Behavioral audiograms were determined for four species of Glires: one lagomorph (domestic rabbit, Oryctolagus cuniculus) and three feral rodents (cotton rat, Sigmodon hispidus; house mouse, Mus musculus; and kangaroo rat, Dipodomys merriami). Considerable variation in hearing ability was found among the four species with low‐frequency hearing limits ranging over 5‐1/2 octaves from 50 (kangaroo rat) to 2300 Hz (feral mouse) and high‐frequency hearing limits ranging from 49 (rabbit) to 90 kHz (feral mouse). Comparison of the characteristics of each audiogram with the audiograms of other animals of the same Order, Cohort, and Class provide further evidence for the validity of two relationships: (1) interaural distance is strongly and inversely correlated with high‐frequency hearing ability, and (2) good high‐frequency hearing is apparently incompatible with good low‐frequency hearing in most, if not all, land mammals. Furthermore, it is shown that cotton rats and feral mice possess the ability to perform frequency discriminations even at very high frequencies, indicating that there is probably no difference about the way in which they perceive high and low‐frequency sounds. Finally, it is shown that kangaroo rats are not unusual in their ability to localize brief sounds, indicating that these animals have not compromised this ability in their acquistion of their unusual low‐frequency sensitivity.
Skip Nav Destination
Article navigation
December 1980
December 01 1980
Hearing in Glires: Domestic rabbit, cotton rat, feral house mouse, and kangaroo rat
Henry Heffner;
Henry Heffner
Bureau of Child Research, University of Kansas, P. O. Box 738, Parsons, Kansas 67357
Search for other works by this author on:
Bruce Masterton
Bruce Masterton
Department of Psychology, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida 32306
Search for other works by this author on:
J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 68, 1584–1599 (1980)
Citation
Henry Heffner, Bruce Masterton; Hearing in Glires: Domestic rabbit, cotton rat, feral house mouse, and kangaroo rat. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 1 December 1980; 68 (6): 1584–1599. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.385213
Download citation file:
Sign in
Don't already have an account? Register
Sign In
You could not be signed in. Please check your credentials and make sure you have an active account and try again.
Pay-Per-View Access
$40.00
Citing articles via
A survey of sound source localization with deep learning methods
Pierre-Amaury Grumiaux, Srđan Kitić, et al.
Co-speech head nods are used to enhance prosodic prominence at different levels of narrow focus in French
Christopher Carignan, Núria Esteve-Gibert, et al.
Source and propagation modelling scenarios for environmental impact assessment: Model verification
Michael A. Ainslie, Robert M. Laws, et al.
Related Content
THE ‘TTIME’ PACKAGE: PERFORMANCE EVALUATION IN A CLUSTER COMPUTING ENVIRONMENT
AIP Conference Proceedings (June 2011)
Underwater audiogram of the northern fur seal (Callorhinus ursinus)
J Acoust Soc Am (August 2005)
Jaynes’s View on the Meaning of “Uninformative” Distributions
AIP Conference Proceedings (December 2009)
Glenis Long's contribution to animal psychoacoustics
J Acoust Soc Am (May 2013)
Comments on “Killer whale (Orcinus orca) behavioral audiograms” [J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 141 , 2387–2398 (2017)]
J. Acoust. Soc. Am. (January 2018)