Literature DB >> 27550413

Low-frequency bias tone suppression of auditory-nerve responses to low-level clicks and tones.

Hui Nam1, John J Guinan2.   

Abstract

We used low-frequency "bias" tones (BT's) to explore whether click and tone responses are affected in the same way by cochlear active processes. In nonlinear systems the responses to clicks are not always simply related to the responses to tones. Cochlear amplifier gain depends on the incremental slope of the outer-hair-cell (OHC) stereocilia mechano-electric transduction (MET) function. BTs transiently change the operating-point of OHC MET channels and can suppress cochlear-amplifier gain by pushing OHC METs into low-slope saturation regions. BT effects on single auditory-nerve (AN) fibers have been studied on tone responses but not on click responses. We recorded from AN fibers in anesthetized cats and compared tone and click responses using 50 Hz BTs at 70-120 dB SPL to manipulate OHC stereocilia position. BTs can also excite and thereby obscure the BT suppression. We measured AN-fiber response synchrony to BTs alone so that we could exclude suppression measurements when the BT synchrony might obscure the suppression. BT suppression of low-level tone and click responses followed the traditional pattern of twice-a-BT-cycle suppression with more suppression at one phase than the other. The major suppression phases of most fibers were tightly grouped with little difference between click and tone suppressions, which is consistent with low-level click and tone responses being amplified in the same way. The data are also consistent with the operating point of the OHC MET function varying smoothly from symmetric in the base to offset in the apex, and, in contrast, with the IHC MET function being offset throughout the cochlea. As previously reported, bias-tones presented alone excited AN fibers at one or more phases, a phenomena termed "peak splitting" with most BT excitation phases ∼¼ cycle before or after the major suppression phase. We explain peak splitting as being due to distortion in multiple fluid drives to inner-hair-cell stereocilia.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Auditory nerve; Cochlear mechanics; Micromechanics; Peak splitting

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27550413      PMCID: PMC5086432          DOI: 10.1016/j.heares.2016.08.007

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


  39 in total

1.  Medial efferent effects on auditory-nerve responses to tail-frequency tones II: alteration of phase.

Authors:  K M Stankovic; J J Guinan
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Medial-olivocochlear-efferent inhibition of the first peak of auditory-nerve responses: evidence for a new motion within the cochlea.

Authors:  John J Guinan; Tai Lin; Holden Cheng
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Low-frequency suppression of auditory nerve responses to characteristic frequency tones.

Authors:  A N Temchin; N C Rich; M A Ruggero
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  1997-11       Impact factor: 3.208

4.  Two-tone suppression of basilar membrane vibrations in the base of the guinea pig cochlea using "low-side" suppressors.

Authors:  C D Geisler; A L Nuttall
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1997-07       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Timing of spike initiation in cochlear afferents: dependence on site of innervation.

Authors:  M A Ruggero; N C Rich
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  1987-08       Impact factor: 2.714

6.  Anomalous phase relations in threshold-level responses from gerbil auditory nerve fibers.

Authors:  D A Ronken
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1986-02       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  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

8.  The modulation of the sensitivity of the mammalian cochlea by low frequency tones. I. Primary afferent activity.

Authors:  R Patuzzi; P M Sellick; B M Johnstone
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  1984-01       Impact factor: 3.208

9.  Responses of auditory-nerve fibers to characteristic-frequency tones and low-frequency suppressors.

Authors:  M B Sachs; A E Hubbard
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  1981-07       Impact factor: 3.208

10.  How are inner hair cells stimulated? Evidence for multiple mechanical drives.

Authors:  John J Guinan
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2012-08-24       Impact factor: 3.208

View more
  3 in total

1.  Intrinsic mechanical sensitivity of mammalian auditory neurons as a contributor to sound-driven neural activity.

Authors:  Maria C Perez-Flores; Eric Verschooten; Jeong Han Lee; Hyo Jeong Kim; Philip X Joris; Ebenezer N Yamoah
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2022-03-10       Impact factor: 8.140

2.  The Spectral Extent of Phasic Suppression of Loudness and Distortion-Product Otoacoustic Emissions by Infrasound and Low-Frequency Tones.

Authors:  Carlos Jurado; Man Yui Pat Chow; Ka Man Lydia Leung; Marcelo Larrea; Juan Vizuete; Alain de Cheveigné; Torsten Marquardt
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2022-02-07

3.  Cochlear amplification and tuning depend on the cellular arrangement within the organ of Corti.

Authors:  Hamid Motallebzadeh; Joris A M Soons; Sunil Puria
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2018-05-14       Impact factor: 11.205

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.