Loss and recovery of sound-evoked otoacoustic emissions in young chicks following acoustic trauma

Audiology and Neurotology

Volumn 10, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 209-219

  Ipakchi, Ramin ^a   Kyin, Tim ^a   Saunders, James C ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^b 5 Ravdin ORL ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

Auditory function, recovery; Cubic difference tone; Distortion product otoacoustic emission, chicks

Indexed keywords

AGE DISTRIBUTION; ARTICLE; CHICKEN; EVOKED OTOACOUSTIC EMISSION; HEARING; INNER EAR; NOISE INJURY; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RELIABILITY; STEADY STATE;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; AGE FACTORS; ANIMALS; CHICKENS; HEARING; HEARING LOSS, NOISE-INDUCED; NOISE; OTOACOUSTIC EMISSIONS, SPONTANEOUS; RECOVERY OF FUNCTION;

EID: 20844435359     PISSN: 14203030     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1159/000084842     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. 2 distortion product otoacoustic emissions in White Leghorn chickens (Gallus domesticus): Effects of frequency ratio and relative level. Audiol Neurootol 1996;1:197-213.
2. Chen L, Salvi RJ, Shero M: Cochlear frequency-place map in adult chickens: Intracellular biocytin labelling. Hear Res 1994;81:130-136.
3. Chen L, Sun W, Salvi RJ: Electrically evoked otoacoustic emissions from the chicken ear. Hear Res 2001;161:54-64.
4. Chin K, Kurian R, Saunders JC: Maturation of tympanic membrane layers and collagen in the embryonic and post-hatch chick (Gallus domesticus). J Morphol 1997;233:257-266.
5. Cohen YE, Hernandez HN, Saunders JC: Middle-ear development. 2. Morphometric changes in the conducting apparatus of the chick. J Morphol 1992a;212:227-267.
6. Cohen YE, Rubin DM, Saunders JC: Middle-ear development. 1. Extra-stapedius response in the neonatal chick. Hear Res 1992b;58:1-8.
7. Cotanche DA: Structural recovery from sound and aminoglycoside damage in the avian cochlea. Audiol Neurootol 1999;4:271-285.
8. Cotanche DA, Saunders JC, Tilney LG: Hair cell damage produced by acoustic trauma in the chick cochlea. Hear Res 1987;25:267-286.
9. Duncan RK, Saunders JC: Stereocilia injury mediates hair bundle stiffness loss and recovery following intense water-jet stimulation. J Comp Physiol A 2000;186:1095-1106.
10. Erulkar JS, O'Brien DA, Saunders JC: Hair bundle morphology on surviving hair cells of the chick basilar papilla exposed to intense sound. Scanning Microsc 1996;10:1127-1141.
11. Froymovich O, Rebala V, Salvi RJ, Rassael H: Long-term effect of acoustic trauma on distortion product otoacoustic emissions in chickens. J Acoust Soc Am 1995;97:3021-3029.
12. Guinan JJ, Peak WT: Middle-ear characteristics of anesthetized cats. J Acoust Soc Am 1967;51:1904-1920.
13. Hara J, Plymale DR, Dhepard DL, Hara H, Garry RF, Yoshihara T, Zenner HP, Bolton M, Kalkeri R, Fermin CD: Avian dark cells. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2002;259:121-141.
14. He D, Beisel KW, Ding D-L, Chen L, Fritzch B, Salvi RJ: Are chick hair cell motile? Abstr Res Assoc Otolaryngol 2001;24:159-160.
15. 2 otoacoustic emissions in pigmented rats. Hear Res 1990;43:141-148.
16. Henry WJ, Makaretz M, Saunders JC, Schneider MD, Vrettakos P: Hair cell loss and regeneration after exposure to intense sound in neonatal chicks. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1988;98:607-611.
17. Husbands J, Kurian R, Steinberg SA, Saunders JC: Tip-link integrity on chick tall hair cell stereocilia following intense sound exposure. Hear Res 1999;135:135-145.
18. Jaramillo F, Markin VS, Hudspeth AJ: Auditory illusions and the single hair cell. Nature 1993;364:527-529.
19. Kettembeil S, Manley GA, Siegl E: Distortion-product otoacoustic emissions and their anaesthesia sensitivity in the European starling and the chicken. Hear Res 1995;86:47-62.
20. Khvoles R, Freeman S, Sohmer H: Development of transient evoked otoacoustic emissions in the neonatal rat. Audiol Neurootol 1998;3:40-53.
21. Köppl C: Otoacoustic emissions as an indicator for active cochlear mechanics. A primative property of vertebrate auditory organs; in Manley GA, Köppl C, Fastl H, Oeckinghouse H (eds): Advances in Hearing Research. Singapore, World Scientific, 1995, pp 207-218.
22. Köppl C, Forge A, Manley GA: Low density of membrane particles in auditory hair cells of lizards and birds suggest an absence of somatic motility. J Comp Neurol 2004;479:149-155.
23. Kurian R, Krupp NL, Saunders JC: Tip link loss and recovery on chick short hair cells following intense exposure to sound. Hear Res 2003;81:40-50.
24. Lifshitz J, Altman K, Furman A, Saunders JC: Spatial distribution of cochlear nerve activity in the sound-damaged chick cochlea. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 2004;5:171-184.
25. Manley GA: Cochlear mechanisms from a phylogenetic viewpoint. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2000;97:11736-11743.
26. Manley GA: Evidence for an active process and a cochlear amplifier in nonmammals. J Neurophysiol 2001;86:541-549.
27. Manley GA, Schulze M, Oeckinghaus H: Otoacoustic emissions in a song bird. Hear Res 1987;26:257-266.
28. Manley GA, Taschenberger G, Oeckinghaus H: Influence of contralateral acoustic stimulation on distortion-product and spontaneous otoacoustic emissions in the barn owl. Hear Res 1999;138:1-12.
29. Marsh RR, Xu L, Moy JP, Saunders JC: Recovery of the basilar papilla following intense sound exposure in the chick. Hear Res 1990;46:229-238.
30. Martin P, Mehta AD, Husbeth AJ: Negative hair bundle stiffness betrays a mechanism for mechanical amplification by the hair cell. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2000;97:2026-2031.
31. Martinez Ibarguen A, Avalos Cuica NW, Santaolalla Montoya F, Sanchez del Rey A, Sanchez Fernandez JM: The study of ototoxicity in Gallus domesticus by recording distortion products (in Spanish). Acta Otorrinolaringol Esp 1998;49:1-8.
32. Norton SJ, Rubel EW: Active and passive components in mammalian and avian ears; in Dallos P, Geisler CD, Matthews JW, Ruggero MA, Stelle CR (eds): The Mechanics and Biophysics of Hearing. Berlin, Springer, 1990, pp 219-226.
33. Plontke S-KR, Lifshitz J, Saunders JC: Rate-intensity coding in the cochlear nerve of the chick exposed to intense sound. Brain Res 1999;842:262-274.
34. Poje C, 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.
35. Probst R, Lonsbury-Martin BL, Martin GK: A review of otoacoustic emissions. J Acoust Soc Am 1991;89:2027-2067.
36. Ramakrishna R, Kurian R, Saunders JC, Gratton MA: Recovery of the tegmentum vasculosum in the noise exposed chick. Abstr Assoc Res Otolaryngol 2004;27:54.
37. Robles L, Ruggero MA: Mechanics of the mammalian cochlea. Physiol Rev 2001;8:1305-1352.
38. Rubel EW: Ontogeny of structure and function in the vertebrate auditory system; in Jacobsen J (ed): Handbook of Sensory Physiology, vol 9. Development of Sensory Systems. New York, Springer, 1978, pp 135-237.
39. Rubel EW, Fritzch B: Auditory system development. Primary auditory neurones and their targets. Annu Rev Neurosci 2002;25:51-101.
40. Ryals BM, Creech HB, Rubel EW: Postnatal changes in the size of the avian cochlear duct. Acta Otolaryngol 1984;98:93-97.
41. Salvi RJ, Chen L, Trautwein P, Powers N, Shero M: Hair cell regeneration and recovery of function in the avian auditory system. Scand Audiol Suppl 1998;48:7-14.
42. Saunders JC, Coles RB, Gates GR: The development of auditory evoked responses in the cochlear nuclei of the chick. Brain Res 1973;63:59-74.
43. Saunders JC, Relkin EM, Rosowski JJ, Bahl C: Changes in middle-ear input admittance during postnatal auditory development in chicks. Hear Res 1986;24:227-235.
44. 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 Neurol 1992;115:241-249.
45. Saunders JC, Doan DE, Poje CP, Fisher KA: Cochlear nerve activity after intense sound exposure in neonatal chicks. J Neurophysiol 1996;76:770-787.
46. Sun H, Salvi RJ, Ding DL, Hashino DE, Shero M, Zheng XY: Excitotoxic effects of kainic acid on chicken ototoxic emissions and cochlear potentials. J Acoust Soc Am 2000;107:2136-2142.
47. Szymko YM, Nelson PM, Saunders JC: Stiffness changes in chick hair bundles following in vitro overstimulation. J Comp Physiol A 1995;176:727-735.
48. Taschenberger G, Gallo L, Manley GA: Filtering of distortion-product otoacoustic emissions in the inner ear of birds and lizards. Hear Res 1995;91:87-92.
49. Trautwein P, Salvi RJ, Miller K, Shero M, Hashino E: Incomplete recovery of chicken distortion otoacoustic emissions following acoustic overstimulation. Audiol Neurootol 1996;1:86-103.
50. Trautwein PG, Chen L, Salvi RJ: Steady state EP is not responsible for hearing loss in adult chickens following acoustic trauma. Hear Res 1997;110:266-270.
51. Tubach M, McGee J, Walsh EW: Distortion generated by the ear: Its emergence and evolution during development. Laryngoscope 1996;106:822-830.
52. Voss SE, Shera CA: Simultaneous measurement of middle ear input impedance and forward/reverse transmission in cat. J Acoust Soc Am 2004;116:2187-2198.
53. 2 distortion product otoacoustic emission in rabbits. 1. Differential dependence of stimulus parameters. J Acoust Soc Am 1992a;91:1587-1607.
54. 2 distortion product otoacoustic emission in rabbits. 2. Differential physiological vulnerability. J Acoust Soc Am 1992b;91:2662-2682.