| Literature DB >> 26064536 |
Kathrin Kugler1, Lutz Wiegrebe2, Benedikt Grothe2, Manfred Kössl3, Robert Gürkov4, Eike Krause4, Markus Drexl4.
Abstract
Noise-induced hearing loss is one of the most common auditory pathologies, resulting from overstimulation of the human cochlea, an exquisitely sensitive micromechanical device. At very low frequencies (less than 250 Hz), however, the sensitivity of human hearing, and therefore the perceived loudness is poor. The perceived loudness is mediated by the inner hair cells of the cochlea which are driven very inadequately at low frequencies. To assess the impact of low-frequency (LF) sound, we exploited a by-product of the active amplification of sound outer hair cells (OHCs) perform, so-called spontaneous otoacoustic emissions. These are faint sounds produced by the inner ear that can be used to detect changes of cochlear physiology. We show that a short exposure to perceptually unobtrusive, LF sounds significantly affects OHCs: a 90 s, 80 dB(A) LF sound induced slow, concordant and positively correlated frequency and level oscillations of spontaneous otoacoustic emissions that lasted for about 2 min after LF sound offset. LF sounds, contrary to their unobtrusive perception, strongly stimulate the human cochlea and affect amplification processes in the most sensitive and important frequency range of human hearing.Entities:
Keywords: cochlea; low-frequency sound; noise-induced hearing loss; spontaneous otoacoustic emissions
Year: 2014 PMID: 26064536 PMCID: PMC4448896 DOI: 10.1098/rsos.140166
Source DB: PubMed Journal: R Soc Open Sci ISSN: 2054-5703 Impact factor: 2.963
Figure 1.Left column: representative pre- and post LF sound exposure examples of pre-existing SOAE level and frequency changes as a function of time from four different subjects. The grey bar indicates the presentation of the LF stimulus (30 Hz, 80 dB(A), 90 s). The timescale is centred around the LF sound offset at 0 s. Right column: same as in the left column, but for new SOAEs which only appeared for a short period after LF exposure.
Figure 2.Representative examples of the fits (bold lines) to the normalized changes (thin line, re. maximum level and frequency, respectively) of (a) pre-existing SOAE level and (b) frequency, which followed an underdamped, sinusoidal oscillation.
Figure 3.(a) Correlation between post-exposure frequency and level changes of bouncing, pre-existing SOAEs. Correlation between the pre-exposure frequency of bouncing, pre-existing SOAEs and (b) level and (c) frequency changes post-exposure, p-values for testing the hypothesis of no correlation against the alternative that there is a non-zero correlation were all smaller than 0.001.
Figure 4.Frequency distribution of pre-existing and new SOAEs. (a) Non-bouncing, pre-existing SOAEs post LF-exposure, (b) pre-existing SOAEs pre LF-exposure, (c) pre-existing SOAEs post LF-exposure, and (d) new SOAEs post LF-exposure.