A critique of the critical cochlea: Hopf - A bifurcation - Is better than none

Journal of Neurophysiology

Volumn 104, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 1219-1229

  Hudspeth, A J ^a   Jülicher, Frank ^b   Martin, Pascal ^c  

^a ROCKEFELLER UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b MAX PLANCK INSTITUT FÜR PHYSIK KOMPLEXER SYSTEME   (Germany)

^c CNRS   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACOUSTIC NERVE FIBER; AUDITORY RESPONSE; COCHLEA; HEARING; HOPF BIFURCATION; MATHEMATICS; OSCILLATION; OTOACOUSTIC EMISSION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; ANIMALS; COCHLEA; EAR, INNER; HAIR CELLS, AUDITORY, INNER; HEARING; HUMANS;

EID: 77957190167     PISSN: 00223077     EISSN: 15221598     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1152/jn.00437.2010     Document Type: Review

References (96)

1. Ashmore J. Cochlear outer hair cell motility. Physiol Rev 88: 173-210, 2008.
2. Ashmore JF. A fast motile response in guinea-pig outer hair cells: the cellular basis of the cochlear amplifier. J Physiol 388: 323-347, 1987.
3. Barral J, Dierkes K, Lindner B, Jülicher F, Martin P. Coupling a sensory hair-cell bundle to cyber clones enhances nonlinear amplification. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 107: 8079-8084, 2010.
4. Bialek W, Wit HP. Quantum limits to oscillator stability: theory and experiments on acoustic emissions from the human ear. Phys Lett 104A: 173-178, 1984.
5. Brownell WE, Bader CR, Bertrand D, de Ribaupierre Y. Evoked mechanical responses of isolated cochlear outer hair cells. Science 227: 194-196, 1985. (Pubitemid 15154227)
6. Camalet S, Duke T, Jülicher F, Prost J. Auditory sensitivity provided by self-tuned critical oscillations of hair cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 97: 3183-3188, 2000. (Pubitemid 30183276)
7. Campbell M, Greated C. The Musician's Guide to Acoustics. Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press, 2002, p. 64-67.
8. 2+ current-driven nonlinear amplification by the mammalian cochlea in vitro. Nat Neurosci 8: 149-155, 2005a.
9. Chan DK, Hudspeth AJ. Mechanical responses of the organ of Corti to acoustic and electrical stimulation in vitro. Biophys J 89: 4382-4395, 2005b.
10. Cheatham MA, Huynh KH, Gao J, Zuo J, Dallos P. Cochlear function in Prestin knockout mice. J Physiol 560: 821-830, 2004. (Pubitemid 39530120)
11. 2+ to mechanoelectrical transduction channels. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 95: 15321-15326, 1998.
12. Crawford AC, Fettiplace R. The mechanical properties of ciliary bundles of turtle cochlear hair cells. J Physiol 364: 359-379, 1985. (Pubitemid 15067219)
13. Dallos P, Wu X, Cheatham MA, Gao J, Zheng J, Anderson CT, Jia S, Wang X, Cheng HY, Sengupta S, He DZ, Zuo J. Prestin-based outer hair cell motility is necessary for mammalian cochlear amplification. Neuron 58: 333-339, 2008. (Pubitemid 351615184)
14. Dallos P, Zheng J, Cheatham MA. Prestin and the cochlear amplifier. J Physiol 576: 37-42, 2006.
15. de Boer E. No sharpening? A challenge for cochlear mechanics. J Acoust Soc Am 73: 567-573, 1983.
16. de Boer E. The "inverse problem" solved for a three-dimensional model of the cochlea. II. Application to experimental data sets. J Acoust Soc Am 98: 904-910, 1995.
17. de La Rochefoucauld O, Olson ES. The role of organ of Corti mass in passive cochlear tuning. Biophys J 93: 3434-3450, 2007.
18. de Vries H. Brownian movement and hearing. Physica 14: 48-60, 1948.
19. Dierkes K, Lindner B, Jülicher F. Enhancement of sensitivity gain and frequency tuning by coupling of active hair bundles. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105: 18669-18674, 2008.
20. Duke T, Jülicher F. Active traveling wave in the cochlea. Phys Rev Lett 90: 158101, 2003.
21. Duke TAJ, Jülicher F. Critical oscillators as active elements in hearing. In: Active Processes and Otoacoustic Emissions in Hearing, edited by Manley GA, Fay RR, Popper AN. New York: Springer Science and Business Media, 2008, p. 63-92.
22. Emadi G, Richter C-P, Dallos P. Stiffness of the gerbil basilar membrane: radial and longitudinal variations. J Neurophysiol 91: 474-488, 2004. (Pubitemid 38084388)
23. Eguíluz VM, Ospeck M, Choe Y, Hudspeth AJ, Magnasco MO. Essential nonlinearities in hearing. Phys Rev Lett 84: 5232-5235, 2000.
24. Fettiplace R, Fuchs PA. Mechanisms of hair cell tuning. Annu Rev Physiol 61: 809-834, 1999.
25. Fettiplace R, Hackney CM. The sensory and motor roles of auditory hair cells. Nat Rev Neurosci 7: 19-29, 2006. (Pubitemid 41828928)
26. Franchini LF, Elgoyhen AB. Adaptive evolution in mammalian proteins involved in cochlear outer hair cell electromotility. Mol Phylogenet Evol 41: 622-635, 2006.
27. Frank G, Hemmert W, Gummer AW. Limiting dynamics of high-frequency electromechanical transduction of outer hair cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 96: 4420-4425, 1999. (Pubitemid 29190351)
28. Gale JE, Ashmore JF. An intrinsic frequency limit to the cochlear amplifier. Nature 389: 63-66, 1997.
29. Gao J, Wang X, Wu X, Aguinaga S, Huynh K, Jia S, Matsuda K, Patel M, Zheng J, Cheatham M, He DZ, Dallos P, Zuo J. Presin-based outer hair cell electromotility in knockin mice does not appear to adjust the operating point of a cilia-based amplifier. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104: 12542-12547, 2007. (Pubitemid 47206174)
30. Gelfand M, Piro O, Magnasco MO, Hudspeth AJ. Interactions between hair cells shape spontaneous otoacoustic emissions in a model of the Tokay gecko's cochlea. PLoS ONE 5: e11116, 2010.
31. Gold T. Hearing. II. The physical basis of the action of the cochlea. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 135: 492-498, 1948.
32. Goldstein JL. Auditory nonlinearity. J Acoust Soc Am 41: 676-689, 1967.
33. 2. J Acoust Soc Am 51: 1863-1871, 1972.
34. Howard J, Hudspeth AJ. Mechanical relaxation of the hair bundle mediates adaptation in mechanoelectrical transduction by the bullfrog's saccular hair cell. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 84: 3064-3068, 1987. (Pubitemid 17064780)
35. Howard J, Hudspeth AJ. Compliance of the hair bundle associated with gating of mechanoelectrical transduction channels in the bullfrog's saccular hair cell. Neuron 1: 189-199, 1988.
36. Hudspeth AJ. How the ear's works work. Nature 341: 397-404, 1989.
37. Hudspeth AJ. Making an effort to listen: mechanical amplification in the ear. Neuron 59: 530-545, 2008.
38. Hudspeth AJ, Choe Y, Mehta AD, Martin P. Putting ion channels to work: mechanoelectrical transduction, adaptation, and amplification by hair cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 97: 11765-11772, 2000.
39. Jaramillo F, Markin VS, Hudspeth AJ. Auditory illusions and the single hair cell. Nature 364: 527-529, 1993. (Pubitemid 23273096)
40. Johnson DH. The relationship between spike rate and synchrony in responses to auditory-nerve fibers to single tones. J Acoust Soc Am 68: 1115-1122, 1980.
41. Jülicher F, Andor D, Duke T. Physical basis of two-tone interference in hearing. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98: 9080-9085, 2001. (Pubitemid 32743872)
42. Jülicher F, Dierkes K, Lindner B, Prost J, Martin P. Spontaneous movements and linear response of a noisy oscillator. Eur Phys J E Soft Matter 29: 449-460, 2009.
43. Kennedy HJ, Crawford AC, Fettiplace R. Force generation by mammalian hair bundles supports a role in cochlear amplification. Nature 435: 880-883, 2005. (Pubitemid 40314898)
44. Kennedy HJ, Evans MG, Crawford AC, Fettiplace R. Depolarization of cochlear outer hair cells evokes active hair bundle motion by two mechanisms. J Neurosci 26: 2757-2766, 2006. (Pubitemid 43357859)
45. Kern A, Stoop R. Essential role of couplings between hearing nonlinearities. Phys Rev Lett 91: 128101, 2003.
46. Kim DO, Neely ST, Molnar CE, Mathhews JW. An active cochlear model with negative damping in the partition: comparison with Rhode's ante- and post-mortem observations. In: Psychophysical, Physiological and Behavioral Studies in Hearing, edited by van den Brink G, Bilsen FA. Delft: The Netherlands: Delft Univ. Press, 1980, p. 7-14.
47. Klinke R, Muller M, Richter CP, Smolders J. Preferred intervals in birds and mammals: a filter response to noise? Hear Res 74: 238-246, 1994. (Pubitemid 24131288)
48. Knudsen VO. The sensibility of the ear to small differences of intensity and frequency. Phys Rev 21: 84-102, 1923.
49. Köppl C. Phase locking to high frequencies in the auditory nerve and cochlear nucleus magnocellularis of the barn owl, Tyto alba. J Neurosci 17: 3312-3321, 1997. (Pubitemid 27175842)
50. Liberman MC. Auditory-nerve response from cats raised in a low-noise chamber. J Acoust Soc Am 63: 442-455, 1978.
51. Liberman MC, Gao J, He DZ, Wu X, Jia S, Zuo J. Prestin is required for electromotility of the outer hair cell and for the cochlear amplifier. Nature 419: 300-304, 2002.
52. Liberman MC, Zuo J, Guinan JJ Jr. Otoacoustic emissions without somatic motility: can stereocilia mechanics drive the mammalian cochlea? J Acoust Soc Am 116: 1649-1655, 2004. (Pubitemid 39202577)
53. Lighthill J. Biomechanics of hearing sensitivity. J Vib Acoust 113: 1-13, 1991.
54. Lindner B, Dierkes K, Jülicher F. Local exponents of nonlinear compression in periodically driven noisy oscillators. Phys Rev Lett 103: 250601, 2009.
55. Magnasco MO. A wave traveling over a Hopf instability shapes the cochlear tuning curve. Phys Rev Lett 90: 058101, 2003.
56. Mammano F, Nobili R. Biophysics of the cochlea: linear approximation. J Acoust Soc Am 93: 3320-3332, 1993.
57. Manley GA. Preferred intervals in the spontaneous activity of primary auditory neurons. Naturwissenschaften 66: 582-584, 1979.
58. Manley GA. Cochlear mechanisms from a phylogenetic viewpoint. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 97: 11736-11743, 2000.
59. Manley GA. Evidence for an active process and a cochlear amplifier in nonmammals. J Neurophysiol 86: 541-549, 2001. (Pubitemid 32738546)
60. Manley GA, Gallo L. Otoacoustic emissions, hair cells, and myosin motors. J Acoust Soc Am 102: 1049-1055, 1997.
61. Manley GA, Sienknecht U, Köppl C. Calcium modulates the frequency and amplitude of spontaneous otoacoustic emissions in the bobtail skink. J Neurophysiol 92: 2685-2693, 2004. (Pubitemid 40340481)
62. Markin VS, Hudspeth AJ. Modeling the active process of the cochlea: phase relations, amplification, and spontaneous oscillation. Biophys J 69: 138-147, 1995.
63. Martin P. Active hair-bundle motility of the hair cells of vestibular and auditory organs. In: Active Processes and Otoacoustic Emissions in Hearing, edited by Manley GA, Fay RR, Popper AN. New York: Springer Science and Business Media, 2008, p. 93-143.
64. Martin P, Bozovic D, Choe Y, Hudspeth AJ. Spontaneous oscillation by hair bundles of the bullfrog's sacculus. J Neurosci 23: 4533-4548, 2003. (Pubitemid 36706184)
65. Martin P, Hudspeth AJ. Active hair-bundle movements can amplify a hair cell's response to oscillatory mechanical stimuli. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 96: 14306-14311, 1999. (Pubitemid 30000646)
66. Martin P, Hudspeth AJ. Compressive nonlinearity in the hair bundle's active response to mechanical stimulation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98: 14386-14391, 2001. (Pubitemid 33121401)
67. Martin P, Hudspeth AJ, Jülicher F. Comparison of a hair bundle's spontaneous oscillations with its response to mechanical stimulation reveals the underlying active process. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98: 14380-14385, 2001. (Pubitemid 33121400)
68. Martin P, Mehta AD, Hudspeth AJ. Negative stiffness betrays a mechanism for mechanical amplification by the hair cell. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 97: 12026-12031, 2000.
69. Mellado Lagarde MM, Drexl M, Lukashkina VA, Lukashkin AN, Russell IJ. Outer hair cell somatic, not hair bundle, motility is the basis of the cochlear amplifier. Nat Neurosci 11: 746-748, 2008. (Pubitemid 351896671)
70. Nadrowski B, Martin P, Jülicher F. Active hair-bundle motility harnesses noise to operate near an optimum of mechanosensitivity. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 101: 12195-12200, 2004. (Pubitemid 39145419)
71. Naidu RC, Mountain DC. Measurements of the stiffness map challenge a basic tenet of cochlear theories. Hear Res 124: 124-131, 1998.
72. Nobili R, Mammano F. Biophysics of the cochlea. II: Stationary nonlinear phenomenology. J Acoust Soc Am 99: 2244-2255, 1996.
73. Nobili R, Mammano F, Ashmore J. How well do we understand the cochlea? Trends Neurosci 21: 159-167, 1998. (Pubitemid 28157185)
74. Probst R. Otoacoustic emissions: an overview. In: New Aspects of Cochlear Mechanics and Inner Ear Pathophysiology, edited by Pfaltz CR. Basel: Karger, 1990, p. 1-91.
75. Reichenbach T, Hudspeth AJ. A ratchet mechanism for amplification in low-frequency mammalian hearing. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 107: 4973-4978, 2010.
76. Robles L, Ruggero MA. Mechanics of the mammalian cochlea. Physiol Rev 81: 1305-1352, 2001.
77. Robles L, Ruggero MA, Rich NC. Two-tone distortion on the basilar membrane of the chinchilla cochlea. J Neurophysiol 77: 2385-2399, 1997.
78. Ruggero MA, Kramek B, Rich NC. Spontaneous otoacoustic emissions in a dog. Hear Res 13: 293-296, 1984.
79. Ruggero MA, Rich NC, Recio A, Narayan SS, Robles L. Basilar-membrane responses to tones at the base of the chinchilla cochlea. J Acoust Soc Am 101: 2151-2163, 1997. (Pubitemid 27163980)
80. Shera CA. Mammalian spontaneous otoacoustic emissions are amplitude-stabilized cochlear standing waves. J Acoust Soc Am 114: 244-262, 2003.
81. Shera CA. Laser amplification with a twist: traveling-wave propagation and gain functions from throughout the cochlea. J Acoust Soc Am 122: 2738-2758, 2007.
82. Shera CA, Tubis A, Talmadge CL. Do forward- and backward-traveling waves occur within the cochlea? Countering the critique of Nobili et al. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 5: 349-359, 2004.
83. Sivian LJ, White SD. On minimum audible sound fields. J Acoust Soc Am 4: 288-321, 1933.
84. Spiegel MF, Watson CS. Performance on frequency-discrimination tasks by musicians and nonmusicians. J Acoust Soc Am 76: 1690-1695, 1984.
85. Strimbu CE, Ramunno-Johnson D, Fredrickson L, Arisaka K, Bozovic D. Correlated movement of hair bundles coupled to the otolithic membrane in the bullfrog sacculus. Hear Res 256: 58-63, 2009.
86. Strogatz SH. Nonlinear Dynamics and Chaos. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1994.
87. Tartini G. Trattato di Musica secondo la vera scienza dell'armonia. Padua, Italy: Univ. of Padua, 1754.
88. Tartini G. de'Principi dell'Armonia Musicale contenuta nel Diatonico Genere. Padua, Italy: Univ. of Padua, 1767.
89. Temchin AN, Rich NC, Ruggero MA. Threshold tuning curves of chinchilla auditory-nerve fibers. I. Dependence on characteristic frequency and relation to the magnitudes of cochlear vibrations. J Neurophysiol 100: 2889-2898, 2008.
90. Tinevez J-Y, Jülicher F, Martin P. Unifying the various incarnations of active hair-bundle motility by the vertebrate hair cell. Biophys J 93: 4053-4067, 2007. (Pubitemid 350223820)
91. Vilfan A, Duke T. Frequency clustering in spontaneous otoacoustic emissions from a lizard's ear. Biophys J 95: 4622-4630, 2008.
92. von Békésy G. Experiments in Hearing. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1960.
93. Zhang T, Penner MJ. A new method for the automated detection of spontaneous otoacoustic emissions embedded in noisy data. Hear Res 117: 107-113, 1998. (Pubitemid 28157434)
94. Zheng J, Shen W, He DZ, Long KB, Madison LD, Dallos P. Prestin is the motor protein of cochlear hair cells. Nature 405: 149-155, 2000. (Pubitemid 30313525)
95. Zurek PM. Spontaneous narrowband acoustic signals emitted by human ears. J Acoust Soc Am 69: 514-523, 1981. (Pubitemid 11129473)
96. Zweig G. Finding the impedance of the organ of Corti. J Acoust Soc Am 89: 1229-1254, 1991.