Literature DB >> 21987783

Frequency selectivity in Old-World monkeys corroborates sharp cochlear tuning in humans.

Philip X Joris1, Christopher Bergevin, Radha Kalluri, Myles Mc Laughlin, Pascal Michelet, Marcel van der Heijden, Christopher A Shera.   

Abstract

Frequency selectivity in the inner ear is fundamental to hearing and is traditionally thought to be similar across mammals. Although direct measurements are not possible in humans, estimates of frequency tuning based on noninvasive recordings of sound evoked from the cochlea (otoacoustic emissions) have suggested substantially sharper tuning in humans but remain controversial. We report measurements of frequency tuning in macaque monkeys, Old-World primates phylogenetically closer to humans than the laboratory animals often taken as models of human hearing (e.g., cats, guinea pigs, chinchillas). We find that measurements of tuning obtained directly from individual auditory-nerve fibers and indirectly using otoacoustic emissions both indicate that at characteristic frequencies above about 500 Hz, peripheral frequency selectivity in macaques is significantly sharper than in these common laboratory animals, matching that inferred for humans above 4-5 kHz. Compared with the macaque, the human otoacoustic estimates thus appear neither prohibitively sharp nor exceptional. Our results validate the use of otoacoustic emissions for noninvasive measurement of cochlear tuning and corroborate the finding of sharp tuning in humans. The results have important implications for understanding the mechanical and neural coding of sound in the human cochlea, and thus for developing strategies to compensate for the degradation of tuning in the hearing-impaired.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21987783      PMCID: PMC3198376          DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1105867108

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A        ISSN: 0027-8424            Impact factor:   11.205


  42 in total

1.  Evaluating auditory performance limits: i. one-parameter discrimination using a computational model for the auditory nerve.

Authors:  M G Heinz; H S Colburn; L H Carney
Journal:  Neural Comput       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 2.026

2.  Measurements of human middle ear forward and reverse acoustics: implications for otoacoustic emissions.

Authors:  Sunil Puria
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Estimates of human cochlear tuning at low levels using forward and simultaneous masking.

Authors:  Andrew J Oxenham; Christopher A Shera
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2003-07-10

4.  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

5.  Temporal properties of responses to broadband noise in the auditory nerve.

Authors:  Dries H G Louage; Marcel van der Heijden; Philip X Joris
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 2.714

6.  Compound actionpotential tuning curves in normal and pathological human ears.

Authors:  J J Eggermont
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1977-11       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Auditory-nerve response from cats raised in a low-noise chamber.

Authors:  M C Liberman
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1978-02       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Some effects of stimulus intensity on response of auditory nerve fibers in the squirrel monkey.

Authors:  J E Rose; J E Hind; D J Anderson; J F Brugge
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  1971-07       Impact factor: 2.714

9.  Revised estimates of human cochlear tuning from otoacoustic and behavioral measurements.

Authors:  Christopher A Shera; John J Guinan; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2002-02-26       Impact factor: 11.205

10.  Stimulus-frequency-emission group delay: a test of coherent reflection filtering and a window on cochlear tuning.

Authors:  Christopher A Shera; John J Guinan
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 1.840

View more
  61 in total

1.  Psychophysiological analyses demonstrate the importance of neural envelope coding for speech perception in noise.

Authors:  Jayaganesh Swaminathan; Michael G Heinz
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2012-02-01       Impact factor: 6.167

2.  Probing cochlear tuning and tonotopy in the tiger using otoacoustic emissions.

Authors:  Christopher Bergevin; Edward J Walsh; JoAnn McGee; Christopher A Shera
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2012-05-29       Impact factor: 1.836

3.  Cochlear partition anatomy and motion in humans differ from the classic view of mammals.

Authors:  Stefan Raufer; John J Guinan; Hideko Heidi Nakajima
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2019-06-24       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  A canonical oscillator model of cochlear dynamics.

Authors:  Karl D Lerud; Ji Chul Kim; Felix V Almonte; Laurel H Carney; Edward W Large
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2019-06-14       Impact factor: 3.208

5.  Measuring stimulus-frequency otoacoustic emissions using swept tones.

Authors:  Radha Kalluri; Christopher A Shera
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Neural representation of harmonic complex tones in primary auditory cortex of the awake monkey.

Authors:  Yonatan I Fishman; Christophe Micheyl; Mitchell Steinschneider
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2013-06-19       Impact factor: 6.167

7.  Temporal properties of responses to sound in the ventral nucleus of the lateral lemniscus.

Authors:  Alberto Recio-Spinoso; Philip X Joris
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2013-11-27       Impact factor: 2.714

8.  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

9.  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

10.  Relationship Between Behavioral and Stimulus Frequency Otoacoustic Emissions Delay-Based Tuning Estimates.

Authors:  Uzma Shaheen Wilson; Jenna Browning-Kamins; Sriram Boothalingam; Arturo Moleti; Renata Sisto; Sumitrajit Dhar
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2020-05-28       Impact factor: 2.297

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.