Spatial tuning curves along the chick basilar papilla in normal and sound-exposed ears

JARO - Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology

Volumn 5, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 171-184

  Lifshitz, J ^a   Furman, A C ^a   Altman, K W ^b   Saunders, J C ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^b NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Acoustic overstimulation; Basilar papilla; Chicks; Cochlear nerve; Hair cell regeneration; Single nerve units; Tuning curves

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ANIMAL TISSUE; ARTICLE; AUDITORY STIMULATION; CHICKEN; COCHLEA DUCT; COCHLEAR NERVE; CONTROLLED STUDY; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SPATIAL FREQUENCY DISCRIMINATION; TUNING CURVE;

EID: 3042693371     PISSN: 15253961     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10162-002-3034-6     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. ADLER HJ, SAUNDERS JC. Hair cell replacement in the avian inner ear following two exposures to intense sound. J. Neurocytol. 24:111-116, 1995.
2. CHEN L, SALVI RJ, SHERO M. Cochlear frequency-place map in adult chickens: Intracellular biocytin labeling. Hear. Res. 81:130-136, 1994.
3. CHEN L., SUN W, SALVI RJ. Electrically evoked otoacoustic emissions from the chicken ear. Hear. Res. 161:54-64, 2001.
4. CHEN L., TRAUTWEIN PG, SHERO M, SALVI RJ. Tuning, spontaneous activity, and tonotopic map in chicken cochlear ganglion neurons following sound-induced hair cell loss and regeneration. Hear. Res. 98:152-164, 1996b.
5. COHEN YE, SAUNDERS JC. The effects of sound overexposure on the spectral response patterns of nucleus magnocellularis in the neonatal chick. Exp. Brain Res. 95:202-212, 1995.
6. COTANCHE DA. Regeneration of the rectorial membrane in the chick cochlea following severe acoustic trauma. Hear. Res. 30:197-206, 1987.
7. COTANCHE DA. Structural recovery from sound and aminoglycoside damage in the avian cochlea. Audiol. Neurootol. 4:271-285, 1999.
8. DELGUTTE B. Physiological mechanisms of psychophysical masking: Observations from auditory-nerve fibers. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 87:791-809, 1990.
9. DIELER R, SHEHATA-DIELER WE, RICHTER CP, KLINKE R. Effects of endolymphatic and perilymphatic application of salicylate in the pigeon: II. Fine structure of auditory hair cells. Hear. Res. 74:85-98, 1994.
10. DUNCAN RK, ILE KE, DUBIN MG, SAUNDERS JC. Hair bundle profiles along the chick basilar papilla. J. Anat. 198:103-116, 2001.
11. EGUILUZ VM, OSPECK M, CHOE Y, HUDSPETH AJ, MAGANSCO MO. Essential nonlinearities in hearing. Phys. Rev. Lett. 84:5232-5235, 2000.
12. FUCHS PA, NAGAI T, EVANS MG. Electrical tuning in hair cells isolated from the chick cochlea. J. Neurosci. 8:2460-2467, 1988.
13. GEISLER CD, RHODE WS, KENNEDY DT. Responses of tonal stimuli of single auditory nerve fibers and their relationship to basilar membrane motion in the squirrel monkey. J. Neurophysiol. 37:1156-1172, 1974.
14. GLEICH O. Auditory afferents in starling: Correlation of function and morphology. Hear. Res. 37:255-267, 1989.
15. GLEICH O. Excitation patterns in the starling cochlea: A population study of primary auditory afferents. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 95:401-409, 1994.
16. GUMMER AW, SMOLDERS JW, KLINKE R. Basilar membrane motion in the pigeon measured with the Mōssbauer technique. Hear. Res. 29:63-92, 1987.
17. HE D, BEISEL KW, DING D-L, CHEN L, FRITZCH B, SALVI RJ. Are chick hair cells mobile? Abstr. Assoc. Res. Otolaryngol. 24:159-160, 2001.
18. HUDSPETH AJ, MARTIN P. Compressive nonlinearity in the hair-bundle's active response to mechanical stimulation. Abstr. Assoc. Res. Otolaryngol. 25:3, 2002.
19. IPAKCHI R, SAUNDERS JC. Changes in the cubic difference tone component of the otoacoustic emission in chicks exposed to intense sound. Abstr. Assoc. Res. Otolaryngol. 22:56, 1990.
20. KIM DO, MOLNAR CE. A population study of cochlear nerve fibers: Comparison of spatial distributions of average-rate and phase-locking measures of response to single tones. J. Neurophysiol. 42:16-30, 1979.
21. KIM DO, CHANG SO, SIRIANNI JG. A population study of auditory-nerve fibers in unanesthetized decerebrate cats: Response to pure tones. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 87:1648-1655, 1990.
22. KŌPPL C. Otoacoustic emissions as an indicator for active cochlear mechanics. A primitive property of vertebrate auditory organs. In: Manley GA, Kōppl C, Fastl H, Oeckinghouse H (eds) Advances in Hearing Research. World Scientific, Singapore, pp 207-218, 1995.
23. KŌPPL C, YATES GK. Coding of sound pressure level in the barn owl's auditory nerve. J. Neurosci. 19:9674-9686, 1999.
24. KŌPPL C, FORGE A, MANLEY GA, FROST S. No correlation for somatic motility in freeze-fractured hair-cell membranes of lizards and birds. Abstr. Assoc. Res. Otolaryngol. 25:165, 2002.
25. KURIAN R, KRUPP NL, SAUNDERS JC. Tip link loss and recovery on chick short hair cells following intense exposure to sound. Hear. Res. 181(1-2):40-50, 2003.
26. LIBERMAN MC. Single-neuron labeling in the cat auditory nerve. Science 216:1239-1241, 1982.
27. LIFSHITZ J, ALTMAN KW, SAUNDERS JC. Distribution of neural activity along the chick basilar papilla after intense sound exposure. Abstr. Assoc. Res. Otolaryngol. 20:120, 1997.
28. MANLEY GA. Cochlear mechanisms from a phylogenetic viewpoint. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 97:11736-11743, 2000.
29. MANLEY GA. Evidence for an active process and cochlear amplifier in non-mammals. J. Neurophysiol. 86:541-549, 2001.
30. MANLEY GA, GLEICH O, LEPPELSACK H-J, OECKINGHAUS H. Activity patterns of cochlear ganglion neurones in the starling. J. Comp. Physiol. A. 157:161-182, 1985.
31. MANLEY GA, KAISER A, BRIX J, GLEICH O. Activity patterns of primary auditory-nerve fibers in chickens: Development of fundamental properties. Hear. Res. 57:1-15, 1991.
32. MANLEY GA, KIRK A, KŌPPL C, YATES GK. In vivo evidence for a cochlear amplifier in the hair-cell bundle of lizards. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 97:2826-2831, 2001.
33. MARTIN P, MEHTA AD, HUDSPETH AJ. Negative hair bundle stiffness betrays a mechanism for mechanical amplification by the hair-cell. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 97:2026-2031, 2000.
34. MARTINEZ-DUNST C, MICHAELS RL, FUCHS PA. Release sites and calcium channels in hair cells of the chick's cochlea. J. Neurosci. 17:9133-9144, 1997.
35. MERCHAN-PEREZ A, LIBERMAN MC. Ultrastructural differences among afferent synapses on cochlear hair cells: Correlations with spontaneous discharge rate. J. Comp. Neurol. 371:208-221, 1996.
36. MŪLLER M, SMOLDERS JWT. Responses of auditory nerve fibers innervating regenerated hair cells after local applications of gentamycin at the round window of the cochlea in the pigeon. Hear. Res. 131:153-169, 1999.
37. NARAYAN SS, TEMCHIN AN, RUGGEREO MA. Frequency tuning of basilar membrane and auditory nerve fibers in the same cochleae. Science 282:1882-1884, 1998.
38. PFEIFFER RR, KIM DO. Cochlear nerve fiber responses: Distribution along the cochlear partition. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 58:867-869, 1975.
39. PLONTKE SK-R, LIFSHITZ J, SAUNDERS JC. Rate-intensity coding in the cochlear nerve of chicks exposed to intense sound. Brain Res. 842:262-274, 1999.
40. POJE CP, SEWELL DA, SAUNDERS JC. The effects of exposure to intense sound on the DC endocochlear potential in the chick. Hear. Res. 82:107-204, 1995.
41. RHODE WS, SMITH PH. Characteristics of tone-pip response patterns in relationship to spontaneous rate in cat auditory nerves fibers. Hear. Res. 18:159-168, 1985.
42. RICHTER CP. Basilar membrane vibrations measured in the chick papilla basilaris. Abstr. Assoc. Res. Otolaryngol. 24:157, 2001.
43. RICHTER CP, HEYNERT S, KLINKE R. Rate-intensity functions of pigeon auditory primary afferents. Hear. Res. 83:19-25, 1995.
44. ROBLES L, RUGGERO MA. Mechanics of the mammalian cochlea. Physiol. Rev. 81:1305-1352, 2001.
45. SAUNDERS JC, DOAN DE, POJE CP, FISHER KA. Cochlear nerve activity after intense sound exposure in neonatal chicks. J. Neurophysiol. 76:770-787, 1996.
46. SAUNDERS JC, VENTETUOLO CE, PLONTKE SK-R, WEISS BA. Coding of sound intensity in the chick cochlear nerve. J. Neurophysiol. 88:2887-2898, 2002.
47. SCHERMULY L, KLINKE R. Change of characteristic frequency of pigeon primary auditory afferents with temperature. J. Comp. Physiol. 156:209-211, 1985.
48. SHOFNER WP, SACHS MB. Representation of a low-frequency tone in the discharge rate of populations of auditory nerve fibers. Hear. Res. 21:91-95, 1986.
49. SMOLDERS JW. Functional recovery in the avian ear after hair cell regeneration. Audiol. Neurootol. 4:286-302, 1999.
50. SMOLDERS JW, KLINKE R. Synchronized responses of primary auditory fiber-population in Caiman crocodilus (L.) to single tones and clicks. Hear. Res. 24:89-103, 1986.
51. SMOLDERS JWT, DING-PFENNINGDORF D, KLINKE R. A functional map of the pigeon basilar papilla: Correlation of the properties of single auditory nerve fibers and their peripheral origin. Hear. Res. 92:151-169, 1995.
52. TILNEY LG, TILNEY MS, DEROSIER DJ. The distribution of hair cell bundle lengths and orientations suggests an unexplained pattern of hair cell stimulation in the chick cochlea. Hear. Res. 24:141-151, 1987.
53. TRAUTWEIN P, SALVI RJ, MILLER K, SHERO M, HASHINO E. Incomplete recovery of chicken distortion product otoacoustic emissions following acoustic overstimulation. Audiol. Neurootol. 1:86-103, 1996.
54. VON BÉKÉSY G. Experiments in Hearing McGraw-Hill, New York, 1960.
55. YATES GK, MANLEY GA, KÖPPL C. Rate-intensity functions in the emu auditory nerve. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 107:2143-2154, 2000.