Literature DB >> 18646984

Testing coherent reflection in chinchilla: Auditory-nerve responses predict stimulus-frequency emissions.

Christopher A Shera1, Arnold Tubis, Carrick L Talmadge.   

Abstract

Coherent-reflection theory explains the generation of stimulus-frequency and transient-evoked otoacoustic emissions by showing how they emerge from the coherent "backscattering" of forward-traveling waves by mechanical irregularities in the cochlear partition. Recent published measurements of stimulus-frequency otoacoustic emissions (SFOAEs) and estimates of near-threshold basilar-membrane (BM) responses derived from Wiener-kernel analysis of auditory-nerve responses allow for comprehensive tests of the theory in chinchilla. Model predictions are based on (1) an approximate analytic expression for the SFOAE signal in terms of the BM traveling wave and its complex wave number, (2) an inversion procedure that derives the wave number from BM traveling waves, and (3) estimates of BM traveling waves obtained from the Wiener-kernel data and local scaling assumptions. At frequencies above 4 kHz, predicted median SFOAE phase-gradient delays and the general shapes of SFOAE magnitude-versus-frequency curves are in excellent agreement with the measurements. At frequencies below 4 kHz, both the magnitude and the phase of chinchilla SFOAEs show strong evidence of interference between short- and long-latency components. Approximate unmixing of these components, and association of the long-latency component with the predicted SFOAE, yields close agreement throughout the cochlea. Possible candidates for the short-latency SFOAE component, including wave-fixed distortion, are considered. Both empirical and predicted delay ratios (long-latency SFOAE delay/BM delay) are significantly less than 2 but greater than 1. Although these delay ratios contradict models in which SFOAE generators couple primarily into cochlear compression waves, they are consistent with the notion that forward and reverse energy propagation in the cochlea occurs predominantly by means of traveling pressure-difference waves. The compelling overall agreement between measured and predicted delays suggests that the coherent-reflection model captures the dominant mechanisms responsible for the generation of reflection-source otoacoustic emissions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18646984      PMCID: PMC2677332          DOI: 10.1121/1.2917805

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


  53 in total

1.  Distortion-product source unmixing: a test of the two-mechanism model for DPOAE generation.

Authors:  R Kalluri; C A Shera
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Cochlear phase and amplitude retrieved from the auditory nerve at arbitrary frequencies.

Authors:  Marcel van der Heijden; Philip X Joris
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2003-10-08       Impact factor: 6.167

3.  Medial-olivocochlear-efferent inhibition of the first peak of auditory-nerve responses: evidence for a new motion within the cochlea.

Authors:  John J Guinan; Tai Lin; Holden Cheng
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Panoramic measurements of the apex of the cochlea.

Authors:  Marcel van der Heijden; Philip X Joris
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2006-11-01       Impact factor: 6.167

5.  Cochlear reflectivity in transmission-line models and otoacoustic emission characteristic time delays.

Authors:  Renata Sisto; Arturo Moleti; Christopher A Shera
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Comparing stimulus-frequency otoacoustic emissions measured by compression, suppression, and spectral smoothing.

Authors:  Radha Kalluri; Christopher A Shera
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 1.840

Review 7.  Evoked otoacoustic emissions arise by two fundamentally different mechanisms: a taxonomy for mammalian OAEs.

Authors:  C A Shera; J J Guinan
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Basilar membrane motion.

Authors:  G Zweig
Journal:  Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol       Date:  1976

9.  Stimulated acoustic emissions from within the human auditory system.

Authors:  D T Kemp
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1978-11       Impact factor: 1.840

10.  Spontaneous otoacoustic emissions in a nonhuman primate. II. Cochlear anatomy.

Authors:  B L Lonsbury-Martin; G K Martin; R Probst; A C Coats
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  1988-04       Impact factor: 3.208

View more
  30 in total

1.  Effects of low-frequency biasing on otoacoustic and neural measures suggest that stimulus-frequency otoacoustic emissions originate near the peak region of the traveling wave.

Authors:  Jeffery T Lichtenhan
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2011-10-15

2.  Coherent reflection without traveling waves: on the origin of long-latency otoacoustic emissions in lizards.

Authors:  Christopher Bergevin; Christopher A Shera
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Local cochlear damage reduces local nonlinearity and decreases generator-type cochlear emissions while increasing reflector-type emissions.

Authors:  Wei Dong; Elizabeth S Olson
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Influence of stimulus parameters on amplitude-modulated stimulus frequency otoacoustic emissions.

Authors:  Tiffany A Johnson; Laura Beshaler
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Obtaining reliable phase-gradient delays from otoacoustic emission data.

Authors:  Christopher A Shera; Christopher Bergevin
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 1.840

Review 6.  Mechanics of the frog ear.

Authors:  Pim Van Dijk; Matthew J Mason; Richard L M Schoffelen; Peter M Narins; Sebastiaan W F Meenderink
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2010-02-10       Impact factor: 3.208

7.  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

8.  The spiral staircase: tonotopic microstructure and cochlear tuning.

Authors:  Christopher A Shera
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2015-03-18       Impact factor: 6.167

9.  Spectral Ripples in Round-Window Cochlear Microphonics: Evidence for Multiple Generation Mechanisms.

Authors:  Karolina K Charaziak; Jonathan H Siegel; Christopher A Shera
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2018-07-16

10.  Nonlinear time-domain cochlear model for transient stimulation and human otoacoustic emission.

Authors:  Sarah Verhulst; Torsten Dau; Christopher A Shera
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 1.840

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.