Literature DB >> 22910032

Distortion products and their influence on representation of pitch-relevant information in the human brainstem for unresolved harmonic complex tones.

Christopher J Smalt1, Ananthanarayan Krishnan, Gavin M Bidelman, Saradha Ananthakrishnan, Jackson T Gandour.   

Abstract

Pitch experiments aimed at evaluating temporal pitch mechanism(s) often utilize complex sounds with only unresolved harmonic components, and a low-pass noise masker to eliminate the potential contribution of audible distortion products to the pitch percept. Herein we examine how: (i) masker induced reduction of neural distortion products (difference tone: DT; and cubic difference tone: CDT) alters the representation of pitch relevant information in the brainstem; and (ii) the pitch salience is altered when distortion products are reduced and/or eliminated. Scalp recorded brainstem frequency following responses (FFR) were recorded in normal hearing individuals using a complex tone with only unresolved harmonics presented in quiet, and in the presence of a low-pass masker at SNRs of +15, +5, and -5 dB. Difference limen for F0 discrimination (F0 DL) was obtained in quiet and in the presence of low-pass noise. Magnitude of DT components (with the exception of components at F0 and 2F0), and the CDT components decreased with increasing masker level. Neural pitch strength decreased with increasing masker level for both the envelope-related (FFR(ENV)) and spectral-related (FFR(SPEC)) phase-locked activity. Finally, F0 DLs increased with decreasing SNRs suggesting poorer F0 discrimination with reduction of the distortion products. Collectively, these findings support the notion that both DT and CDT, as reflected in the FFR(ENV) and FFR(SPEC), respectively, influence both the brainstem representation of pitch relevant information and the pitch salience of the complex sounds.
Copyright © 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22910032      PMCID: PMC3483078          DOI: 10.1016/j.heares.2012.08.001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hear Res        ISSN: 0378-5955            Impact factor:   3.208


  77 in total

1.  The behavior of the acoustic distortion product, 2f1-f2, from the human ear and its relation to auditory sensitivity.

Authors:  S A Gaskill; A M Brown
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1990-08       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Distortion product emissions in humans. I. Basic properties in normally hearing subjects.

Authors:  B L Lonsbury-Martin; F P Harris; B B Stagner; M D Hawkins; G K Martin
Journal:  Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl       Date:  1990-05

3.  Electrophysiological evidence of nonlinear distortion products to two-tone stimuli.

Authors:  M D Rickman; M E Chertoff; K E Hecox
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1991-06       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Neural correlates of the pitch of complex tones. I. Pitch and pitch salience.

Authors:  P A Cariani; B Delgutte
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  1996-09       Impact factor: 2.714

5.  Two-tone suppression and distortion production on the basilar membrane in the hook region of cat and guinea pig cochleae.

Authors:  W S Rhode; N P Cooper
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  1993-03       Impact factor: 3.208

6.  A time domain description for the pitch strength of iterated rippled noise.

Authors:  W A Yost; R Patterson; S Sheft
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1996-02       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  The role of resolved and unresolved harmonics in pitch perception and frequency modulation discrimination.

Authors:  T M Shackleton; R P Carlyon
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1994-06       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Comparison of the envelope following response in the Mongolian gerbil using two-tone and sinusoidally amplitude-modulated tones.

Authors:  W F Dolphin; M E Chertoff; R Burkard
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1994-10       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  Auditory distortion products measured with averaged auditory evoked potentials.

Authors:  M E Chertoff; K E Hecox; R Goldstein
Journal:  J Speech Hear Res       Date:  1992-02

10.  Spontaneous otoacoustic emissions in chinchilla ear canals: correlation with histopathology and suppression by external tones.

Authors:  W W Clark; D O Kim; P M Zurek; B A Bohne
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  1984-12       Impact factor: 3.208

View more
  15 in total

1.  Losing the music: aging affects the perception and subcortical neural representation of musical harmony.

Authors:  Oliver Bones; Christopher J Plack
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2015-03-04       Impact factor: 6.167

2.  Afferent-efferent connectivity between auditory brainstem and cortex accounts for poorer speech-in-noise comprehension in older adults.

Authors:  Gavin M Bidelman; Caitlin N Price; Dawei Shen; Stephen R Arnott; Claude Alain
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2019-08-27       Impact factor: 3.208

3.  Human Frequency Following Responses to Vocoded Speech.

Authors:  Saradha Ananthakrishnan; Xin Luo; Ananthanarayan Krishnan
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2017 Sep/Oct       Impact factor: 3.570

4.  Fundamental-frequency discrimination using noise-band-vocoded harmonic complexes in older listeners with normal hearing.

Authors:  Kara C Schvartz-Leyzac; Monita Chatterjee
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Brainstem correlates of concurrent speech identification in adverse listening conditions.

Authors:  Anusha Yellamsetty; Gavin M Bidelman
Journal:  Brain Res       Date:  2019-02-20       Impact factor: 3.252

6.  Human Frequency Following Response: Neural Representation of Envelope and Temporal Fine Structure in Listeners with Normal Hearing and Sensorineural Hearing Loss.

Authors:  Saradha Ananthakrishnan; Ananthanarayan Krishnan; Edward Bartlett
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2016 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 3.570

7.  Subcortical rather than cortical sources of the frequency-following response (FFR) relate to speech-in-noise perception in normal-hearing listeners.

Authors:  Gavin M Bidelman; Sara Momtaz
Journal:  Neurosci Lett       Date:  2021-01-23       Impact factor: 3.046

8.  Causal Relationship between the Right Auditory Cortex and Speech-Evoked Envelope-Following Response: Evidence from Combined Transcranial Stimulation and Electroencephalography.

Authors:  Guangting Mai; Peter Howell
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2022-03-30       Impact factor: 5.357

Review 9.  Enhanced brainstem phase-locking in low-level noise reveals stochastic resonance in the frequency-following response (FFR).

Authors:  Bhanu Shukla; Gavin M Bidelman
Journal:  Brain Res       Date:  2021-08-30       Impact factor: 3.252

10.  Brainstem correlates of cochlear nonlinearity measured via the scalp-recorded frequency-following response.

Authors:  Gavin M Bidelman; Shaum Bhagat
Journal:  Neuroreport       Date:  2020-07-10       Impact factor: 1.703

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.