| Literature DB >> 24904256 |
Joshua R Gold1, Victoria M Bajo1.
Abstract
The brain displays a remarkable capacity for both widespread and region-specific modifications in response to environmental challenges, with adaptive processes bringing about the reweighing of connections in neural networks putatively required for optimizing performance and behavior. As an avenue for investigation, studies centered around changes in the mammalian auditory system, extending from the brainstem to the cortex, have revealed a plethora of mechanisms that operate in the context of sensory disruption after insult, be it lesion-, noise trauma, drug-, or age-related. Of particular interest in recent work are those aspects of auditory processing which, after sensory disruption, change at multiple-if not all-levels of the auditory hierarchy. These include changes in excitatory, inhibitory and neuromodulatory networks, consistent with theories of homeostatic plasticity; functional alterations in gene expression and in protein levels; as well as broader network processing effects with cognitive and behavioral implications. Nevertheless, there abounds substantial debate regarding which of these processes may only be sequelae of the original insult, and which may, in fact, be maladaptively compelling further degradation of the organism's competence to cope with its disrupted sensory context. In this review, we aim to examine how the mammalian auditory system responds in the wake of particular insults, and to disambiguate how the changes that develop might underlie a correlated class of phantom disorders, including tinnitus and hyperacusis, which putatively are brought about through maladaptive neuroplastic disruptions to auditory networks governing the spatial and temporal processing of acoustic sensory information.Entities:
Keywords: auditory cortex; cochlea; hearing loss; neural plasticity; peripheral insult; tinnitus
Year: 2014 PMID: 24904256 PMCID: PMC4033160 DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2014.00110
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Neurosci ISSN: 1662-453X Impact factor: 4.677
Summary of the changes observed at the various levels of the auditory pathway after different types of auditory insults.
| Acoustic trauma | Tones | ↑ Threshold | Ventral cochlear nucleus | ↑ GABRA1, GRIN1, RAB3GAP1, KCNK15 | ↑ SFR (high-CF units) | ↓ Inhibitory receptive field, ↑ excitatory activity | |
| ↓ Hair cell integrity | |||||||
| ↓ Ribbon synapse density | |||||||
| Dorsal cochlear nucleus | ↑ SFR | Tonotopic remapping toward lower edge frequencies | |||||
| ↑ Bursting activity | |||||||
| ↑ Response threshold | |||||||
| ↑ Driven activity | |||||||
| Brainstem/midbrain | ↓ ABR amplitude recovery | ↓ Operant detection performance | |||||
| ↑ ABR evoked amplitude | ↓ GPIAS efficacy | ||||||
| Inferior Colliculus | ↑ BDNF | ↑ SFR | Tonotopic remapping toward lower edge frequencies | ||||
| ↓ GAD65 (acute) | 2–6 weeks: subject to ANF lesion | ↑ Gap detection thresholds | |||||
| ↑ Muscimol binding | 8–12 weeks: stable | ||||||
| ↓ GABRA1, KCNK15; GLRA1, GRIA2, GRIN1, RAB3GAP1 (acute) | diminished by DCN removal | ||||||
| ↑ RLF gain | |||||||
| Medial geniculate body | |||||||
| Auditory cortex | ↓ GAD67 | N.C./↓ evoked rate | Tonotopic remapping | ↓ GPIAS efficacy | |||
| ↓ Arg3.1/Arc | ↓ synaptic excitation, inhibition (low-CF) | ↓ Gap detection thresholds | ↓ Conditioned place preference bias | ||||
| ↓ BDNF | ↓ synaptic inhibition | ||||||
| Modified dendrite and spine morphology | ↑ RLF monotonicity | ||||||
| ↑ Membrane excitability | ↑ SFR | ||||||
| ↑ Synchrony | |||||||
| Noise | ↑ Threshold | Ventral cochlear nucleus | ↓ Presynaptic fiber density | ↑ RLF slope | |||
| ↓ Hair cell integrity | N.C. c-Fos labeling | ||||||
| ↓ Ribbon synapse density | ↑ GAP-43 expression (presynaptic) | ||||||
| ↓SGC density (long term) | |||||||
| ↓RLF gain | |||||||
| Dorsal cochlear nucleus | ↑ c-Fos | ↑ SFR | ↑ Bimodal facilitation | ↓GPIAS efficacy | |||
| ↑/↓ GlyR mRNA + protein | ↑ Driven activity | ↑Anti-Hebbian STDP | |||||
| Fiber degeneration | ↑ Response threshold | ||||||
| Brainstem/midbrain | ↑Transneuronal degeneration | ↑ Wave 5 amplitude | ↑ ASR amplitude | ||||
| ↑ ABR amplitude | ↓ GPIAS efficacy (near-gap) | ||||||
| ↑ ABR latency | |||||||
| Inferior Colliculus | N.C. c-Fos | ↑/↓ RLF gain | |||||
| ↑ c-Fos | |||||||
| ↑ Transneuronal degeneration | |||||||
| Medial geniculate body | N.C. c-Fos | ||||||
| Auditory cortex | ↑ c-Fos | ↑/↓ Evoked amplitudes | Tonotopic remapping | ↓ GPIAS efficacy | |||
| N.C. Arg3.1/Arc (100 dB exposure) | ↑ SFR | ↓ Surround inhibition without tonotopic remapping | |||||
| ↑ Synchrony | |||||||
| ↑ Evoked spike rate | |||||||
| Mechanical trauma | Complete | Total deafferentation | Ventral cochlear nucleus | ↑ Fiber degeneration | Loss of SFR | ||
| ↑ GAP-43 | |||||||
| Complex changes in glutamate60–63, GABA | |||||||
| ↑ ERK | |||||||
| Dorsal cochlear nucleus | ↑ Fiber degeneration | No loss of SFR | |||||
| ↑ GAP-43 | |||||||
| Complex changes in glutamate60–63, GABA | |||||||
| ↑ ERK | |||||||
| Brainstem/midbrain | ↑ Transneuronal fiber degeneration | ||||||
| Complex changes in glutamate60–63, GABA | |||||||
| ↑ ERK | |||||||
| Inferior colliculus | ↑ Transneuronal fiber degeneration | ↑ Contralesional sensitivity | |||||
| ↓ GAD67 | |||||||
| Medial geniculate body | ↓Thalamocortical synchrony | ||||||
| Auditory cortex | Complex changes in immediate early-, plasticity related-, and neurotransmission related-gene expression | N.C. Gap detection thresholds to contralesional acoustic stimulation | |||||
| Partial | Organ of corti and AN can be preserved | Ventral cochlear nucleus | ↓ GABRA1, GAD1, KCNK15 | ↑ SFR | ↑ Contralesional sensitivity | ||
| Dorsal cochlear nucleus | ↑ Fiber degeneration | ↑ Response thresholds/loss of responsiveness | Tonotopic remapping | ||||
| Brainstem/midbrain | |||||||
| Inferior colliculus | ↓ GABRA1 | ↑ Response thresholds/loss of sharp tuning | ↑ Contralesional sensitivity | ||||
| Tonotopic remapping | |||||||
| Medial geniculate body | N.C. Response thresholds | ||||||
| Auditory cortex | N.C. Inhibitory gain | Tonotopic remapping86–88, not reliant on BFB cholinergic function | |||||
| N.C. Response thresholds | |||||||
| Drug trauma | Ototoxicity | Extensive OHC loss, often with basal IHC degeneration89–93 | Ventral cochlear nucleus | ↓ Glutamate/aspartate (CC) | N.C. Behavioral audiogram with moderate IHC loss (CC) | ||
| Ribbon synapse disruption | ↑ GAP-43 | ||||||
| ↓ VGLUT1 | |||||||
| ↓ Glycine-+’ve puncta | |||||||
| Loss of ANF sharp tuning | Dorsal cochlear nucleus | ↓ VGLUT1 | ↑ SFR | ||||
| ↑ VGLUT2 | |||||||
| ↓ Glycine-+’ve puncta | |||||||
| Carboplatin in the chinchilla: selective IHC ablation | Brainstem/midbrain | ↓ Glycine-+’ve puncta | |||||
| Inferior colliculus | ↑ SFR | ↑ Contralesional sensitivity (unilateral cochlear injection) | ↑ Conditioned reflex at 1 kHz | ||||
| ↑ Synchrony | |||||||
| ↓ Synchrony (CC) | |||||||
| N.C. RLF gain or amplitude (CC) | |||||||
| ↓ RLF amplitude (CC) | |||||||
| ↓ RLF monotonicity (CC) | |||||||
| Medial geniculate body | |||||||
| Auditory cortex | ↑ RLF gain (CC) | Tonotopic remapping | |||||
| ↑ Contralesional sensitivity (unilateral cochlear injection) | |||||||
| ↑ Crossmodal sensitivity | |||||||
| Salicylate | ↑ ANF SFR | Ventral cochlear nucleus | |||||
| ↑ CAP threshold | |||||||
| ↓ CAP gain | |||||||
| ↓ DPOAE gain | |||||||
| Dorsal cochlear nucleus | |||||||
| Brainstem/midbrain | |||||||
| Inferior colliculus | ↑ GAD | ↑ Response threshold | |||||
| ↑ Muscimol binding affinity | ↑ SFR | ||||||
| ↓ Muscimol binding sites | ↓ RLF gain (RW application) | ||||||
| Medial geniculate body | |||||||
| Auditory cortex | ↑/↓ SFR (systemic)124–128 | Tonotopic remapping toward 10–20 kHz | ↓ GPIAS efficacy | ||||
| ↓ SFR (brain application) | ↑ Gap detection threshold | ↑ ASR amplitude | |||||
| ↑ RLF gain | |||||||
| ↓ RLF gain | |||||||
| Aging | ↓ IHC-ANF ribbon synapse density | Ventral cochlear nucleus | ↓ Glycine | ↑ Response threshold | |||
| ↓ Spiral ligament & stria vascularis integrity132–136 | ↓ Strychnine binding sites | ||||||
| ↓ SGC density | |||||||
| ↓Hair cell integrity | |||||||
| Dorsal cochlear nucleus | ↓ Glycine | ↑ Response threshold | ↓ GPIAS efficacy | ||||
| ↓ Strychnine binding sites | ↑ RLF monotonicity & gain | ||||||
| Brainstem/midbrain | ↑ ABR latency | ||||||
| ↓ Brainstem modulation coding in noise155–157 | |||||||
| Inferior colliculus | ↓ Glycine | ↓ Efficacy of fast AM encoding161–163 | |||||
| ↓ GABA | ↓ Gap encoding efficacy | ||||||
| ↓ GAD65/67 | |||||||
| Medial geniculate body | ↓ Glutamate | ↓ sIPSC (MGBv), ↑sIPSC(MGBd) | |||||
| ↓ GABA | |||||||
| ↓ Glycine | |||||||
| ↓GAD67 | |||||||
| ↓ Extracellular GABAAR | |||||||
| Auditory cortex | ↓ Parvalbumin staining | ↑ SFR | ↑ Gap detection threshold | ↓ Temporal processing task performance | |||
| ↓ GAD65/67 | ↓ Onset latency | ↓ Frequency receptive field encoding efficacy | |||||
| Modified GABAAR subunit composition | ↓ Spatial receptive field encoding efficacy |
N.C., No change (compared with control); SFR, spontaneous firing rate; GPIAS, gap-mediated prepulse inhibition of the acoustic startle reflex; ABR, auditory brainstem response; CF, characteristic frequency; BFB, basal forebrain; CC, carboplatin treatment in the chinchilla; ANF, auditory nerve fiber; RW, round window; RLF, rate level function; sIPSC, spontaneous inhibitory postsynaptic potential.
Cody and Johnstone (1980),
Puel et al. (1998),
Kiang et al. (1975),
Singer et al. (2013),
Rüttiger et al. (2013),
Dong et al. (2010a),
Vogler et al. (2011),
Boettcher and Salvi (1993),
Finlayson and Kaltenbach (2009),
Kaltenbach and McCaslin (1996),
Chang et al. (2002),
Zhang and Kaltenbach (1998),
Brozoski et al. (2002),
Rajan and Irvine (1998),
Ahlf et al. (2012),
Tan et al. (2007),
Milbrandt et al. (2000),
Manzoor et al. (2013),
Mulders and Robertson (2009),
Mulders and Robertson (2011),
Manzoor et al. (2012),
Salvi et al. (1990),
Izquierdo et al. (2008),
Yang et al. (2011),
Yang et al. (2012),
Noreña and Eggermont (2003),
Seki and Eggermont (2003),
Noreña and Eggermont (2003),
Cheung et al. (2009),
Seki and Eggermont (2002),
Calford et al. (1993),
Yin et al. (2008),
Hawkins et al. (1976),
Liberman and Beil (1979),
Spongr et al. (1992),
Hickox and Liberman (2014),
Lin et al. (2011),
Kujawa and Liberman (2009),
Heinz et al. (2005),
Heinz and Young (2004),
Illing et al. (2005),
Wallhäusser-Franke et al. (2003),
Michler and Illing (2002),
Cai et al. (2009),
Wang et al. (2009a),
Morest and Bohne (1983),
Shore et al. (2008),
Dehmel et al. (2012b),
Ma and Young (2006),
Koehler and Shore (2013a),
Dehmel et al. (2012a),
Mahlke and Wallhäusser-Franke (2004),
Willott and Lu (1982),
Noreña et al. (2010),
Noreña and Eggermont (2006),
Engineer et al. (2011),
Rajan (1998),
Morest et al. (1997),
Gentschev and Sotelo (1973),
Fyk-Kolodziej et al. (2011),
Förster and Illing (1998),
Potashner et al. (1997),
Godfrey et al. (2014),
Suneja et al. (1998b),
Potashner et al. (2000),
Suneja et al. (1998a),
Hildebrandt et al. (2011),
Suneja and Potashner (2003),
Suneja et al. (2005),
Koerber et al. (1966),
Bledsoe et al. (2009),
Argence et al. (2006),
McAlpine et al. (1997),
Sun et al. (2009b),
Oh et al. (2007),
Kirby and Middlebrooks (2010),
Nordeen et al. (1983),
Snyder et al. (2008),
Dong et al. (2009),
Dong et al. (2010b),
Snyder and Sinex (2002),
Snyder et al. (2000),
Irvine et al. (2003),
Kamke et al. (2003),
Rajan (2001),
Robertson and Irvine (1989),
Rajan et al. (1993),
Kamke et al. (2005),
Ryan et al. (1979),
Nienhuys and Clark (1978),
Ryan and Dallos (1975),
Kaltenbach et al. (2002),
Forge (1985),
Liu et al. (2013),
Dallos and Harris (1978),
Takeno et al. (1994),
Wake et al. (1993),
Kraus et al. (2009),
Qiu et al. (2000),
El-Badry and McFadden (2007),
Godfrey et al. (2005),
Zeng et al. (2009),
Asako et al. (2005),
Lobarinas et al. (2013b),
Zeng et al. (2012),
Rachel et al. (2002),
Buras et al. (2006),
Bauer et al. (2008),
McFadden et al. (1998),
Alkhatib et al. (2006),
Popelár et al. (1994),
Kakigi et al. (2000),
Schwaber et al. (1993),
Meredith et al. (2012),
Allman et al. (2009),
Cazals et al. (1998),
Evans and Borerwe (1982),
Ruel et al. (2008),
Stolzberg et al. (2011),
Sun et al. (2009a),
Bauer et al. (2000),
Deng et al. (2010),
Jastreboff and Sasaki (1986),
Lu et al. (2011),
Ochi and Eggermont (1996),
Eggermont and Kenmochi (1998),
Yang et al. (2007),
Zhang et al. (2011),
Sun et al. (2014),
Sergeyenko et al. (2013),
Stamataki et al. (2006),
Hequembourg and Liberman (2001),
Buckiova et al. (2007),
Ichimiya et al. (2000),
Di Girolamo et al. (2001),
Kujawa and Liberman (2006),
Cohen et al. (1990),
Dazert et al. (1996),
Engle et al. (2013),
Keithley and Feldman (1979),
Schmiedt et al. (1996),
White et al. (2000),
Bielefeld et al. (2008),
Chen et al. (2009),
Keithley and Feldman (1982),
Spongr et al. (1997),
Banay-Schwartz et al. (1989a),
Willott et al. (1997),
Milbrandt and Caspary (1995),
Willott et al. (1991),
Wang et al. (2009b),
Caspary et al. (2006),
Caspary et al. (2005),
Nozawa et al. (1996),
Parthasarathy et al. (2010),
Parthasarathy and Bartlett (2011),
Banay-Schwartz et al. (1989b),
Caspary et al. (1990),
Burianova et al. (2009),
Shaddock Palombi et al. (2001),
Simon et al. (2004),
Walton et al. (2002),
Walton et al. (1998),
Richardson et al. (2013),
De Villers-Sidani et al. (2010),
Martin del Campo et al. (2012),
Ling et al. (2005),
Caspary et al. (2013),
Schmidt et al. (2010),
Juarez-Salinas et al. (2010),
Engle and Recanzone (2012),
Recanzone et al. (2011),
Turner et al. (.
Figure 1Insult-induced changes to auditory nerve physiology can occur in the absence of audiometric hearing loss. Peripheral thresholds measured using auditory brainstem responses (A) and distortion product otoacoustic emissions (B) following exposure to moderate narrowband noise trauma. Both are elevated in the short term following overexposure (24 h; triangles), however by >7 days thresholds have returned to normal (open circles). Modified with permission from Lin et al. (2011). (C) There is a significant shift in the normally bimodal distribution of spontaneous rate in the auditory nerve of exposed animals over a similar time course, leading to underrepresentation of type-1 auditory nerve fibers, coding for frequencies at and above the trauma high-pass corner, with spontaneous rates <20 spikes/s. Modified with permission from Furman et al. (2013). (D) Anatomically, such fibers synapse on the modiolar side of inner hair cells, and typically have a wide dynamic range of response, allowing effective rate coding up to high stimulus intensities. In a mouse model of exposure (inset), these high-threshold type-1 ANF responses are selectively reduced in the acoustic trauma region in the short term following traumatic exposure (8–16 kHz octave-band noise, 100 dB SPL), but not for exposure to a non-traumatic stimulus (94 dB SPL). Modified with permission from Hickox and Liberman (2014). (E,F) Histological comparison between the spiral ganglia basal turns of mice in the short- (E) and long- (F) terms following trauma finds that this pattern of high-threshold response loss precipitates ongoing SGC apoptosis. Scale bars 50 μm. Modified with permission from Kujawa and Liberman (2009). *p ≤ 0.01.
Figure 2Changes in the auditory cortex expression of Arg3.1/Arc and cochlear ribbon synapse density related to the degree of acoustic trauma. (A) Following exposure to acoustic trauma that renders non-permanent threshold elevation (100 dB SPL, 2 h), reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) analysis reveals Arg3.1/Arc expression is significantly upregulated in the auditory cortex; (B) by contrast, animals overexposed at 115–119 dB SPL for 2 h displayed marked downregulation of Arg3.1/Arc transcipts. Modified with permission from Tan et al. (2007). *p ≤ 0.05. (C,D) This relative downregulation is illustrated by immunohistochemical labeling of Arg3.1/Arc mRNA in the auditory cortex of animals exposed to a similar trauma (120 dB SPL, 2 h). Glutamate decarboxylase puncta are also indicated. Modified with permission from Singer et al. (2013). When animals were acoustically overexposed for either (E) 1 h or (F) 1.5 h, staining in the cochlea for IHC ribbon synapses (CtBP2, green, open arrows) indicated a subset of animals with marked reduction in ribbon synapse density, illustrated here for the mid-basal turn of the cochlea. IHC nuclei are labeled with DAPI (blue, circled); glutamate receptor subunit GluR4 protein labeled (red, open arrowheads). Scale bars 10 μm. (G,H) For each exposure protocol, a subset of animals could be categorized according to significant proportional reductions in midbasal and basal cochlear IHC ribbon synapse densities, relative to exposed animals without this pathology. Open bars = controls; filled bars = exposed. Numbers in each bar correspond to respective n. Modified with permission from Rüttiger et al. (2013). *p ≤ 0.05; **p ≤ 0.01; ***p ≤ 0.001.
Figure 3Specific elevation of auditory evoked rate level functions after selective inner hair cell ablation. Following systemic injection of carboplatin (various doses) into chinchillas, the selective IHC lesion that develops was evaluated by chronic electrode implantation with measurement of evoked field response functions from the cochlear compound action potential (A), the inferior colliculus (B) and the auditory cortex (C) in the awake animal in response to 1 kHz (left column) and 4 kHz (right column) tonal acoustic stimulation. By recording prior to lesion induction (thick lines), 3 days (thin lines), 2 weeks (circles) and 5 weeks (triangles) after lesioning, there was found to be a maintained suppression of evoked response amplitudes in both the cochlea and the inferior colliculus; paradoxically, IHC ablation yielded a marked enhancement of evoked response functions recorded from the auditory cortex. Modified with permission from Qiu et al. (2000).
Figure 4The balance of excitation and inhibition is differentially modified by band-limited acoustic trauma according to the frequency tuning of cortical neurons. Following acoustic trauma (123 dB SPL, 4 kHz, 7 h) of adult rats, in vitro patch recordings from primary auditory cortex layer II/III pyramidal neurons were performed to evaluate relative changes in excitability between neurons with low- or high-categorized characteristic frequency tuning. In response to square current pulse injection, low-CF neurons showed no enhancement in the number of spikes fired (A), whereas high-CF cells displayed significantly elevated excitability (B). Modified with permission from Yang et al. (2012). On recording miniature excitatory postsynaptic potentials (mEPSCs), there was a significant increase in the amplitude (C) and frequency (D) of mEPSCs in low-CF neurons only following trauma. Similar analysis of miniature inhibitory postsynaptic potentials (mIPSCs) revealed a significant trauma-driven elevation of mIPSC amplitude in low-CF neurons (E), while the frequency of mIPSCs was significantly depressed in high-CF cells (F). Modified with permission from Yang et al. (2011). *p ≤ 0.05; **p ≤ 0.01.
Figure 5Remapping of the tonotopy in the primary auditory cortex following a variety of peripheral insults. (A) A flattening of the linear progression of characteristic frequency (CF) tuning when units were recorded along the dorsoventral axis of primary auditory cortex is observed following partial mechanical lesion of the cochlea in adult cats (individual subjects, upper and lower. Each datapoint represents a single unit CF. Modified with permission from Rajan et al. (1993). (B) A similar flattening of tonotopic progression is demonstrated as a function of distance along the cortical surface dorsoventrally in adult cats exposed to narrowband-passed acoustic trauma (crosses), compared with naive controls (circles). Modified with permission from Seki and Eggermont (2002). (C) In individual adult chinchillas (left, right) exposed to amikacin-induced basal cochlear hair cell lesions, there is a rearrangement of cortical responses to preference low characteristic frequency responses at regions of the cortex normally responsive at threshold to higher frequency stimuli (shaded region). Scale bars 1 mm. Modified with permission from Kakigi et al. (2000). (D) When individual multiunits were isolated in the adult rat primary auditory cortex (each unit is a different color), together spanning the hearing range of the animal, (E) systemic injection of salicylate (250 mg/kg intraperitoneal) produced a dynamic retuning of multiunits toward a CF range of 10–20 kHz by 2.5 h after injection. Modified with permission from Stolzberg et al. (2011).
Figure 6Gap-prepulse inhibition of the acoustic startle reflex (GPIAS) in rodents acts as a marker for underlying neurobiological changes following auditory insult. (A) In a cohort of adult guinea pigs, acoustic overexposure (1/4 octave band noise centered at 7 kHz, 93 dB SPL, 2 h; twice-exposed, separated by 6–8 weeks) yielded a subset of animals that displayed significantly decreased normalized startle response inhibition for background masking in the 4–16 kHz bandwidths. Sham controls = white bars; GPIAS-unimpaired animals = gray bars; GPIAS-impaired animals = pink bars. Star = significantly different (p < 0.05) from other bars in the same frequency band (B) On the basis of categorization according to the presence of GPIAS deficits, this subset of animals displayed significantly different stimulus-timing dependent plasticity functions for bimodal somatosensory-auditory stimulation compared with both sham controls, and exposed but unimpaired animals. Sham = gray; GPIAS-unimpaired = pink; GPIAS-impaired = red. Modified with permission from Koehler and Shore (2013a). (C–E) Following exposure to acoustic trauma (octave band noise centered at 16 kHz, 115 dB SPL, 1 h), adult rats underwent daily pairing of tonal stimuli outside the 8–10 kHz frequency bandwidth, either with vagal nerve stimulation (VNS) (C) or sham stimulation (D). VNS-tone pairing was found to produce rapid and long-lasting remediation of GPIAS impairments for 8–10 kHz background masking; sham-tone pairing produced no such improvement, with startle suppression ratios remaining depressed throughout the testing period following trauma. Time points: i, before trauma; ii, 4 weeks after exposure; iii, 10 days after initiation of VNS-tone or sham-tone pairing therapy; iv, 20 days after therapy initiation; v, 1 week after conclusion of therapy; vi, 3 weeks after conclusion of therapy. Broadband noise (thick line), non-tinnitus frequency (thin line), putative tinnitus frequency (dashed line). (E) In addition, VNS-tone pairing was found to remediate and normalize with respect to control measurements, aspects of primary auditory cortex neuronal operation which had been significantly enhanced following trauma, including tonotopic map distortion, frequency receptive field bandwidth, evoked spike response number, and neural spike-timing synchrony. For each bar plot, leftmost bar = naive; middle bar (gray) = sham-tone pairing therapy; rightmost bar = VNS-tone pairing therapy. Asterisk = significantly different (p < 0.05) compared with controls. Modified with permission from Engineer et al. (2011).
Figure 7Unilateral conductive hearing loss yields conflicting reports of tinnitus generation in adult human and non-human normal-hearing subjects. (A) Chronic (>7 days) insertion of an earplug into one ear produced subjective reports of tinnitus in 10/18 human listeners, evaluated on a tinnitus similarity likeness scale; the group average tinnitus likeness indicated the development of a low-pass sensation peaking between 8 and 12 kHz. Inset is the attenuation function for earplug insertion, indicating a sloping attenuation of high-frequency stimuli up to ~30 dB SPL for stimuli >3–4 kHz. Modified with permission from Schaette et al. (2012). (B) Using GPIAS as a surrogate reporter of tinnitus presence in adult normal-hearing rats, unilateral earplug insertion also revealed tinnitus-like symptoms, as a reduction in startle-suppression efficacy for gaps inserted into carrier noise (60 dB SPL) narrow-bandpassed at 12, 16, 20, and 24 kHz. No such reduction developed for a 6 kHz narrowband carrier. Gray bars = baseline startle suppression ratio; black bars = plug startle suppression ratio; asterisk = significant difference within frequency band compared to baseline (p < 0.05). Modified with permission from Lobarinas et al. (2013a). (C) Conversely, testing of the effects of unilateral plugging on an operant sound detection task for stimuli presented at 10 kHz (upper) and lower (20 kHz) in adult rats showed there to be no effect upon detection functions for either stimulus bandwidth; by contrast, animals that underwent acoustic overexposure (narrowband noise centered at 16 kHz, 105 dB SPL, 1 h) displayed marked reduction in detection functions at 20 kHz, interpreted as the presence of tinnitus whose spectral content matched that frequency band. Control = open circles; normal-hearing with plug = filled squares; acoustic trauma without plug = open squares. Modified with permission from Bauer and Brozoski (2001). (D) A similar evaluation of the effects of unilateral earplug in adult rats found no difference between GPIAS functions in the same subjects prior to and following earplug insertion. Background noise was centered at 10 kHz, at which plug insertion produced a mean attenuation of 22 dB SPL. Modified with permission from Turner et al. (2006).