Effect of contralateral pure tone stimulation on distortion emissions suggests a frequency-specific functioning of the efferent cochlear control

Journal of Neurophysiology

Volumn 107, Issue 7, 2012, Pages 1962-1969

  Althen, H ^a   Wittekindt, A ^a   Gaese, B ^a   Kossl M ^a   Abel, C ^b  

^a Institute of Cell Biology and Neuroscience   (Germany)

^b GOETHE UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

Author keywords

Cochlear amplification; Medial olivocochlear system; Otoacoustic emissions

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ARTICLE; AUDITORY STIMULATION; AUDITORY SYSTEM; COCHLEA; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISTORTION PRODUCT OTOACOUSTIC EMISSION; FEMALE; GERBIL; HEARING; MALE; NONHUMAN; OLIVOCOCHLEAR CONTROL; OLIVOCOCHLEAR SYSTEM; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PURE TONE AUDIOMETRY; WHITE NOISE;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; ANIMALS; AUDITORY PERCEPTION; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; COCHLEA; FEMALE; FUNCTIONAL LATERALITY; GERBILLINAE; MALE; NOISE; OTOACOUSTIC EMISSIONS, SPONTANEOUS; PSYCHOACOUSTICS;

EID: 84859528039     PISSN: 00223077     EISSN: 15221598     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1152/jn.00418.2011     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Abel C, Wittekindt A, Kössl M. Contra lateral acoustic stimulation modulates low-frequency biasing of DPOAE: efferent influence on cochlear amplifier operating state? J Neurophysiol 101: 2362-2371, 2009.
2. Ashmore J. Cochlear outer hair cell motility. Physiol Rev 88: 173-210, 2008.
3. Bian L. Cochlear compression: effects of low-frequency biasing on quadratic distortion product otoacoustic emission. J Acoust Soc Am 116: 3559-3571, 2004.
4. Brown AM. Acoustic distortion from rodent ears: a comparison of responses from rats, guinea pigs and gerbils. Hear Res 31: 25-37, 1987.
5. Brown MC. Morphology and response properties of single olivocochlear fibers in the guinea pig. Hear Res 40: 93-109, 1989.
6. Chang KW, Norton SJ. Efferently mediated changes in the quadratic distortion product (f2-f1). J Acoust Soc Am: 1719-1733, 1997.
7. Chéry-Croze S, Moulin A, Collet L. Effect of contra lateral sound stimulation on the distortion product 2f1-f2 in humans: evidence of a frequency specificity. Hear Res 68: 53-58, 1993.
8. Cooper NP, Guinan JJ. Separate mechanical processes underlie fast and slow effects of medial olivocochlear efferent activity. J Physiol 548: 307-312, 2003.
9. Davis H. An active process in cochlear mechanics. Hear Res 9: 79-90, 1983.
10. Eckrich T, Foeller E, Stuermer IW, Gaese BH, Kössl M. Strain-dependence of age-related cochlear hearing loss in wild and domesticated Mongolian gerbils. Hear Res 235: 72-79, 2008.
11. Frank G, Kössl M. Acoustical and electrical biasing of the cochlea partition. Effects on the acoustic two tone distortions f2-f1 and 2f1-f2. Hear Res 113: 57-68, 1997.
12. Frank G, Kössl M. The acoustic two-tone distortions 2f1-f2 and f2-f1 and their possible relation to changes in the operating point of the cochlear amplifier. Hear Res 98: 104-115, 1996.
13. Giard MH, Collet L, Bouchet P, Pernier J. Auditory selective attention in the human cochlea. Brain Res 633: 353-356, 1994.
14. Giard MH, Fort A, Mouchetant-Rostaing Y, Pernier J. Neuro physiological mechanisms of auditory selective attention in humans. Front Biosci 5: D84-D94, 2000.
15. Gifford ML, Guinan JJ. Effects of crossed-olivocochlear-bundle stimulation on cat auditory nerve fiber responses to tones. J Acoust Soc Am 74: 115-123, 1983.
16. Green TJ, McKeown JD. Capture of attention in selective frequency listening. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 27: 1197-1210, 2001.
17. Guinan JJ, Stankovic KM. Medial efferent inhibition produces the largest equivalent attenuations at moderate to high sound levels in cat auditorynerve fibers. J Acoust Soc Am 100: 1680-1690, 1996.
18. Guinan JJ, Warr WB, Norris BE. Topographic organization of the olivocochlear projections from the lateral and medial zones of the superior olivary complex. J Comp Neurol 226: 21-27, 1984.
19. Guinan JJ. Olivocochlear efferents: anatomy, physiology, function, and the measurement of efferent effects in humans. Hear Res 27: 589-607, 2006.
20. Harvey D, Steel KP. The development and interpretation of the summating potential response. Hear Res 61: 137-146, 1992.
21. Hirsh IJ, Ward WD. Recovery of the auditory threshold after strong acoustic stimulation. J Acoust Soc Am 24: 131-141, 1952.
22. Kemp DT. Otoacoustic emissions, travelling waves and cochlear mechanisms. Hear Res 22: 95-104, 1986.
23. Kevanishvili Z, Hofmann G, Burdzgla I, Pietsch M, Gamgebeli Z, Yarin Y, Tushishvili M, Zahnert T. Behavior of evoked otoacoustic emission under low-frequency tone exposure: objective study of the bounce phenomenon in humans. Hear Res 222: 62-69, 2006.
24. Kirk DL, Johnstone BM. Modulation of f2-f1: evidence for a GABA-ergic efferent system in apical cochlea of the guinea pig. Hear Res 67: 20-34, 1993.
25. Kirk DL, Moleirinho A, Patuzzi RB. Microphonic and DPOAE measurements suggest a micromechanical mechanism for the 'bounce' phenomenon following low-frequency tones. Hear Res 112: 69-86, 1997.
26. Kirk DL, Patuzzi RB. Transient changes in cochlear potentials and DPOAEs after low-frequency tones: the 'two-minute bounce' revisited. Hear Res 112: 49-68, 1997.
27. Kössl M, Coro F. L1, L2 maps of distortion-product otoacoustic emissions from a moth ear with only two auditory receptor neurons. J Acoust Soc Am 120: 3822-3831, 2006.
28. Kujawa SG, Glattke TJ, Fallon M, Bobbin RP. Contralateral sound suppresses distortion product otoacoustic emissions through cholinergic mechanisms. Hear Res 68: 97-106, 1993.
29. Kuyper P. The cocktail party effect. Audiology 11: 277-282, 1972.
30. Liberman MC, Brown MC. Physiology and anatomy of single olivocochlear neurons in the cat. Hear Res 24: 17-36, 1986.
31. Lilaonitkul W, Guinan JJ. Reflex control of the human inner ear: a half octave offset in medial efferent feedback that is consistent with an efferent role in the control of masking. J Neurophysiol 101: 1394-1406, 2009.
32. Lukas JH. Human auditory attention: the olivocochlear bundle may function as a peripheral filter. Psychophysiology 17: 444-452, 1980.
33. Lukashkin AN, Russell IJ. Modifications of a single saturating non-linearity account for post-onset changes in 2f1-f2 distortion product otoacoustic emission. J Acoust Soc Am 112: 1561-1568, 2002.
34. Lukashkin AN, Russell IJ. Dependence of the DPOAE amplitude pattern on acoustical biasing of the cochlear partition. Hear Res 203: 45-53, 2005.
35. Mills DM, Rubel EW. Variation of distortion product otoacoustic emissions with furosemide injection. Hear Res 77: 183-199, 1994.
36. Mills DM. Interpretation of standard distortion product oto acoustic emission measurements in light of the complete parametric response. J Acoust Soc Am 112: 1545-1560, 2002.
37. Mondor TA, Bregman AS. Allocating attention to frequency regions. PerceptPsychophys 56: 268-276, 1994.
38. Mountain DC. Changes in endo lymphatic potential and crossed olivocochlear bundle stimulation alter cochlear mechanics. Science 210: 71-72, 1980.
39. Murugasu E, Russell IJ. The effect of efferent stimulation on basilar membrane displacement in the basal turn of the guinea pig cochlea. J Neurosci 16: 325-332, 1996.
40. Pilz PK, Ostwald J, Kreiter A, Schnitzler HU. Effect of the middle ear reflex on sound transmission to the inner ear of rat. Hear Res 105: 171-182, 1997.
41. Puel JL, Bonfils P, Pujol R. Selective attention modifies the active micromechanical properties of the cochlea. Brain Res 447: 380-383, 1988.
42. Robles L, Ruggero MA. Mechanics of the mammalian cochlea. Physiol Rev 81: 1305-1352, 2001.
43. Russell IJ, Kössl M. Modulation of hair cell voltage responses to tones by low-frequency biasing of the basilar membrane in the guinea pig cochlea. J Neurosci 12: 1587-1601, 1992.
44. Russell IJ, Lukashkin AN. Cellular and molecular mechanisms in the efferent control of cochlear nonlinearities. In: Active Processes and Otoacoustic Emissions in Hearing, edited by Manley GA, Fay RR, Popper AN. New York: Springer, 2007, p. 343-379.
45. Russell IJ, Sellick PM. Intracellular studies of hair cells in the mammalian cochlea. J Physiol 284: 261-290, 1978.
46. Siegel JH, Kim DO. Efferent neural control of cochlear mechanics? Olivocochlear bundle stimulation affects cochlear biomechanical nonlinearity. Hear Res 6: 171-182, 1982.
47. Sirjani DB, Salt AN, Gill RM, Hale SA. The influence of transducer operating point on distortion generation in the cochlea. J Acoust Soc Am 115: 1219-1229, 2004.
48. Veuillet E, Collet L, Duclaux R. Effect of contra lateral acoustic stimulation on active cochlear micromechanical properties in human subjects: dependence on stimulus variables. J Neurophysiol 65: 724-735, 1991.
49. Ward LM, Mori S. Attention cueing aids auditory intensity resolution. J Acoust Soc Am 100: 1722-1727, 1996.
50. Warr WB. Organization of olivicochlear efferent systems in mammals. In: The Mammalian Auditory Pathway. Neuroanatomy, edited by Webster DB, Popper AN, Fay RR. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1992, p. 410-448.
51. Wittekindt A, Gaese BH, Kössl M. Influence of contralateral acoustic stimulation on the quadratic distortion product f2-f1 in humans. Hear Res 247: 27-33, 2009.