Incomplete recovery of chicken distortion product otoacoustic emissions following acoustic overstimulation

Audiology and Neuro-Otology

Volumn 1, Issue 2, 1996, Pages 86-103

  Trautwein, Patricia ^a   Salvi, Richard J ^a   Miller, Karen ^a   Shew, Marlene ^a   Hashino, Eri ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY AT BUFFALO   (United States)

Author keywords

Acoustic trauma; Chickens; Cochlea; Hair cell regeneration; Otoacoustic emission; Tectorial membrane

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; AUDITORY STIMULATION; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; BASILAR MEMBRANE; CHICKEN; COCHLEA DUCT; FLUORESCENCE MICROSCOPY; HAIR CELL; NERVE REGENERATION; NOISE INJURY; PATHOLOGY; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PERCEPTION DISORDER; PHYSIOLOGY; SCANNING ELECTRON MICROSCOPY; SPONTANEOUS OTOACOUSTIC EMISSION;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; ANIMALS; AUDITORY FATIGUE; BASILAR MEMBRANE; CHICKENS; HAIR CELLS; HEARING LOSS, NOISE-INDUCED; MICROSCOPY, ELECTRON, SCANNING; MICROSCOPY, FLUORESCENCE; NERVE REGENERATION; OTOACOUSTIC EMISSIONS, SPONTANEOUS; PERCEPTUAL DISTORTION; TECTORIAL MEMBRANE;

EID: 0030089950     PISSN: 14203030     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1159/000259188     Document Type: Article

References (71)

1. Robles I, Ruggero MA, Rieh NC,: Basilar membrane mechanics al the base of the chinchilla cochlea. 1. Input-output functions, tuning curves, and response phases. J Acoust Soc Am 1986;80:1364-1374.
2. Ruggero MA, Robles L, Rich NC,: Two-tone suppression in the basilar membrane of the cochlea: Mechanical basis of auditors-nerve rate suppression. J Neurophysiol 1992:68: 1087-1099.
3. Rhode WS. Robles L: Evidence from Mossbauer experiments for nonlinear vibration in the cochlea. J Acoust Soc Ant 1974:55:588-596.
4. Sellick PM, Patuzzi R, Johnstone BM,: Measurement of basilar membrane motion in the guinea pig using the Mossbauer technique. J Acoust Soc Am 1982;72:131-141.
5. Smoorcnburg CJF: Audibility region of comibnation tones. J Acoust Soc Am 1972:52:603-614.
6. Goldstein JL: Auditory nonlinearity. J Acoust Soc Am 1967:41: 676-689.
7. Goldstein JL. Kiang NYS: Neural correlates of the aural combination tone 2F1-F2. Proc IEEE 1968:56: 981-992.
8. Kim DO: Cochlear mechanics: Implications of electrophysiological and acoustical observations. Hear Res 1980:2:297-317.
9. Kemp DT. Brown AM: Ear canal acoustic and round window electrical correlates of 2l'l-f2 distortion generated in the cochlea. Hear Res 1984:13:39-46.
10. Brown AM. McDowel B. Forge A: Acoustic distortion products can be used to monitor the effects of chronic gentamicin treatment. Hear Res 1989:42:143-156.
11. Schrott A. Puel J-L. Rebillard G: Cochlear origin of2ft-f2 distortion products assessed by using 2 types of mutant mice. Hear Res 1991:52: 245-254.
12. Martin GK. Probst R. Scheinin SA. Coats AC. Lonsbury-Martin Bl.: Acoustic distortion products in rabbits. II. Sites of origin revealed by suppression and purc-tone exposures. Hear Res 1987:28:191-208.
13. Kemp DT: Cochlear echoes: implications for noise-induced hearing loss: in Hamernik RP. Henderson D. Salvi RJ (eds): New Perspectives on Noisc-Induccd Hearing Loss. New York, Raven Press. 1982. pp 189-207.
14. Siegel JH. Kim DO: Cochlear biomechanics: Vulnerability to acoustic trauma and other alterations as seen in neural responses and ear-canal sound pressure: in Hamernik RP. Henderson D. Salvi RJ (eds): New Perspectives on Noise-Induced Hearing Loss. New York. Raven Press. 1982. pp 137-151.
15. Siegel JH, Kim DO: Efferent neural control of cochlear mechanics? Olivocochlear bundle stimulation affects cochlear biomechanical nonlinearity. Hear Res 1982:6:245-248.
16. Brownell WE. Bader CR. Bertrand D. dc Ribaupicrre Y: Evoked mechanical responses of isolated cochlear outer hair cells. Science 1985: 227:194-196.
17. Hubbard AE. Mountain DC: Alternating current delivered into the scala media alters sound pressure at the ear drum. Science 1983:222: 510-512.
18. Mountain DC: Changes in endolymphatic potential and crossed olivocochlear bundle stimulation alters cochlear mechanics. Sci 1980:210: 71-72.
19. Xue S. Mountain DC. Hubbard AE: Electrically evoked basilar membrane motion. J Acoust Soc Am 1995:97:3030-3041.
20. Manley GA. Schulze M. Occking-haus H: Otoacoustic emissions in song bird. Hear Res 1987:26:257-266.
21. Klinke R. Smolders J: Hearing mechanisms in caiman and pigeon: in Bolis L. Keynes RD. Maddress SUP (eds): Comparative Physiology of Sensory Systems. Cambridge University Press. 1984. pp 195-211.
22. Strack G, Klinke R, Wilson JP,: Evoked cochlear response in Caiman crocodilin'. Pfliigcr's Arch 1981;suppl 39LR43.
23. Rosowski JJ. Peake WT. White JR: Cochlear nonlinearities inferred from two-tone distortion products in the ear canal of the alligator lizard. Hear Res 1984:13:141-158.
24. Norton SJ. Tucci DL. Rubcl EW: Comparison of acoustic and neural responses from avian ears following gentamicin. Abstr Assoc Res Otolaryngol 1990:11:62.
25. Wilson JP. Baker RJ. Whitehead ML: Otoacoustic emissions in frogs. Adv Audiol 1990;7:47-56.
26. Kettembcil S. Manley GA. Siegel E: Distortion-product otoacoustic and their anaesthesia sensitivity in the European starling and chicken. Hear Res 1995:86:47-62.
27. Jaramillo F. Martin VS. Hudspeth AJ: Auditory illusions and the single hair cell. Nature 1993:364:527-529.
28. Howard J. Hudspeth AJ: Compliance of hair bundle associated with gating of mcchanoclcctrical transduction channels in the bullfrog's saccular hair cell. Neuron 1988;1:189-199.
29. Benser ME, lssa NP, Hudspeth AJ,: Hair-bundle stiffness dominates the elastic reactance to otolithic-membrane shear. Hear Res 1993:68:243-252.
30. Denk W. Webb WW. Hudspeth AJ: Mechanical properties of sensory hair bundles are reflected in their Brownian motion measured with a laser differential interferometer. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1989:86: 5371-5375.
31. Crawford AC. Fettiplaee R: The mechanical properties of ciliary bundles of turtle cochlear hair cells. J Physiol (Lond) 1985:364:359-379.
32. Zimmermann U. Reuter G. Giltcr AH. Zcnner HP. Klinke R: Isolation and short term culture of pigeon hair cells: in Eisner N. Singer W (eds): Dynamics and Plasticity in Neuronal System. Stuttgart. Thieme. 1989. p 286.
33. Gummer A. Smolders JWT. Klinke R: Basilar membrane motion in the pigeon measured with the M5ss-bauer technique. Hear Res 1987:29: 63-92.
34. Ryals BM. Rubel EW: Hair cell regeneration after acoustic trauma in adult Coturnix quail. Science 1988: 240:1774-1776.
35. Corwin JT. Cotanche DA: Regeneration of sensory hair cells after acoustic trauma. Science 1988:240: 1772-1774.
36. Norton SJ, Rubel EW,: Active and passive ADP components in mammalian and avian ears: in Gcislcr D, Dallos P. Mathews J. Ruggero M (eds): Mechanics and Biophysics of Hearing. Berlin. Springer-Verlag. 1990. pp 219-226.
37. Rubcl EW: Regeneration of hair cells in the avian inner car; in Dancer A. Henderson D. Salvi RJ. Hamernik RP (eds): Noise Induced I tearing Loss. St Louis. Mosby Year Book. 1992. pp 204-227.
38. Duckert LG. Rubel EW: Morphological correlates of functional recovery in the chicken inner ear after gentamicin treatment. J Comp Neurol 1993:331:75-96.
39. Chen L, Salvi RJ, Hashino E,: Recovery of CAP threshold and amplitude in chickens following kanamv-cin ototoxicity. Hear Res 1993:69: 15-24.
40. Girod DA. Tucci D. Rubel EW: Anatomical correlates of functional recovery' in the avian inner ear following aminoglycoside ototoxicity. Laryngoscope 1991:101:1139-1149.
41. Froymovich O, Rebala V, Salvi RJ, Rassael H,: Long term effects of acoustic trauma on distortion product otoacoustic emissions in chickens. J Acoust Soe Am 1995:97: 3021-3029.
42. Hashino E. Salvi RJ: Changing spatial patterns of DNA replication in the noise-damaged chick cochlea. J Cell Sci 1993;105:23-31.
43. Saunders SS. Salvi RJ. Miller KM: Recovery of thresholds and temporal integration in adult chickens after high level 525 Hz pure tone exposure. J Acoust Soc Am 1995:97: 1150-1164.
44. Chen L. Trautwcin PG. Salvi RJ: DC endocochlear potential in adult chickens following acoustic over-stimulation. Abstr Assoc Res Otolaryngol 1996:19:5.
45. Hashino E. Tanaka Y. Sokabe M: Hair cell damage and recovery following chronic application of kana-mycin in the chick cochlea. Hear Res 1991:52:356-368.
46. Hashino E. Tanaka Y. Salvi RJ. Sokabe M: Hair cell regeneration in the adult budgerigar after kanamycin ototoxicity. Hear Res 1992:59:46-58.
47. Chen L, Salvi R, Shero M: Cochlear frequency-place map in adult chickens: Intracellular biocytin labeling. Hear Res 1994:81:130-136.
48. Anderson SD. Kemp DT: The evoked cochlear mechanical response in laboratory primates. Arch Otolaryngol 1979:224:47-54.
49. Wilson JP, Evans EF: Effects of fu-rosemidc. Flaxcdil. noise and tone over-stimulation on the evoked otoacoustic emission cat. Proc Inc Union Phvsiol Sci 1983:15:100-109.
50. Poje CP. Sewell DA. Saunders JC: The effects of exposure to intense sound on the DC endocochlear potential in the chick. Hear Res 1995; 82:197-204.
51. Saunders JC. Doan DE, Cohen YE, Adler HJ, Poje CP: Recent observations on the recovery of structure and function in the sound damaged chick car; in Salvi RJ, Henderson D. Fiorino F. Colletti V (eds): Auditory Plasticity and Regeneration: Basic Science and Clinical Implications. Stuttgart, Thiemc Medical Publishers. 1996. pp 62-83.
52. Ryals BM. Stalford MD. Lambert PR. Westbrook EW: Recovery of noise-induced changes in the dark cells of the quail tegmentum vascu-losum. Hear Res 1995:83:51-61.
53. Cotanche DA: Regeneration of hair cell stcrcociliary bundles in the chick cochlea following severe acoustic trauma. Hear Res 1987:30: 181-196.
54. Cotanche DA. Corwin JT: Sicreocil-iary bundles reorient during hair cell development and regeneration in the chick cochlea. Hear Res 1991: 52:379-402.
55. Saunders SS. Salvi RJ: Pure lone masking patterns in adult chickens alter recovery from acoustic trauma. J Acoust Soc Am 1995:98:1365-1371.
56. Duckert LG. Rubel EW: Ultrastruc-tural observation on regenerating hair cells in the chick basilar papilla. Hear Res 1990:48:161-182.
57. Cotanche DA. Saunders JC. Tilncv L: Hair cell damage produced by acoustic trauma in the chick cochlea. Hear Res 1987:25:267-286.
58. Saunders JC, Adler HJ, Pugliano FA: The structural and functional aspects of hair cell regeneration in the chick as a result of exposure to intense sound. Exp Neuroi 1992; 115:13-17.
59. Ryals BM. Westbrook EW: TEM analysis of neural terminals on auto-radiographically identified cells. Hear Res 1994;72:81-88.
60. Ryals BM, Dooling RJ: Changes in innervation and auditory sensitivity following acoustic trauma and hair cell regeneration in birds; in Salvi RJ. Henderson D, Fiorino F, Colletti V (eds): Auditory Plasticity and Regeneration: Basic Science and Clinical Implications. Stuttgart, Thiemc Medical Publishers, 1996. pp 84-99.
61. Cotanche DA: Video-enhanced D1C images of the noise-damaged and regenerated chick tectorial membrane. Exp Neurol 1992:115:23-26.
62. Cotanche DA. Picard DA: Progression of damage to the chick tectorial membrane with increased length of noise exposure. Abstr Assoc Res Otolaryngol 1992:15:116.
63. Cotanche DA: Regeneration of the tectorial membrane in the chick cochlea following severe acoustic trauma. Hear Res 1987:30:197-206.
64. Raphael Y: Pure-tone overstimulation protects surviving avian hair cells front acoustic trauma. Hear Res 1991:53:173-184.
65. McFaddcn EA. Saunders JC: Recovery of auditory function following intense sound exposure in the neonatal chick. Hear Res 1989:41: 205-216.
66. Pugliano RA. et al: Recovery of auditor structure and function in neonatal chicks exposed to intense sound for eight days. Neurosci Lett 1993:113:18-25.
67. Manley GA. Brix J. Kaiser A: Developmental stability of the tonotopie organization of the chick's basilar papilla. Science 1987;237:655-656.
68. Tucci DL. Rubel F.W: Physiological status of regenerated hair cells in the avian inner ear following aminoglycoside ototoxicity. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1990; 103:443-445.
69. Salvi RJ, Saunders SS, Hashino E, Chen L,: Discharge patterns of chicken cochlear ganglion neurons following kanamycin-induced hearing loss and regeneration. J Comp Physiol A 1994;174:351-369.
70. Hashino E, TinHan EK, Salvi RJ,: Base-to-apex gradient of cell proliferation in the chick cochlea following kanamycin induced hair cell loss. Hear Res 1995:88:156-168.
71. Keidcl WD: DC potentials in the auditory evoked response in man. Acta Oto-Laryngol 1971:71:242-248.