The Octavolateralis System and Mauthner Cell: Interactions and Questions

This paper is an overview of some of the major points to arise in the accompanying contributions of this special symposium issue. The symposium papers arose out of discussions among investigators interested in the inner ear and Mauthner cell, with the focus on hydrodynamic components that activate the Mauthner cell through the octavolateralis system. The intention of the symposium was to investigate the possibility of using our knowledge of the Mauthner system to help understand acoustic processing by the ear, and of using, our knowledge of fish hearing to better understand Mauthner cell function. This is the first attempt to take a broad look at both systems to see how they might function together. As such, these proceedings can serve as a mini-tutorial for investiaators interested in one system or the other. In this summary paper we also identify some of the major uncertainties in our understanding of the ear-Mauthner connection. These include questions about: (1) the identity of the acoustic stimuli that are neuroethologically relevant to the Mauthner system; (2) the relative importance of the various octavolateralis inputs (acoustic, vestibular, or lateral line); (3) the contribution of the different various acoustic endorgans to the Mauthner system; (4) whether the Mauthner system can distinguish sound source location; and (5) whether Mauthner neurobiology is compatible with the prevailing model (the phase model) for determining sound source location by fishes. We believe these issues provide potentially useful avenues of future investigation that should give important insights into both acoustic processing by fish and the function of the Mauthner system

Sensory Cells of the Fish Ear: A Hairy Enigma

Analysis of the structure of the ears in teleost fishes has led to the tentative suggestion that otolithic endorgans may function differently, in different species. Recently, evidence has demonstrated different 'types' of sensory hair cells can be found in the ears of teleost fishes, and individual hair cell types are found in discrete regions of individual sensory, epithelia. The presence of multiple hair cell types in fishes provides strong support to the hypothesis of regional differences in the responses of individual otolithic sensory epithelia. The finding of hair cell types in fishes that closely resemble those found in amniote vestibular endorgans also suggests that hair cell heterogeneity arose earlier in the evolution of the vertebrate ear than previously thought

Is the quantum world composed of propensitons?

In this paper I outline my propensiton version of quantum theory (PQT). PQT is a fully micro-realistic version of quantum theory that provides us with a very natural possible solution to the fundamental wave/particle problem, and is free of the severe defects of orthodox quantum theory (OQT) as a result. PQT makes sense of the quantum world. PQT recovers all the empirical success of OQT and is, furthermore, empirically testable (although not as yet tested). I argue that Einstein almost put forward this version of quantum theory in 1916/17 in his papers on spontaneous and induced radiative transitions, but retreated from doing so because he disliked the probabilistic character of the idea. Subsequently, the idea was overlooked because debates about quantum theory polarised into the Bohr/Heisenberg camp, which argued for the abandonment of realism and determinism, and the Einstein/Schrödinger camp, which argued for the retention of realism and determinism, no one, as a result, pursuing the most obvious option of retaining realism but abandoning determinism. It is this third, overlooked option that leads to PQT. PQT has implications for quantum field theory, the standard model, string theory, and cosmology. The really important point, however, is that it is experimentally testable. I indicate two experiments in principle capable of deciding between PQT and OQT

Structural Diversity in the Inner Ear of Teleost Fishes: Implications for Connections to the Mauthner Cell

A body of literature suggests that the Mauthner cell startle response can be elicited by stimulation of the ear. While we know that there are projections to the M-cell from the ear, the specific endorgan(s) of the ear projecting to the M-cell are not known. Moreover, there are many reasons to question whether there is one pattern of inner ear to M-cell connection or whether the endorgan(s) projection to the M-cell varies in species that have different hearing capabilities of hearing structures. In this paper, we briefly review the structure of fish ears, with an emphasis on structural regionalization within the ear. We also review the central projections of the ear, along with a discussion of the limited data on projections to the M-cell

Audition in sciaenid fishes with different swim bladder-inner ear configurations

We investigated how morphological differences in the auditory periphery of teleost fishes may relate to hearing capabilities. Two species of western Atlantic sciaenids were examined: weakfish (Cynoscion regalis, Block and Schneider) and spot (Leiostomus xanthurus, Lacepede). These species differ in the anatomical relationship between the swim bladder and the inner ear. In weakfish, the swim bladder has a pair of anterior horns that terminate close to the ear, while there are no extensions of the swim bladder in spot. Thus, the swim bladder in spot terminates at a greater distance from the ear when compared to weakfish. With the use of the auditory brainstem response technique, Cynoscion regalis were found to detect frequencies up to 2000 Hz, while Leiostomus xanthurus detected up to 700 Hz. There were, however, no significant interspecific differences in auditory sensitivity for stimuli between 200 and 700 Hz. These data support the hypothesis that the swim bladder can potentially expand the frequency range of detection

The Ithaca Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics

I list several strong requirements for what I would consider a sensible interpretation of quantum mechanics and I discuss two simple theorems. One, as far as I know, is new; the other was only noted a few years ago. Both have important implications for such a sensible interpretation. My talk will not clear everything up; indeed, you may conclude that it has not cleared anything up. But I hope it will provide a different perspective from which to view some old and vexing puzzles (or, if you believe nothing needs to be cleared up, some ancient verities.)Comment: 21 pages, plain TEX. Notes for a lecture given at the Golden Jubilee Workshop on Foundations of Quantum Theory, Tata Institute, Bombay, September 9-12, 199