Literature DB >> 3199181

Response properties of cochlear efferent neurons: monaural vs. binaural stimulation and the effects of noise.

M C Liberman1.   

Abstract

1. Discharge properties of olivocochlear efferent neurons were measured in anesthetized cats. Previous studies of these neurons concentrated on monaural stimulation with tones and found sound-evoked discharge rates rarely exceeded 60 spikes/s (16, 20). In the present study, rates as high as 140 spikes/s were achieved by binaural stimulation and/or the addition of noise. Based on studies on the known effects of electrically stimulating the efferents such high rates of sound-evoked efferent activity probably have significant feedback effects on the auditory periphery. 2. Spontaneous discharge rate (SR) was weakly correlated with threshold among efferent neurons: those with SRs greater than 1 spikes/s were generally more sensitive than spontaneously inactive fibers. The discharge rate measured in the absence of acoustic stimulation was shown to be dependent on stimulation history: some units with zero SR became spontaneously active after several minutes of continuous noise stimulation. 3. For stimulation with monaural tones, efferent excitability varied with characteristic frequency (CF): units with CF less than 10 kHz tended to have lower thresholds, higher discharge rates, and shorter latencies than higher CF units. These differences could be minimized by the addition of broadband noise (see below). 4. When tones were presented to one ear at a time, most efferent units appeared monaural (91%), with roughly two-thirds excited by ipsilateral stimuli and one-third by contralateral stimuli. However, the effects of simultaneous stimulation of the two ears suggested that the great majority of efferent units have binaural inputs: the addition of opposite-ear noise or tones, which presented alone were not excitatory, typically enhanced the response to main-ear stimulation. This type of binaural facilitation was strongest among low-CF efferents when the opposite-ear stimuli were tones, and strongest among high-CF units when the opposite-ear stimulus was broadband noise. 5. The binaural facilitation seen using opposite-ear noise both lowered the threshold (by as much as 40 dB) and increased the discharge rate (by as much as 80%) to tones presented in the main ear. Significant facilitation was seen with noise levels as low as 25 dB SPL or tone levels as low as 30 dB SPL. In general, the weaker the response to monaural stimuli, the stronger the binaural facilitation. 6. The facilitatory effects of stimulation with continuous noise could outlast the stimulus. Persistent increases in efferent sensitivity were documented following 10-min exposures to broadband noise at 85-115 dB SPL.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1988        PMID: 3199181     DOI: 10.1152/jn.1988.60.5.1779

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurophysiol        ISSN: 0022-3077            Impact factor:   2.714


  41 in total

1.  Cholinergic modulation of stellate cells in the mammalian ventral cochlear nucleus.

Authors:  K Fujino; D Oertel
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2001-09-15       Impact factor: 6.167

2.  Centrifugal pathways protect hearing sensitivity at the cochlea in noisy environments that exacerbate the damage induced by loud sound.

Authors:  R Rajan
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2000-09-01       Impact factor: 6.167

3.  Effect of human auditory efferent feedback on cochlear gain and compression.

Authors:  Ifat Yasin; Vit Drga; Christopher J Plack
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2014-11-12       Impact factor: 6.167

4.  Responses of medial olivocochlear neurons. Specifying the central pathways of the medial olivocochlear reflex.

Authors:  M C Brown; R K de Venecia; J J Guinan
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2003-10-14       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  Contralateral-noise effects on cochlear responses in anesthetized mice are dominated by feedback from an unknown pathway.

Authors:  Stéphane F Maison; Hajime Usubuchi; Douglas E Vetter; A Bélen Elgoyhen; Steven A Thomas; M Charles Liberman
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2012-04-18       Impact factor: 2.714

6.  Frequency tuning of the contralateral medial olivocochlear reflex in humans.

Authors:  Wei Zhao; Sumitrajit Dhar
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2012-03-28       Impact factor: 2.714

7.  Mice lacking adrenergic signaling have normal cochlear responses and normal resistance to acoustic injury but enhanced susceptibility to middle-ear infection.

Authors:  Stéphane F Maison; Mina Le; Erik Larsen; Suh-Kyung Lee; John J Rosowski; Steven A Thomas; M Charles Liberman
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2010-05-26

8.  The effects of ipsilateral, contralateral, and bilateral broadband noise on the mid-level hump in intensity discrimination.

Authors:  Elin Roverud; Elizabeth A Strickland
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  Slow build-up of cochlear suppression during sustained contralateral noise: central modulation of olivocochlear efferents?

Authors:  Erik Larsen; M Charles Liberman
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2009-02-20       Impact factor: 3.208

10.  Contralateral effects and binaural interactions in dorsal cochlear nucleus.

Authors:  Kevin A Davis
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2005-09
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.