Literature DB >> 12880041

Suppression tuning in noise-exposed rabbits.

MacKenzie A Howard1, Barden B Stagner, Paul K Foster, Brenda L Lonsbury-Martin, Glen K Martin.   

Abstract

Psychophysical, basilar-membrane (BM), and single nerve-fiber tuning curves, as well as suppression of distortion-product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs), all give rise to frequency tuning patterns with stereotypical features. Similarities and differences between the behaviors of these tuning functions, both in normal conditions and following various cochlear insults, have been documented. While neural tuning curves (NTCs) and BM tuning curves behave similarly both before and after cochlear insults known to disrupt frequency selectivity, DPOAE suppression tuning curves (STCs) do not necessarily mirror these responses following either administration of ototoxins [Martin et al., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 104, 972-983 (1998)] or exposure to temporarily damaging noise [Howard et al., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 111, 285-296 (2002)]. However, changes in STC parameters may be predictive of other changes in cochlear function such as cochlear immaturity in neonatal humans [Abdala, Hear. Res. 121, 125-138 (1998)]. To determine the effects of noise-induced permanent auditory dysfunction on STC parameters, rabbits were exposed to high-level noise that led to permanent reductions in DPOAE level, and comparisons between pre- and postexposure DPOAE levels and STCs were made. Statistical comparisons of pre- and postexposure STC values at CF revealed consistent basal shifts in the frequency region of greatest cochlear damage, whereas thresholds, Q10dB, and tip-to-tail gain values were not reliably altered. Additionally, a large percentage of high-frequency lobes associated with third tone interference phenomena, that were exhibited in some data sets, were dramatically reduced following noise exposure. Thus, previously described areas of DPOAE interference above f2 may also be studied using this type of experimental manipulation [Martin et al., Hear. Res. 136, 105-123 (1999); Mills, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 107, 2586-2602 (2002)].

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12880041     DOI: 10.1121/1.1577555

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am        ISSN: 0001-4966            Impact factor:   1.840


  6 in total

1.  Stimulus-frequency otoacoustic emission suppression tuning in humans: comparison to behavioral tuning.

Authors:  Karolina K Charaziak; Pamela Souza; Jonathan H Siegel
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2013-09-07

2.  Distortion product otoacoustic emission phase and component analysis in human newborns.

Authors:  Carolina Abdala; Sumitrajit Dhar
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Characterizing distortion-product otoacoustic emission components across four species.

Authors:  Glen K Martin; Barden B Stagner; You Sun Chung; Brenda L Lonsbury-Martin
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Distortion-product otoacoustic emission suppression tuning curves in hearing-impaired humans.

Authors:  Alyson Gruhlke; Cori Birkholz; Stephen T Neely; Judy Kopun; Hongyang Tan; Walt Jesteadt; Kendra Schmid; Michael P Gorga
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Evidence for basal distortion-product otoacoustic emission components.

Authors:  Glen K Martin; Barden B Stagner; Brenda L Lonsbury-Martin
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Exploration of stimulus-frequency otoacoustic emission suppression tuning in hearing-impaired listeners.

Authors:  Karolina K Charaziak; Pamela E Souza; Jonathan H Siegel
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2014-10-07       Impact factor: 2.117

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.