Literature DB >> 25737537

Salient features of otoacoustic emissions are common across tetrapod groups and suggest shared properties of generation mechanisms.

Christopher Bergevin1, Geoffrey A Manley2, Christine Köppl2.   

Abstract

Otoacoustic emissions (OAEs) are faint sounds generated by healthy inner ears that provide a window into the study of auditory mechanics. All vertebrate classes exhibit OAEs to varying degrees, yet the biophysical origins are still not well understood. Here, we analyzed both spontaneous (SOAE) and stimulus-frequency (SFOAE) otoacoustic emissions from a bird (barn owl, Tyto alba) and a lizard (green anole, Anolis carolinensis). These species possess highly disparate macromorphologies of the inner ear relative to each other and to mammals, thereby allowing for novel insights into the biomechanical mechanisms underlying OAE generation. All ears exhibited robust OAE activity, and our chief observation was that SFOAE phase accumulation between adjacent SOAE peak frequencies clustered about an integral number of cycles. Being highly similar to published results from human ears, we argue that these data indicate a common underlying generator mechanism of OAEs across all vertebrates, despite the absence of morphological features thought essential to mammalian cochlear mechanics. We suggest that otoacoustic emissions originate from phase coherence in a system of coupled oscillators, which is consistent with the notion of "coherent reflection" but does not explicitly require a mammalian-type traveling wave. Furthermore, comparison between SFOAE delays and auditory nerve fiber responses for the barn owl strengthens the notion that most OAE delay can be attributed to tuning.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cochlear mechanics; coupled oscillators; hair cells; otoacoustic emissions; phase coherence

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25737537      PMCID: PMC4371923          DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1418569112

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


  53 in total

1.  Active traveling wave in the cochlea.

Authors:  Thomas Duke; Frank Jülicher
Journal:  Phys Rev Lett       Date:  2003-04-16       Impact factor: 9.161

2.  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

3.  Entrainment of neuronal oscillations as a mechanism of attentional selection.

Authors:  Peter Lakatos; George Karmos; Ashesh D Mehta; Istvan Ulbert; Charles E Schroeder
Journal:  Science       Date:  2008-04-04       Impact factor: 47.728

Review 4.  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

5.  Spontaneous otoacoustic emissions in the barn owl.

Authors:  G Taschenberger; G A Manley
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  1997-08       Impact factor: 3.208

Review 6.  The role of fluid inertia in mechanical stimulation of hair cells.

Authors:  D M Freeman; T F Weiss
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  1988-09-15       Impact factor: 3.208

7.  Engineering coherence among excited states in synthetic heterodimer systems.

Authors:  Dugan Hayes; Graham B Griffin; Gregory S Engel
Journal:  Science       Date:  2013-04-18       Impact factor: 47.728

8.  Basilar membrane motion in the pigeon measured with the Mössbauer technique.

Authors:  A W Gummer; J W Smolders; R Klinke
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  1987       Impact factor: 3.208

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.  Otoacoustic emissions, hair cells, and myosin motors.

Authors:  G A Manley; L Gallo
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1997-08       Impact factor: 1.840

View more
  6 in total

1.  Comparison of time-frequency methods for analyzing stimulus frequency otoacoustic emissions.

Authors:  Milan Biswal; Srikanta K Mishra
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  A common microstructure in behavioral hearing thresholds and stimulus-frequency otoacoustic emissions.

Authors:  James B Dewey; Sumitrajit Dhar
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2017-11       Impact factor: 1.840

Review 3.  Whistling While it Works: Spontaneous Otoacoustic Emissions and the Cochlear Amplifier.

Authors:  Christopher A Shera
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2022-01-03

4.  Hair cell force generation does not amplify or tune vibrations within the chicken basilar papilla.

Authors:  Anping Xia; Xiaofang Liu; Patrick D Raphael; Brian E Applegate; John S Oghalai
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2016-10-31       Impact factor: 14.919

5.  Mammalian behavior and physiology converge to confirm sharper cochlear tuning in humans.

Authors:  Christian J Sumner; Toby T Wells; Christopher Bergevin; Joseph Sollini; Heather A Kreft; Alan R Palmer; Andrew J Oxenham; Christopher A Shera
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2018-10-15       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Bilateral Spontaneous Otoacoustic Emissions Show Coupling between Active Oscillators in the Two Ears.

Authors:  Yuttana Roongthumskul; Dáibhid Ó Maoiléidigh; A J Hudspeth
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2019-04-02       Impact factor: 4.033

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.