not allow transillumination. In the tinamou, we dissected
|
||
apart M. syringealis to allow LVMs imaging using transillumination. In zebra finch
|
||
transillumination was successful in adult females and juvenile males, but attempts
|
||
in adult males were unsuccessful due to the high optical density of M. syringealis
|
||
ventralis (VS) muscles. In the zebra finch sound production was induced in the
|
||
right hemisyrinx. Substantially different requirements in lighting conditions did
|
||
not allow for simultaneous transillumination and tracheal endoscopy in zebra
|
||
finches.
|
||
To image syringeal oscillatory behaviour we subjected the syrinx to a single
|
||
bronchial pressure ramps at constant air sac pressure, while filming from 5,000 to
|
||
35,000 frames s 1. Our system could acquire and save a maximum of 2–10 s of
|
||
data depending on frame rates, which comprised (tens of) thousands of frames.
|
||
Due to the image complexity of the data, analysis could not be automatized, and
|
||
required frame-by-frame manual analysis. On selected sequences of high-speed
|
||
images, the left and right LVM or labia were traced manually in Amira (Visage
|
||
Imaging GmbH, Berlin, Germany) and processed in Matlab. We calculated
|
||
displacement (for example, Fig. 1e top panel) as current position minus the most
|
||
lateral position during oscillation (indicated by the green line ‘min’ on the top left
|
||
in Fig. 1e). With both left and right LVM shapes quantified we could then compute
|
||
the syringeal opening as a function of position and time, a graph also known as the
|
||
glottovibrogram30 as can be seen in Figs 1e,2d and 3d.
|
||
To quantify syringeal dynamics over a range of F0 values, full glottovibrogram
|
||
reconstructions over several cycles were not suitable due to the labour intensive
|
||
manual tracing required. Therefore we used an alternative approach to determine
|
||
the presence of the VC2 component and speed of the tissue wave across a range of
|
||
F0 values. For pigeon, tinamou and zebra finch we used transilluminated frontal
|
||
views of the syrinx and calculated one DKG at the caudal edge and one DKG at the
|
||
cranial edge of the LVM or labia (top two panels in Fig. 1d) at distance Dy
|
||
(indicated in middle panel Fig. 1c). DKG’s contain many periodic traces as many
|
||
structures move with each oscillation. By tracing selected LVM and labial inner
|
||
|
||
NATURE COMMUNICATIONS | 6:8978 | DOI: 10.1038/ncomms9978 | www.nature.com/naturecommunications
|
||
|
||
11
|
||
|
||
ARTICLE
|
||
|
||
NATURE COMMUNICATIONS | DOI: 10.1038/ncomms9978
|
||
|
||
edges in video stills over five oscillation cycles, we could identify the wave
|
||
representing the motion of the LVM or labial inner edge in the DKG’s and as such
|
||
measure the time difference between maximal lateral position of LVM or labium on
|
||
the two DKG’s (DtDKG in Fig. 1d). The wave speed equalled vVC2 ¼ Dy/DtDKG and
|
||
was averaged over five consecutive cycles. Because in the cockatiel syrinx
|
||
transillumination was not successful, we used cross-correlation between two
|
||
mEGG electrode pairs located at distance Dy to calculate time delay (DtmEGG) and
|
||
wave speed vVC2. The ostrich was not included in this analysis because both
|
||
transillumination was not successful and mEGG did not resolve vibrations due to
|
||
lack of syringeal closure. We did not estimate wave speed from the tracheal
|
||
endoscopic view because the VC2 velocity component was almost normal to the
|
||
imaging plane, leading to large inaccuracies.
|
||
In these five consecutive oscillations, we quantified the timing of syringeal
|
||
opening and closing from the transilluminated frontal views as the first frame in
|
||
which the entire syringeal passage was open or closed, respectively. The minimal
|
||
precision for these measurements equals the duration of one frame as indicated by
|
||
the black vertical line at the base of each column in Fig. 5. In addition, we
|
||
quantified the timing of acoustic excitations in the sound pressure signal. The
|
||
timing of the sound signals was corrected for the time needed for the sound to
|
||
propagate from the oscillators through trachea and tubing to the microphone,
|
||
assuming a sound speed of 340 m s 1. With these parameters we quantified the
|
||
timing of acoustic excitation with respect to syringeal opening and closing events
|
||
within single oscillatory cycles.
|
||
Pressure control space protocol. To explore syringeal oscillatory behaviour in
|
||
the pressure control space we subjected the syrinx to a set of bronchial pressure
|
||
ramps at randomized and variable air sac pressure, and one additional ramp where
|
||
pb equalled pICAS. Ramp speed was 1 kPa s 1. Depending on species, we used
|
||
pressures o2.0–4.0 kPa and |pb pICAS|o2.0 kPa to avoid regimes of high flow
|
||
(that is, combinations of high pb and low pICAS) and/or mechanical failure of
|
||
syringeal oscillatory structures. These sets were performed without transillumination imaging. SPL and WE were calculated on 100 ms segments by applying a
|
||
sliding window with 50 ms steps. If the SPL of these segments were above the 60 dB
|
||
re. 20 mPa threshold, segments were zero-padded to the next power of two, and a
|
||
4,096 point power spectral density estimate was computed (periodogram method
|
||
in Matlab). Additional filtering was used to extract the fundamental frequency (F0)
|
||
reliably from the spectral density estimate. WE was calculated as the geometric
|
||
mean of the power spectrum over the arithmetic mean of the power spectrum.
|
||
We extracted iso-F0 contours in pb, pICAS control space. SPL and WE were
|
||
evaluated along the iso-F0 contours at a resolution of 10 Pa (Supplementary Fig. 3).
|
||
To evaluate whether points on these iso-F0 contour lines were redundant for all
|
||
three quantified acoustic parameters (F0, SPL and WE) we computed acoustic
|
||
parameters at a fixed distance of 100 Pa both before and after each point along the
|
||
iso-F0 contour line locations in pb, pICAS control space (Supplementary Fig. 3). For
|
||
the 100 Pa start and end sections of the contour, only forward and backward values
|
||
could be computed. A point along the iso-F0 contour was considered redundant for
|
||
all the three parameters if the WE and SPL variation within the 100 Pa interval
|
||
was below 0.2 units of WE and 1 dB SPL (ref. 66). This resulted in a logical (1/0)
|
||
redundancy array for each iso-F0 contour. The iso-F0 contour is plotted
|
||
white when redundant and black when not in the pb, pICAS control spaces in
|
||
Figs 6a–d and 7c.
|
||
We computed iso-F0 contours at fixed intervals (Columba, 10 Hz; Streptopelia,
|
||
50 Hz Eudromia, 50 Hz; Nymphicus, 100 Hz; Lonchura, 100 Hz; Taenopygia, 50 Hz)
|
||
within the F0 range observed in the preparation. The percentage redundancy
|
||
of a pressure control space was expressed as the ratio of redundant points to
|
||
the total amount of points on all iso-F0 contours computed in the pb, pICAS
|
||
control space.
|
||
Muscle stimulation protocol. Muscles were stimulated with 50 mm diameter
|
||
Teflon-coated twisted silver wire electrodes (A-M Systems) that were fixed with
|
||
10/0 suture. We used a stimulus isolator (model A395, WPI, Sarasota, FL, USA) to
|
||
apply variable currents (0–10 mA) when limited compliance voltage was sufficient
|
||
to contract muscles (tinamou). For zebra finches and Bengalese finches, we used
|
||
two stimulators (model 14E11, DISA, Herlev, Denmark and model 2100, A-M
|
||
Systems, respectively). To ensure muscle specificity, we placed carbon microspheres
|
||
(20–40 mm diameter) at regular intervals on the muscles and surrounding tissues
|
||
and filmed contractions at 1 kHz. We stimulated the single syringeal muscle
|
||
present in tinamous, M. syringealis. In songbirds, activity of the M. syringealis
|
||
ventralis correlates to F0 (ref. 67). Therefore we focussed on this muscle to study F0
|
||
control in zebra finches (N ¼ 5 adult males). F0 of the sound was determined
|
||
30 ms prior (control) and 30 ms after stimulation. We computed 512-point fast
|
||
Fourier transforms and used parabolic interpolation around the peak power to
|
||
determine F0.
|
||
Statistics. Linear regressions were calculated to test the significance of wave speed
|
||
as a function of F0 in Matlab. All values are presented as mean±1 s.d.
|
||
Morphome reconstruction. We constructed three-dimensional annotated syrinx
|
||
morphologies, that is, morphomes, based on IKI contrasted CT scans56. All
|
||
12
|
||
|
||
specimens were scanned at Odense University Hospital with a mCT scanner
|
||
(VivaCT 40, Scanco Medical AG, Switzerland) with 10 mm resolution, except the
|
||
ostrich syrinx which was scanned with 80 mm resolution on a XtremeCT (Scanco
|
||
Medical AG). These scans were annotated manually in Amira for bone, soft tissue
|
||
and muscle using protocols cf. ref. 56.
|
||
Natural vocalizations. Sound recordings of natural vocalizations were obtained in
|
||
previous studies for domestic Barbary dove7, elegant-crested tinamou68 and zebra
|
||
finch69. A domestic pigeon call recording was obtained from www.xeno-canto.com
|
||
(catalogue nr: XC92264). We recorded the mating calls of two male ostriches at an
|
||
open-range ostrich-breeding farm (Langeskov, Denmark) from April to May 2013
|
||
using a shotgun microphone (model KMR82i, Neumann, Berlin, Germany) and a
|
||
24-bit digital recorder (Olympus LS-100). Cockatiel recordings were made with the
|
||
same shotgun microphone and solid-state recorder (model PMD-670, Marantz,
|
||
Mahwah, NJ, USA).
|
||
|
||
References
|
||
1. King, A. S. Functional anatomy of the syrinx in Form and Function in Birds
|
||
(eds King, A. S. & McLelland, J.) 4, 105–192 (Academic Press, 1989).
|
||
2. Brainard, M. S. & Doupe, A. J. Translating birdsong: songbirds as a model for
|
||
basic and applied medical research. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 36, 489–517 (2013).
|
||
3. Fee, M. S. & Scharff, C. The songbird as a model for the generation and
|
||
learning of complex sequential behaviors. ILAR J. 51, 362–377 (2010).
|
||
4. Elemans, C. P. H. The singer and the song: The neuromechanics of avian sound
|
||
production. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 28, 172–178 (2014).
|
||
5. Goller, F. & Larsen, O. N. A new mechanism of sound generation in songbirds.
|
||
Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 94, 14787–14791 (1997).
|
||
6. Jensen, K. K., Cooper, B. G., Larsen, O. N. & Goller, F. Songbirds use pulse tone
|
||
register in two voices to generate low-frequency sound. Proc. Biol. Sci. 274,
|
||
2703–2710 (2007).
|
||
7. Elemans, C. P. H., Zaccarelli, R. & Herzel, H. Biomechanics and control of
|
||
vocalization in a non-songbird. J. R. Soc. Interface 5, 691–703 (2008).
|
||
8. Zaccarelli, R., Elemans, C. P. H., Fitch, W. T. & Herzel, H. Modelling bird
|
||
songs: voice onset, overtones and registers. Acta Acust. United Acust. 92,
|
||
741–748 (2006).
|
||
9. Mindlin, G. B. & Laje, R. The Physics of Birdsong (Springer, 2005).
|
||
10. Amador, A. & Margoliash, D. A mechanism for frequency modulation in
|
||
songbirds shared with humans. J. Neurosci. 33, 11136–11144 (2013).
|
||
11. Amador, A., Perl, Y. S., Mindlin, G. B. & Margoliash, D. Elemental gesture
|
||
dynamics are encoded by song premotor cortical neurons. Nature 495, 59–64
|
||
(2013).
|
||
12. van den Berg, J. Myoelastic-aerodynamic theory of voice production. J. Speech
|
||
Hear. Res. 1, 227–244 (1958).
|
||
13. Titze, I. R. Principles of Voice Production (National Center for Voice and
|
||
Speech, 2000).
|
||
14. Titze, I. R. Comments on the myoelastic—aerodynamic theory of phonation.
|
||
J. Speech Hear. Res. 23, 495–510 (1980).
|
||
15. Titze, I. R. & Alipour, F. The Myoelastic Aerodynamic Theory of Phonation
|
||
(National Center for Voice and Speech, 2006).
|
||
16. Riede, T. & Goller, F. Peripheral mechanisms for vocal production in birds—
|
||
differences and similarities to human speech and singing. Brain Lang. 115,
|
||
69–80 (2010).
|
||
17. Fitch, T. in Encyclopedia of language and linguistics 2nd ed., Vol. 10 (ed Brown,
|
||
K) 115–121 (Oxford, Elsevier 2006).
|
||
18. Herbst, C. T. et al. How low can you go? Physical production mechanism of
|
||
elephant infrasonic vocalizations. Science 337, 595–599 (2012).
|
||
19. Titze, I. R. & Strong, W. J. Normal modes in vocal cord tissues. J. Acoust. Soc.
|
||
Am. 57, 736–749 (1975).
|
||
20. Titze, I. R. On the relation between subglottal pressure and fundamental
|
||
frequency in phonation. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 85, 901–906 (1989).
|
||
21. Svec, J. G., Horácek, J., Sram, F. & Veselý, J. Resonance properties of the vocal
|
||
folds: in vivo laryngoscopic investigation of the externally excited laryngeal
|
||
vibrations. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 108, 1397–1407 (2000).
|
||
22. Berry, D. A. Mechanisms of modal and nonmodal phonation. J. Phon. 29,
|
||
431–450 (2001).
|
||
23. Flanagan, J. L. & Landgraf, L. L. Self-oscillating source for vocal-tract
|
||
synthesizers. IEEE Trans. Audio Electroacoust. AU16, 57 (1968).
|
||
24. Titze, I. R. The physics of small-amplitude oscillation of the vocal folds.
|
||
J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 83, 1536–1552 (1988).
|
||
25. Ishizaka, K. & Flanagan, J. L. Synthesis of voiced sounds from a two-mass
|
||
model of the vocal cords. Bell Syst. Tech. J. 51, 1233–1268 (1972).
|
||
26. Scherer, R. C., Torkaman, S., Kucinschi, B. R. & Afjeh, A. A. Intraglottal
|
||
pressures in a three-dimensional model with a non-rectangular glottal shape.
|
||
J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 128, 828–838 (2010).
|
||
27. Fulcher, L. P. et al. Pressure distributions in a static physical model of the
|
||
hemilarynx: measurements and computations. J. Voice 24, 2–20 (2010).
|
||
28. Miller, D. G. & Schutte, H. K. Characteristic patterns of sub-and supraglottal
|
||
pressure variations within the glottal cycle. in Transcr. XIIIth Symp. Care Prof.
|
||
|
||
NATURE COMMUNICATIONS | 6:8978 | DOI: 10.1038/ncomms9978 | www.nature.com/naturecommunications
|
||
|
||
ARTICLE
|
||
|
||
NATURE COMMUNICATIONS | DOI: 10.1038/ncomms9978
|
||
|
||
Voice (ed. Lawrence, V.) 70–75 (The Voice Foundation, New York, NY,
|
||
USA, 1985).
|
||
29. Schutte, H. K. & Miller, D. G. Resonanzspiele der Gesangsstimme in ihren
|
||
Beziehungen zu supra- und subglottalen Druckverläufen: Konsequenzen für die
|
||
Stimmbildungstheorie. Folia. Phoniatr. (Basel) 40, 65–73 (1988).
|
||
30. Herbst, C. T. et al. Complex vibratory patterns in an elephant larynx. J. Exp.
|
||
Biol. 216, 4054–4064 (2013).
|
||
31. Larsen, O. N. & Goller, F. Role of syringeal vibrations in bird vocalizations.
|
||
Proc. R. Soc. Biol. Sci. 266, 1609–1615 (1999).
|
||
32. Fee, M. S., Shraiman, B., Pesaran, B. & Mitra, P. P. The role of nonlinear dynamics
|
||
of the syrinx in the vocalizations of a songbird. Nature 395, 67–71 (1998).
|
||
33. Fee, M. S. Measurement of the linear and nonlinear mechanical properties of
|
||
the oscine syrinx: implications for function. J. Comp. Physiol. A Neuroethol.
|
||
Sens. Neural. Behav. Physiol. 188, 829–839 (2002).
|
||
34. Dürrwang, R. Funktionelle Biologie, Anatomie und Physiologie der
|
||
Vogelstimme PhD thesis, University of Basel (Aku-Fotodruck, Basel, 1974).
|
||
35. Paulsen, K. Das Prinzip der Stimmbildung in der Wirbeltierrehe und beim
|
||
Menschen (Akademische Verlagsgesellschaft, 1967).
|
||
36. Amador, A. & Mindlin, G. B. Beyond harmonic sounds in a simple model for
|
||
birdsong production. Chaos 18, 043123 (2008).
|
||
37. Goller, F. & Riede, T. Integrative physiology of fundamental frequency control
|
||
in birds. J. Physiol. Paris 107, 230–242 (2013).
|
||
38. Suthers, R. A. & Zollinger, S. A. in Neuroscience of birdsong. (eds Zeigler, H.P.
|
||
& Marler P) 78–98 (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2008).
|
||
39. Bernstein, N. The Co-ordination and Regulation of Movements (Pergamon
|
||
Press, 1967).
|
||
40. Herbst, C. T., Ternström, S. & Švec, J. G. Investigation of four distinct glottal
|
||
configurations in classical singing—a pilot study. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 125,
|
||
EL104–EL109 (2009).
|
||
41. Riede, T. & Goller, F. Morphological basis for the evolution of acoustic diversity
|
||
in oscine songbirds. Proc. Biol. Sci. 281, 20132306 (2014).
|
||
42. Kusuyama, T., Fukuda, H., Shiotani, A., Nakagawa, H. & Kanzaki, J. Analysis of
|
||
vocal fold vibration by X-ray stroboscopy with multiple markers. Otolaryngol.
|
||
Head Neck Surg. 124, 317–322 (2001).
|
||
43. Döllinger, M., Tayama, N. & Berry, D. A. Empirical eigenfunctions and medial
|
||
surface dynamics of a human vocal fold. Methods Inf. Med. 44, 384–391 (2005).
|
||
44. Boessenecker, A., Berry, D. A., Lohscheller, J., Eysholdt, U. & Doellinger, M.
|
||
Mucosal wave properties of a human vocal fold. Acta Acust. United Acust. 93,
|
||
815–823 (2007).
|
||
45. Kobler, J. B., Chang, E. W., Zeitels, S. M. & Yun, S.-H. Dynamic imaging of
|
||
vocal fold oscillation with four-dimensional optical coherence tomography.
|
||
Laryngoscope 120, 1354–1362 (2010).
|
||
46. Döllinger, M., Berry, D. A. & Berke, G. S. Medial surface dynamics of an in vivo
|
||
canine vocal fold during phonation. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 117, 3174–3183 (2005).
|
||
47. Titze, I. R., Jiang, J. J. & Hsiao, T. Y. Measurement of mucosal wave
|
||
propagation and vertical phase difference in vocal fold vibration. Ann. Otol.
|
||
Rhinol. Laryngol. 102, 58–63 (1993).
|
||
48. Maina, J. N. The Lung-Air Sac System of Birds (Springer Science & Business
|
||
Media, 2006).
|
||
49. Maina, J. N., Singh, P. & Moss, E. A. Inspiratory aerodynamic valving occurs in
|
||
the ostrich, Struthio camelus lung: a computational fluid dynamics study under
|
||
resting unsteady state inhalation. Respir. Physiol. Neurobiol. 169, 262–270 (2009).
|
||
50. Mackelprang, R. & Goller, F. Ventilation patterns of the songbird lung/air sac
|
||
system during different behaviors. J. Exp. Biol. 216, 3611–3619 (2013).
|
||
51. Brackenbury, J. H. Lung-air-sac anatomy and respiratory pressures in the bird.
|
||
J. Exp. Biol. 57, 543–550 (1972).
|
||
52. Gaunt, A. S., Stein, R. C. & Gaunt, S. L. Pressure and air flow during distress
|
||
calls of the starling, Sturnus vulgaris (Aves; Passeriformes). J. Exp. Zool. 183,
|
||
241–261 (1973).
|
||
53. Beckers, G. J. L. Mechanisms of frequency and amplitude modulation in ring
|
||
dove song. J. Exp. Biol. 206, 1833–1843 (2003).
|
||
54. Elemans, C. P. H., Spierts, I. L. Y., Müller, U. K., van Leeuwen, J. L. & Goller, F.
|
||
Bird song: superfast muscles control dove’s trill. Nature 431, 146 (2004).
|
||
55. Elemans, C. P. H., Mead, A. F., Rome, L. C. & Goller, F. Superfast vocal muscles
|
||
control song production in songbirds. PLoS ONE 3, e2581 (2008).
|
||
56. Düring, D. N. et al. The songbird syrinx morphome: a three-dimensional, highresolution, interactive morphological map of the zebra finch vocal organ. BMC
|
||
Biol. 11, 1 (2013).
|
||
57. Sober, S. J., Wohlgemuth, M. J. & Brainard, M. S. Central contributions to
|
||
acoustic variation in birdsong. J. Neurosci. 28, 10370–10379 (2008).
|
||
58. Scholz, J. P. & Schoner, G. The uncontrolled manifold concept: identifying
|
||
control variables for a functional task. Exp. Brain Res. 126, 289–306 (1999).
|
||
|
||
59. Todorov, E. & Jordan, M. I. Optimal feedback control as a theory of motor
|
||
coordination. Nat. Neurosci. 5, 1226–1235 (2002).
|
||
60. Latash, M. L. The bliss (not the problem) of motor abundance (not
|
||
redundancy). Exp. Brain Res. 217, 1–5 (2012).
|
||
61. Chhetri, D. K. et al. Effects of asymmetric superior laryngeal nerve
|
||
stimulation on glottic posture, acoustics, vibration. Laryngoscope 123,
|
||
3110–3116 (2013).
|
||
62. Chhetri, D. K., Neubauer, J. & Berry, D. A. Neuromuscular control of
|
||
fundamental frequency and glottal posture at phonation onset. J. Acoust. Soc.
|
||
Am. 131, 1401–1412 (2012).
|
||
63. Qiu, Q. & Schutte, H. K. Real-time kymographic imaging for visualizing human
|
||
vocal-fold vibratory function. Rev. Sci. Instrum. 78, 024302 (2007).
|
||
64. Švec, J. G. & Schutte, H. K. Kymographic imaging of laryngeal vibrations. Curr.
|
||
Opin. Otolaryngol. Head Neck Surg. 20, 458–465 (2012).
|
||
65. Baken, R. J. Electroglottography. J. Voice 6, 98–110 (1992).
|
||
66. Dooling, R. J., Lohr, B. & Dent, M. L. Comparative Hearing: Birds and Reptiles
|
||
13, 308–359 (Springer, 2000).
|
||
67. Goller, F. & Suthers, R. A. Role of syringeal muscles in controlling the
|
||
phonology of bird song. J. Neurophysiol. 76, 287–300 (1996).
|
||
68. Schuster, S., Zollinger, S. A., Lesku, J. A. & Brumm, H. On the evolution of
|
||
noise-dependent vocal plasticity in birds. Biol. Lett. 8, 913–916 (2012).
|
||
69. Elemans, C. P. H., Laje, R., Mindlin, G. B. & Goller, F. Smooth operator:
|
||
avoidance of subharmonic bifurcations through mechanical mechanisms
|
||
simplifies song motor control in adult zebra finches. J. Neurosci. 30,
|
||
13246–13253 (2010).
|
||
70. Secora, K. R. et al. Syringeal specialization of frequency control during song
|
||
production in the Bengalese finch (Lonchura striata domestica). PLoS ONE 7,
|
||
e34135 (2012).
|
||
|
||
Acknowledgements
|
||
We thank T. Christensen, P. Martensen, F. Mortensen, F. Andreasen, A. Chandler, V.
|
||
Shanbogue and N. Ditzel for technical assistance, J. Brewer for optics advice, L. Jakobsen
|
||
for use of equipment, S. Pedersen for ostrich access, A. Qiu for videokymography advice
|
||
and M. Rothenberg for EGG advice. H. Mehaffey, J.M. Ratcliffe and A. Surlykke commented on the manuscript. This study was funded by grants from the Danish Research
|
||
Council (FNU), Carlsberg Foundation, visiting professorship (Université de Saint-Etienne) and QuanTM fellowship (Emory University) to C.P.H.E., a Heisenberg Fellowship
|
||
of the German Research Foundation (Br 2309/8-1) to H.B., US National Institutes of
|
||
Health grants F31DC013753 to K.S., P30NS069250 and R01NS084844 to S.J.S., European
|
||
Social Fund and the state budget of the Czech Republic, project numbers OPVK CZ.1.07/
|
||
2.3.00/30.0004 ‘POST-UP’ to C.T.H. and J.G.Š., the institutional fund of Palacký University Olomouc to C.T.H. and OPVK CZ.1.07/2.3.00/20.0057 to J.G.Š.
|
||
|
||
Author contributions
|
||
C.P.H.E. conceived the study and built the set-up. All authors contributed to data
|
||
acquisition: pigeon (C.P.H.E., J.H.R., C.T.H., D.N.D., J.G.Š.), Barbary dove (C.P.H.E.),
|
||
ostrich (N.S., C.P.H.E.), tinamou (S.A.Z., H.B., C.P.H.E.), cockatiel (O.N.L., C.P.H.E.),
|
||
Bengalese finch (K.S., S.J.S., C.P.H.E.) and zebra finch (D.N.D., C.P.H.E.). CT scans were
|
||
performed by D.N.D. and M.D., data annotation by D.N.D. All authors contributed to
|
||
data analysis and the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
|
||
|
||
Additional information
|
||
Supplementary Information accompanies this paper at http://www.nature.com/
|
||
naturecommunications
|
||
Competing financial interests: The authors declare no competing financial interests.
|
||
Reprints and permission information is available online at http://npg.nature.com/
|
||
reprintsandpermissions/
|
||
How to cite this article: Elemans, C. P. H. et al. Universal mechanisms of
|
||
sound production and control in birds and mammals. Nat. Commun. 6:8978
|
||
doi: 10.1038/ncomms9978 (2015).
|
||
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
|
||
International License. The images or other third party material in this
|
||
article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise
|
||
in the credit line; if the material is not included under the Creative Commons license,
|
||
users will need to obtain permission from the license holder to reproduce the material.
|
||
To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
|
||
|
||
NATURE COMMUNICATIONS | 6:8978 | DOI: 10.1038/ncomms9978 | www.nature.com/naturecommunications
|
||
|
||
13
|
||
|
||
|