Literature DB >> 17982372

Cortical evoked response to gaps in noise: within-channel and across-channel conditions.

Jennifer J Lister1, Nathan D Maxfield, Gabriel J Pitt.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to describe the cortical evoked response to silent gaps in a group of young adults with normal hearing using stimulus conditions identical to those used in psychophysical studies of gap detection. Specifically, we sought to examine the P1-N1-P2 auditory evoked response to the onsets of stimuli (markers) defining a silent gap for within-channel (spectrally identical markers) and across-channel (spectrally different markers) conditions using four perceptually-equated gap durations. It was hypothesized that (1) P1, N1, and P2 would be present and consistent for 1st marker (before the gap) onsets; (2) for within-channel markers, P1, N1, and P2 would be present for 2nd marker (after the gap) onsets only when the gap was of a duration equal to or larger than the behaviorally measured gap detection threshold; and (3) for the across-channel conditions, P1, N1, and P2 would be present for 2nd marker onsets regardless of gap duration. This is expected due to the additional cue of frequency change following the gap.
DESIGN: Twelve young adults (mean age 26 years) with normal hearing participated. Within-channel and across-channel gap detection thresholds were determined using an adaptive psychophysical procedure. Next, cortical auditory evoked potentials (P1-N1-P2) were recorded with a 32-channel Neuroscan electroencephalogram system using within-channel and across-channel markers identical to those used for the psychophysical task and four perceptually weighted gap durations: (1) individual listener's gap detection threshold; (2) above gap detection threshold; (3) below gap detection threshold; and (4) a 1-ms gap identical to the gap in the standard interval of the psychophysical task. P1-N1-P2 peak latencies and amplitudes were analyzed using repeated-measures analyses of variance. A temporal-spatial principal component analysis was also conducted.
RESULTS: The latency of P2 and the amplitude of P1, N1, and P2 were significantly affected by the acoustic characteristics of the 2nd marker as well as the duration of the gap. Larger amplitudes and shorter latencies were generally found for the conditions in which the acoustic cues were most salient (e.g., across-channel markers, 1st markers, large gap durations). Interestingly, the temporal-spatial principal component analysis revealed activity elicited by gap durations equal to gap detection threshold in the latency regions of 167 and 183 ms for temporal-parietal and right-frontal spatial locations.
CONCLUSIONS: The cortical response to a silent gap is unique to specific marker characteristics and gap durations among young adults with normal hearing. Specifically, when the onset of the 2nd marker is perceptually salient, the amplitude of the P1-N1-P2 response is relatively larger and the P2 latency is relatively shorter than for nonsalient 2nd marker onsets, providing noninvasive, nonbehavioral indicators of the neural coding of this important temporal cue in the thalamic-cortical region of the central auditory system. Gap duration appears to be most clearly indicated by P1 and T-complex amplitude.

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17982372      PMCID: PMC4792277          DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e3181576cba

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ear Hear        ISSN: 0196-0202            Impact factor:   3.570


  59 in total

Review 1.  Linking brainwaves to the brain: an ERP primer.

Authors:  Alexandra P Fonaryova Key; Guy O Dove; Mandy J Maguire
Journal:  Dev Neuropsychol       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 2.253

2.  Within- and between-channel gap detection in the human auditory cortex.

Authors:  Antje Heinrich; Claude Alain; Bruce A Schneider
Journal:  Neuroreport       Date:  2004-09-15       Impact factor: 1.837

3.  The detection of temporal gaps as a function of frequency region and absolute noise bandwidth.

Authors:  D A Eddins; J W Hall; J H Grose
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1992-02       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Test-retest reliability of cortical evoked potentials using naturally produced speech sounds.

Authors:  K L Tremblay; L Friesen; B A Martin; R Wright
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 3.570

5.  Evidence for an across-frequency, between-channel process in asymptotic monaural temporal gap detection.

Authors:  C Formby; M J Gerber; L P Sherlock; L S Magder
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1998-06       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Cortical evoked response to acoustic change within a syllable.

Authors:  J M Ostroff; B A Martin; A Boothroyd
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  1998-08       Impact factor: 3.570

7.  Behavioral and neural measures of auditory temporal acuity in aging humans and mice.

Authors:  Kathy Barsz; James R Ison; Karen B Snell; Joseph P Walton
Journal:  Neurobiol Aging       Date:  2002 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 4.673

Review 8.  Intensity dependence of auditory evoked potentials as an indicator of central serotonergic neurotransmission: a new hypothesis.

Authors:  U Hegerl; G Juckel
Journal:  Biol Psychiatry       Date:  1993-02-01       Impact factor: 13.382

9.  Psychophysical evidence for a general temporal processing deficit in children with dyslexia.

Authors:  M Van Ingelghem; A van Wieringen; J Wouters; E Vandenbussche; P Onghena; P Ghesquière
Journal:  Neuroreport       Date:  2001-11-16       Impact factor: 1.837

10.  Consequences of neural asynchrony: a case of auditory neuropathy.

Authors:  N Kraus; A R Bradlow; M A Cheatham; J Cunningham; C D King; D B Koch; T G Nicol; T J Mcgee; L K Stein; B A Wright
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2000-08
View more
  16 in total

1.  Auditory temporal acuity probed with cochlear implant stimulation and cortical recording.

Authors:  Alana E Kirby; John C Middlebrooks
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2009-11-18       Impact factor: 2.714

2.  Auditory discrimination: the relationship between psychophysical and electrophysiological measures.

Authors:  Shuman He; John H Grose; Craig A Buchman
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 2.117

Review 3.  Assessment of responses to cochlear implant stimulation at different levels of the auditory pathway.

Authors:  Paul J Abbas; Carolyn J Brown
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2014-11-04       Impact factor: 3.208

4.  Acoustically evoked auditory change complex in children with auditory neuropathy spectrum disorder: a potential objective tool for identifying cochlear implant candidates.

Authors:  Shuman He; John H Grose; Holly F B Teagle; Jennifer Woodard; Lisa R Park; Debora R Hatch; Patricia Roush; Craig A Buchman
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2015 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.570

5.  Biological markers of auditory gap detection in young, middle-aged, and older adults.

Authors:  Bernhard Ross; Bruce Schneider; Joel S Snyder; Claude Alain
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-04-09       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Auditory evoked response to gaps in noise: older adults.

Authors:  Jennifer J Lister; Nathan D Maxfield; Gabriel J Pitt; Victoria B Gonzalez
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 2.117

7.  Hearing an illusory vowel in noise: suppression of auditory cortical activity.

Authors:  Lars Riecke; Mieke Vanbussel; Lars Hausfeld; Deniz Başkent; Elia Formisano; Fabrizio Esposito
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2012-06-06       Impact factor: 6.167

8.  Maturation of auditory temporal integration and inhibition assessed with event-related potentials (ERPs).

Authors:  Allison M Fox; Mike Anderson; Corinne Reid; Tim Smith; Dorothy V M Bishop
Journal:  BMC Neurosci       Date:  2010-04-16       Impact factor: 3.288

9.  The effect of changes in stimulus level on electrically evoked cortical auditory potentials.

Authors:  Jae-Ryong Kim; Carolyn J Brown; Paul J Abbas; Christine P Etler; Sara O'Brien
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 3.570

Review 10.  Objective evidence of temporal processing deficits in older adults.

Authors:  Samira Anderson; Hanin Karawani
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2020-08-16       Impact factor: 3.208

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.