Erratum to: Auditory distortions: Origins and functions. (Physiol Rev, (2013), 93, (1563-1619), 10.1152/physrev.00029.2012);Auditory distortions: Origins and functions

Physiological Reviews

Volumn 93, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 1563-1619

  Avan, Paul ^{a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h}   Büki, Béla ^{a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h}   Petit, Christine ^{a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h}  

^a UNIVERSITÉ CLERMONT AUVERGNE   (France)

^b INSERM   (France)

^c CENTRE JEAN PERRIN   (France)

^d Department of Neurology   (Austria)

^e INSTITUT PASTEUR   (France)

^f Centre de Recherche Interdisciplinaire en Biologie   (France)

^g Institut Pasteur   (France)

^h SORBONNE UNIVERSITÉ   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; AUDITORY CANAL; AUDITORY STIMULATION; AUDITORY SYSTEM; COCHLEA; DYNAMICS; HEARING; HEARING IMPAIRMENT; HUMAN; NON INVASIVE PROCEDURE; NONHUMAN; NONLINEAR SYSTEM; OTOACOUSTIC EMISSION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SENSORY NERVE CELL; VIBRATION;

EID: 84885699626     PISSN: 00319333     EISSN: 15221210     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1152/physrev.z9j-2683-corr.2013     Document Type: Erratum

References (317)

1. Abdala C, Dhar S. Distortion product otoacoustic emission phase and component analysis in human newborns. J Acoust Soc Am 127: 316-325, 2010.
2. Abel C, Kossl M. Sensitive response to low-frequency cochlear distortion products in the auditory midbrain. J Neurophysiol 101: 1560-1574, 2009.
3. Abel C, Wittekindt A, Kossl M. Contralateral acoustic stimulation modulates lowfrequency biasing of DPOAE: efferent influence on cochlear amplifier operating state? J Neurophysiol 101: 2362-2371, 2009.
4. Aerts JR, Dirckx JJ. Nonlinearity in eardrum vibration as a function of frequency and sound pressure. Hear Res 263: 26-32, 2010.
5. Allen JB, Fahey PF. A second cochlear-frequency map that correlates distortion product and neural tuning measurements. J Acoust Soc Am 94: 809-816, 1993.
6. Allen JB, Fahey PF. Using acoustic distortion products to measure the cochlear amplifier gain on the basilar membrane. J Acoust Soc Am 92: 178-188, 1992.
7. Anderson SD, Kemp DT. The evoked cochlear mechanical response in laboratory primates. A preliminary report. Arch Oto-rhino-laryngol 224: 47-54, 1979.
8. Ashmore J. Cochlear outer hair cell motility. Physiol Rev 88: 173-210, 2008.
9. 2 produced by high-versus low-level stimuli. J Acoust Soc Am 113: 430-441, 2003.
10. Avan P, Bonfils P, Loth D, Elbez M, Erminy M. Transient-evoked otoacoustic emissions and high-frequency acoustic trauma in the guinea pig. J Acoust Soc Am 97: 3012-3020, 1995.
11. Avan P, Giraudet F, Chauveau B, Gilain L, Mom T. Unstable distortion-product otoacoustic emission phase in Meniere's disease. Hear Res 277: 88-95, 2011.
12. Avan P, Loth D, Menguy C, Teyssou M. Evoked otoacoustic emissions in guinea pig: basic characteristics. Hear Res 44: 151-160, 1990.
13. Avan P, Magnan P, Smurzynski J, Probst R, Dancer A. Direct evidence of cubic difference tone propagation by intracochlear acoustic pressure measurements in the guinea-pig. Eur J Neurosci 10: 1764-1770, 1998.
14. Barral J, Martin P. Phantom tones and suppressive masking by active nonlinear oscillation of the hair-cell bundle. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 109: E1344-1351, 2012.
15. Békésy G von. Experiments in Hearing, translated and edited by E. G. Wever. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1960.
16. Bergevin C, Freeman DM, Saunders JC, Shera CA. Otoacoustic emissions in humans, birds, lizards, and frogs: evidence for multiple generation mechanisms. J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol 194: 665-683, 2008.
17. Bergevin C, Shera CA. Coherent reflection without traveling waves: on the origin of long-latency otoacoustic emissions in lizards. J Acoust Soc Am 127: 2398-2409, 2010.
18. Bergevin C, Velenovsky DS, Bonine KE. Tectorial membrane morphological variation: effects upon stimulus frequency otoacoustic emissions. Biophys J 99: 1064-1072, 2010.
19. Beurg M, Fettiplace R, Nam JH, Ricci AJ. Localization of inner hair cell mechanotransducer channels using high-speed calcium imaging. Nat Neurosci 12: 553-558, 2009.
20. Bialek W, Wit HP. Quantum limits to oscillator stability: theory and experiments on an acoustic emission from the human ear. Phys Lett A 104: 173-178, 1984.
21. Bian L. Effects of low-frequency biasing on spontaneous otoacoustic emissions: frequency modulation. J Acoust Soc Am 124: 3009-3021, 2008.
22. Bian L, Chertoff ME, Miller E. Deriving a cochlear transducer function from lowfrequency modulation of distortion product otoacoustic emissions. J Acoust Soc Am 112: 198-210, 2002.
23. Bonfils P, Uziel A, Pujol R. Screening for auditory dysfunction in infants by evoked oto-acoustic emissions. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 114: 887-890, 1988.
24. Boutet de Monvel J, Petit C. Wrapping up stereocilia rootlets. Cell 141: 748-750, 2010.
25. Braun M. Frequency spacing of multiple spontaneous otoacoustic emissions shows relation to critical bands: a large-scale cumulative study. Hear Res 114: 197-203, 1997.
26. Brown AM. Continuous low level sound alters cochlear mechanics: an efferent effect? Hear Res 34: 27-38, 1988.
27. Brown AM, Gaskill SA, Williams DM. Mechanical filtering of sound in the inner ear. Proc Biol Sci 250: 29-34, 1992.
28. 2 stimulated acoustic emissions in gerbil and man. Hear Res 13: 29-37, 1984.
29. Brown AM, McDowell B, Forge A. Acoustic distortion products can be used to monitor the effects of chronic gentamicin treatment. Hear Res 42: 143-156, 1989.
30. Brown DJ, Hartsock JJ, Gill RM, Fitzgerald HE, Salt AN. Estimating the operating point of the cochlear transducer using low-frequency biased distortion products. J Acoust Soc Am 125: 2129-2145, 2009.
31. Brownell WE, Bader CR, Bertrand D, de Ribaupierre Y. Evoked mechanical responses of isolated cochlear outer hair cells. Science 227: 194-196, 1985.
32. Brundin L, Flock A, Khanna SM, Ulfendahl M. Frequency-specific position shift in the guinea pig organ of Corti. Neurosci Lett 128: 77-80, 1991.
33. Büki B, Avan P, Lemaire JJ, Dordain M, Chazal J, Ribari O. Otoacoustic emissions: a new tool for monitoring intracranial pressure changes through stapes displacements. Hear Res 94: 125-139, 1996.
34. Caberlotto E, Michel V, Foucher I, Bahloul A, Goodyear RJ, Pepermans E, Michalski N, Perfettini I, Alegria-Prevot O, Chardenoux S, Do Cruzeiro M, Hardelin JP, Richardson GP, Avan P, Weil D, Petit C. Usher type 1G protein sans is a critical component of the tip-link complex, a structure controlling actin polymerization in stereocilia. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 108: 5825-5830, 2011.
35. 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.
36. 2+ current-driven nonlinear amplification by the mammalian cochlea in vitro. Nat Neurosci 8: 149-155, 2005.
37. Chan DK, Hudspeth AJ. Mechanical responses of the organ of corti to acoustic and electrical stimulation in vitro. Biophys J 89: 4382-4395, 2005.
38. Chang KW, Norton SJ. The effects of continuous versus interrupted noise exposures on distortion product otoacoustic emissions in guinea pigs. Hear Res 96: 1-12, 1996.
39. Cheatham MA, Dallos P. Two-tone interactions in the cochlear microphonic. Hear Res 8: 29-48, 1982.
40. Cherry EC. Some experiments on the recognition of speech, with one and two ears. J Acoust Soc Am 25: 975-979, 1953.
41. Collet L, Kemp DT, Veuillet E, Duclaux R, Moulin A, Morgon A. Effect of contralateral auditory stimuli on active cochlear micro-mechanical properties in human subjects. Hear Res 43: 251-261, 1990.
42. Cooper NP. Harmonic distortion on the basilar membrane in the basal turn of the guinea-pig cochlea. J Physiol 509: 277-288, 1998.
43. Cooper NP. Two-tone suppression in cochlear mechanics. J Acoust Soc Am 99: 3087-3098, 1996.
44. Cooper NP, Rhode WS. Mechanical responses to two-tone distortion products in the apical and basal turns of the mammalian cochlea. J Neurophysiol 78: 261-270, 1997.
45. Crawford AC, Fettiplace R. The mechanical properties of ciliary bundles of turtle cochlear hair cells. J Physiol 364: 359-379, 1985.
46. Davis H. An active process in cochlear mechanics. Hear Res 9: 79-90, 1983.
47. De Boer E, Kuyper P. Triggered correlation. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 15: 169-179, 1968.
48. De Kleine E, Wit HP, van Dijk P, Avan P. The behavior of spontaneous otoacoustic emissions during and after postural changes. J Acoust Soc Am 107: 3308-3316, 2000.
49. Delgutte B. Physiological mechanisms of psychophysical masking: observations from auditory-nerve fibers. J Acoust Soc Am 87: 791-809, 1990.
50. Dhar S, Rogers A, Abdala C. Breaking away: violation of distortion emission phasefrequency invariance at low frequencies. J Acoust Soc Am 129: 3115-3122, 2011.
51. 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.
52. Dong W, Olson ES. Local cochlear damage reduces local nonlinearity and decreases generator-type cochlear emissions while increasing reflector-type emissions. J Acoust Soc Am 127: 1422-1431, 2010.
53. Dong W, Olson ES. Middle ear forward and reverse transmission in gerbil. J Neurophysiol 95: 2951-2961, 2006.
54. Dong W, Olson ES. Supporting evidence for reverse cochlear traveling waves. J Acoust Soc Am 123: 222-240, 2008.
55. Dong W, Olson ES. Two-tone distortion in intracochlear pressure. J Acoust Soc Am 117: 2999-3015, 2005.
56. Duifhuis H. Power law nonlinearities: a review of some less familiar properties. In: Cochlear Mechanisms: Structure, Function and Models, edited by Wilson JP and Kemp DT. New York: Plenum, 1989, p. 395-403.
57. Duke T, Jülicher F. Active traveling wave in the cochlea. Phys Rev Lett 90: 158101, 2003.
58. Durrant JD, Wang J, Ding DL, Salvi RJ. Are inner or outer hair cells the source of summating potentials recorded from the round window? J Acoust Soc Am 104: 370-377, 1998.
59. Egan JP, Hake HW. On the masking pattern of a simple auditory stimulus. J Acoust Soc Am 22: 622-630, 1950.
60. Eggermont JJ. Wiener and Volterra analyses applied to the auditory system. Hear Res 66: 177-201, 1993.
61. Eguiluz VM, Ospeck M, Choe Y, Hudspeth AJ, Magnasco MO. Essential nonlinearities in hearing. Phys Rev Lett 84: 5232-5235, 2000.
62. Elliott E. A ripple effect in the audiogram. Nature 181: 1076, 1958.
63. Engebretson AM, Eldredge DH. Model for the nonlinear characteristics of cochlear potentials. J Acoust Soc Am 44: 548-554, 1968.
64. Epp B, Verhey JL, Mauermann M. Modeling cochlear dynamics: interrelation between cochlea mechanics and psychoacoustics. J Acoust Soc Am 128: 1870-1883, 2010.
65. Fahey PF, Stagner BB, Lonsbury-Martin BL, Martin GK. Nonlinear interactions that could explain distortion product interference response areas. J Acoust Soc Am 108: 1786-1802, 2000.
66. Fahey PF, Stagner BB, Martin GK. Mechanism for bandpass frequency characteristic in distortion product otoacoustic emission generation. J Acoust Soc Am 119: 991-996, 2006.
67. Fahey PF, Stagner BB, Martin GK. Source of level dependent minima in rabbit distortion product otoacoustic emissions. J Acoust Soc Am 124: 3694-3707, 2008.
68. Fletcher H. Auditory patterns. Rev Mod Phys 12: 47-65, 1940.
69. Flock A, Strelioff D. Graded and nonlinear mechanical properties of sensory hairs in the mammalian hearing organ. Nature 310: 597-599, 1984.
70. Francey LJ, Conlin LK, Kadesch HE, Clark D, Berrodin D, Sun Y, Glessner J, Hakonarson H, Jalas C, Landau C, Spinner NB, Kenna M, Sagi M, Rehm HL, Krantz ID. Genome-wide SNP genotyping identifies the Stereocilin (STRC) gene as a major contributor to pediatric bilateral sensorineural hearing impairment. Am J Med Genet A 158: 298-308, 2012.
71. 1 and their possible relation to changes in the operating point of the cochlear amplifier. Hear Res 98: 104-115, 1996.
72. Fresnel AJ. Oeuvres Completes d'Augustin Fresnel Tombe Premier, edited by H. de Senarmont, E. Verdet, and L. Fresnel. Paris: Imprimerie Impériale, 1866.
73. 2+-dependent signaling pathways regulate the motor output of cochlear outer hair cells. J Neurosci 20: 5940-5948, 2000.
74. 2. J Acoust Soc Am 100: 3268-3274, 1996.
75. Geisler CD. Two-tone suppression by a saturating feedback model of the cochlear partition. Hear Res 63: 203-210, 1992.
76. Geisler CD, Greenberg S. A two-stage nonlinear cochlear model possesses automatic gain control. J Acoust Soc Am 80: 1359-1363, 1986.
77. Geisler CD, Yates GK, Patuzzi RB, Johnstone BM. Saturation of outer hair cell receptor currents causes two-tone suppression. Hear Res 44: 241-256, 1990.
78. Glanville JD, Coles RR, Sullivan BM. A family with high-tonal objective tinnitus. J Laryngol Otol 85: 1-10, 1971.
79. Gold T. Hearing II: the physical basis of the action of the cochlea. Proc Roy Soc Lond B Biol Sci 135: 492-491, 1948.
80. Gold T. Historical background to the proposal 40 years ago of an active model for cochlear frequency analysis. In: Cochlear Mechanisms: Structure, Function and Models, edited by Wilson JP and Kemp DT. London: Plenum, 1989, p. 299-305.
81. Goldstein JL. Auditory nonlinearity. J Acoust Soc Am 41: 676-689, 1967.
82. Goodman SS, Withnell RH, Shera CA. The origin of SFOAE microstructure in the guinea pig. Hear Res 183: 7-17, 2003.
83. Goodyear RJ, Marcotti W, Kros CJ, Richardson GP. Development and properties of stereociliary link types in hair cells of the mouse cochlea. J Comp Neurol 485: 75-85, 2005.
84. Gopfert MC, Robert D. Active auditory mechanics in mosquitoes. Proc Biol Sci 268: 333-339, 2001.
85. Guinan JJ Jr. Cochlear efferent innervation and function. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 18: 447-453, 2010.
86. Gummer AW, Hemmert W, Zenner HP. Resonant tectorial membrane motion in the inner ear: its crucial role in frequency tuning. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 93: 8727-8732, 1996.
87. Hao LF, Khanna SM. Mechanical nonlinearity in the apical turn of the guinea pig organ of Corti. Hear Res 148: 31-46, 2000.
88. Hao LF, Khanna SM. Vibrations of the guinea pig organ of Corti in the apical turn. Hear Res 148: 47-62, 2000.
89. Harris DM, Dallos P. Forward masking of auditory nerve fiber responses. J Neurophysiol 42: 1083-1107, 1979.
90. 1 ratio. J Acoust Soc Am 85: 220-229, 1989.
91. Harris FP, Probst R. Reporting click-evoked and distortion-product otoacoustic emission results with respect to the pure-tone audiogram. Ear Hear 12: 399-405, 1991.
92. Harte JM, Elliott SJ, Kapadia S, Lutman ME. Dynamic nonlinear cochlear model predictions of click-evoked otoacoustic emission suppression. Hear Res 207: 99-109, 2005.
93. 2 acoustic distortion products: effects of primary level and frequency ratios. J Acoust Soc Am 101: 3554-3565, 1997.
94. 2 acoustic distortion product: changes with primary level. J Acoust Soc Am 94: 2659-2669, 1993.
95. He W, Fridberger A, Porsov E, Grosh K, Ren T. Reverse wave propagation in the cochlea. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105: 2729-2733, 2008.
96. He W, Fridberger A, Porsov E, Ren T. Fast reverse propagation of sound in the living cochlea. Biophys J 98: 2497-2505, 2010.
97. Helmholtz Hv. Die Lehre von den Tonempfindungen als physiologische Grundlage für die Theorie der Musik. Brunswick: Vieweg, 1863.
98. Horner KC, Lenoir M, Bock GR. Distortion product otoacoustic emissions in hearingimpaired mutant mice. J Acoust Soc Am 78: 1603-1611, 1985.
99. Housley GD, Ashmore JF. Ionic currents of outer hair cells isolated from the guineapig cochlea. J Physiol 448: 73-98, 1992.
100. Houtgast T. Lateral Suppression in Hearing. Amsterdam: Academische Pers., 1974.
101. Houtsma AJM, Goldstein JL. The central origin of the pitch of complex tones: evidence from musical interval recognition. J Acoust Soc Am 51: 520-529, 1972.
102. Howard J, Ashmore JF. Stiffness of sensory hair bundles in the sacculus of the frog. Hear Res 23: 93-104, 1986.
103. 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.
104. 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.
105. Howard MA, Stagner BB, Foster PK, Lonsbury-Martin BL, Martin GK. Suppression tuning in noise-exposed rabbits. J Acoust Soc Am 114: 279-293, 2003.
106. Hudspeth AJ. Making an effort to listen: mechanical amplification in the ear. Neuron 59: 530-545, 2008.
107. Hudspeth AJ, Jülicher F, Martin P. A critique of the critical cochlea: Hopf-a bifurcation-is better than none. J Neurophysiol 104: 1219-1229, 2010.
108. Jaramillo F, Markin VS, Hudspeth AJ. Auditory illusions and the single hair cell. Nature 364: 527-529, 1993.
109. Javel E, Geisler CD, Ravindran A. Two-tone suppression in auditory nerve of the cat: rate-intensity and temporal analyses. J Acoust Soc Am 63: 1093-1104, 1978.
110. Johnsen NJ, Bagi P, Elberling C. Evoked acoustic emissions from the human ear. III. Findings in neonates. Scand Audiol 12: 17-24, 1983.
111. Johnson SL, Beurg M, Marcotti W, Fettiplace R. Prestin-driven cochlear amplification is not limited by the outer hair cell membrane time constant. Neuron 70: 1143-1154, 2011.
112. Jülicher F, Andor D, Duke T. Physical basis of two-tone interference in hearing. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98: 9080-9085, 2001.
113. Kalluri R, Shera CA. Distortion-product source unmixing: a test of the two-mechanism model for DPOAE generation. J Acoust Soc Am 109: 622-637, 2001.
114. Kalluri R, Shera CA. Near equivalence of human click-evoked and stimulus-frequency otoacoustic emissions. J Acoust Soc Am 121: 2097-2110, 2007.
115. Kanis LJ, de Boer E. Frequency dependence of acoustic distortion products in a locally active model of the cochlea. J Acoust Soc Am 101: 1527-1531, 1997.
116. Kapadia S, Lutman ME. Nonlinear temporal interactions in click-evoked otoacoustic emissions. I. Assumed model and polarity-symmetry. Hear Res 146: 89-100, 2000.
117. Kapadia S, Lutman ME. Nonlinear temporal interactions in click-evoked otoacoustic emissions. II. Experimental data. Hear Res 146: 101-120, 2000.
118. Karavitaki KD, Corey DP. Hair bundle mechanics at high frequencies: a test of series or parallel transduction. In: Auditory Mechanisms: Processes and Models, edited by Nuttall AL, Ren T, Gillespie P, Grosh K, and de Boer E. Hackensack, NJ: World Scientific, 2005, p. 286-292.
119. Karavitaki KD, Corey DP. Sliding adhesion confers coherent motion to hair cell stereocilia and parallel gating to transduction channels. J Neurosci 30: 9051-9063, 2010.
120. Kawashima Y, Geleoc GS, Kurima K, Labay V, Lelli A, Asai Y, Makishima T, Wu DK, Della Santina CC, Holt JR, Griffith AJ. Mechanotransduction in mouse inner ear hair cells requires transmembrane channel-like genes. J Clin Invest 121: 4796-4809, 2011.
121. Kazmierczak P, Sakaguchi H, Tokita J, Wilson-Kubalek EM, Milligan RA, Muller U, Kachar B. Cadherin 23 and protocadherin 15 interact to form tip-link filaments in sensory hair cells. Nature 449: 87-91, 2007.
122. Kemp DT. Otoacoustic emissions: concepts and origins. In: Active Processes and Otoacoustic Emissions, edited by Manley GA, Fay RR, and Popper AN. New York: Springer, 2008, p. 1-38.
123. Kemp DT. Stimulated acoustic emissions from within the human auditory system. J Acoust Soc Am 64: 1386-1391, 1978.
124. Kemp DT, Bray P, Alexander L, Brown AM. Acoustic emission cochleography-practical aspects. Scand Audiol Suppl 25: 71-95, 1986.
125. Kemp DT, Chum R. Properties of the generator of stimulated acoustic emissions. Hear Res 2: 213-232, 1980.
126. Khanna SM. The response of the apical turn of cochlea modeled with a tuned amplifier with negative feedback. Hear Res 194: 97-108, 2004.
127. Khanna SM, Hao LF. Amplification in the apical turn of the cochlea with negative feedback. Hear Res 149: 55-76, 2000.
128. Kiang NY, Moxon EC. Tails of tuning curves of auditory-nerve fibers. J Acoust Soc Am 55: 620-630, 1974.
129. Kim DO, Molnar CE, Matthews JW. Cochlear mechanics: nonlinear behavior in twotone responses as reflected in cochlear-nerve-fiber responses and in ear-canal sound pressure. J Acoust Soc Am 67: 1704-1721, 1980.
130. Kim DO, Siegel JH, Molnar CE. Cochlear nonlinear phenomena in two-tone responses. Scand Audiol Suppl 63-81, 1979.
131. Kim KX, Fettiplace R. Developmental changes in the cochlear hair cell mechanotransducer channel and their regulation by transmembrane channel-like proteins. J Gen Physiol 141: 141-148, 2013.
132. Kimberley BP, Brown DK, Eggermont JJ. Measuring human cochlear traveling wave delay using distortion product emission phase responses. J Acoust Soc Am 94: 1343-1350, 1993.
133. 1: evidence for a GABAergic efferent system in apical cochlea of the guinea pig. Hear Res 67: 20-34, 1993.
134. Kitajiri S, Sakamoto T, Belyantseva IA, Goodyear RJ, Stepanyan R, Fujiwara I, Bird JE, Riazuddin S, Riazuddin S, Ahmed ZM, Hinshaw JE, Sellers J, Bartles JR, Hammer JA 3rd, Richardson GP, Griffith AJ, Frolenkov GI, Friedman TB. Actin-bundling protein TRIOBP forms resilient rootlets of hair cell stereocilia essential for hearing. Cell 141: 786-798, 2010.
135. 2 area study. J Acoust Soc Am 107: 457-473, 2000.
136. Knight RD, Kemp DT. Wave and place fixed DPOAE maps of the human ear. J Acoust Soc Am 109: 1513-1525, 2001.
137. Kozlov AS, Baumgart J, Risler T, Versteegh CP, Hudspeth AJ. Forces between clustered stereocilia minimize friction in the ear on a subnanometre scale. Nature 474: 376-379, 2011.
138. Kozlov AS, Risler T, Hudspeth AJ. Coherent motion of stereocilia assures the concerted gating of hair-cell transduction channels. Nat Neurosci 10: 87-92, 2007.
139. Kummer P, Janssen T, Hulin P, Arnold W. Optimal L(1)-L(2) primary tone level separation remains independent of test frequency in humans. Hear Res 146: 47-56, 2000.
140. 1 ratios of distortion product otoacoustic emissions, and scanning electron microscopy. Hear Res 120: 51-61, 1998.
141. Legan PK, Lukashkina VA, Goodyear RJ, Kossi M, Russell IJ, Richardson GP. A targeted deletion in alpha-tectorin reveals that the tectorial membrane is required for the gain and timing of cochlear feedback. Neuron 28: 273-285, 2000.
142. LePage EL. Frequency-dependent self-induced bias of the basilar membrane and its potential for controlling sensitivity and tuning in the mammalian cochlea. J Acoust Soc Am 82: 139-154, 1987.
143. LePage EL, Murray NM. Latent cochlear damage in personal stereo users: a study based on click-evoked otoacoustic emissions. Med J Aust 169: 588-592, 1998.
144. LePage EL, Olofsson A. Modeling scala media as a pressure vessel. In: What Fire Is in Mine Ears, Progress in Auditory Biomechanics, edited by Shera CA and Olson ES. Melville, NY: American Institute of Physics, 2011, p. 212-217.
145. 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.
146. 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.
147. Lichtenhan JT. Effects of low-frequency biasing on otoacoustic and neural measures suggest that stimulus-frequency otoacoustic emissions originate near the peak region of the traveling wave. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 13: 17-28, 2012.
148. Licklider JCR. "Periodicity" Pitch and "Place" Pitch. J Acoust Soc Am 26: 945, 1954.
149. Lighthill J. Energy flow in the cochlea. J Fluid Mech 106: 149-213, 1981.
150. Long GR, Tubis A, Jones KL. Modeling synchronization and suppression of spontaneous otoacoustic emissions using Van der Pol oscillators: effects of aspirin administration. J Acoust Soc Am 89: 1201-1212, 1991.
151. Long GR, Van Dijk P, Wit HP. Temperature dependence of spontaneous otoacoustic emissions in the edible frog (Rana esculenta). Hear Res 98: 22-28, 1996.
152. Lonsbury-Martin BL, Martin GK, Probst R, Coats AC. Spontaneous otoacoustic emissions in a nonhuman primate. II. Cochlear anatomy. Hear Res 33: 69-93, 1988.
153. Lukashkin AN, Lukashkina VA, Legan PK, Richardson GP, Russell IJ. Role of the tectorial membrane revealed by otoacoustic emissions recorded from wild-type and transgenic Tecta(deltaENT/deltaENT) mice. J Neurophysiol 91: 163-171, 2004.
154. Lukashkin AN, Lukashkina VA, Russell IJ. One source for distortion product otoacoustic emissions generated by low-and high-level primaries. J Acoust Soc Am 111: 2740-2748, 2002.
155. Lukashkin AN, Russell IJ. A descriptive model of the receptor potential nonlinearities generated by the hair cell mechanoelectrical transducer. J Acoust Soc Am 103: 973-980, 1998.
156. 2 distortion product otoacoustic emission. J Acoust Soc Am 112: 1561-1568, 2002.
157. Lyon RF. Automatic gain control in cochlear mechanics. In: The Mechanics and Biophysics of Hearing, edited by Dallos P, Geisler CD, Matthews JW, Ruggero MA, and Steele CR. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 1990, p. 395-402.
158. Maat B, Wit HP, van Dijk P. Noise-evoked otoacoustic emissions in humans. J Acoust Soc Am 108: 2272-2280, 2000.
159. Magnan P, Avan P, Dancer A, Smurzynski J, Probst R. Reverse middle-ear transfer function in the guinea pig measured with cubic difference tones. Hear Res 107: 41-45, 1997.
160. Manley GA. Cochlear mechanisms from a phylogenetic viewpoint. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 97: 11736-11743, 2000.
161. Manley GA. Frequency spacing of acoustic emissions: a possible explanation. In: Mechanisms of Hearing, edited by Webster WR and Aitken LM. Clayton: Monash Univ. Press, 1983, p. 36-39
162. Manley GA, Koppl C. What have lizard ears taught us about auditory physiology? Hear Res 238: 3-11, 2008.
163. Manley GA, Koppl C, Sneary M. Reversed tonotopic map of the basilar papilla in Gekko gecko. Hear Res 131: 107-116, 1999.
164. Marmarelis PZ, Marmarelis VZ. Analysis of Physiological Systems: The White-Noise Approach. New York: Plenum, 1978.
165. 1 distortion-product otoacoustic emissions in normalhearing humans revealed by suppression tuning, onset latencies, and amplitude correlations. J Acoust Soc Am 103: 1957-1971, 1998.
166. Martin GK, Lonsbury-Martin BL, Probst R, Coats AC. Spontaneous otoacoustic emissions in a nonhuman primate. I. Basic features and relations to other emissions. Hear Res 33: 49-68, 1988.
167. Martin GK, Lonsbury-Martin BL, Probst R, Scheinin SA, Coats AC. Acoustic distortion products in rabbit ear canal. II. Sites of origin revealed by suppression contours and pure-tone exposures. Hear Res 28: 191-208, 1987.
168. Martin GK, Ohlms LA, Franklin DJ, Harris FP, Lonsbury-Martin BL. Distortion product emissions in humans III Influence of sensorineural hearing loss. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl 147: 30-42, 1990.
169. Martin GK, Stagner BB, Chung YS, Lonsbury-Martin BL. Characterizing distortionproduct otoacoustic emission components across four species. J Acoust Soc Am 129: 3090-3103, 2011.
170. Martin GK, Stagner BB, Fahey PF, Lonsbury-Martin BL. Steep and shallow phase gradient distortion product otoacoustic emissions arising basal to the primary tones. J Acoust Soc Am 125: EL85-92, 2009.
171. Martin GK, Stagner BB, Jassir D, Telischi FF, Lonsbury-Martin BL. Suppression and enhancement of distortion-product otoacoustic emissions by interference tones above f(2). I. Basic findings in rabbits. Hear Res 136: 105-123, 1999.
172. Martin GK, Stagner BB, Lonsbury-Martin BL. Evidence for basal distortion-product otoacoustic emission components. J Acoust Soc Am 127: 2955-2972, 2010.
173. Martin P, Bozovic D, Choe Y, Hudspeth AJ. Spontaneous oscillation by hair bundles of the bullfrog's sacculus. J Neurosci 23: 4533-4548, 2003.
174. Martin P, Mehta AD, Hudspeth AJ. Negative hair-bundle stiffness betrays a mechanism for mechanical amplification by the hair cell. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 97: 12026-12031, 2000.
175. Mauermann M, Uppenkamp S, van Hengel PW, Kollmeier B. Evidence for the distortion product frequency place as a source of distortion product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) fine structure in humans. II. Fine structure for different shapes of cochlear hearing loss. J Acoust Soc Am 106: 3484-3491, 1999.
176. McAlpine D. Neural sensitivity to periodicity in the inferior colliculus: evidence for the role of cochlear distortions. J Neurophysiol 92: 1295-1311, 2004.
177. Meenderink SW, van der Heijden M. Distortion product otoacoustic emissions evoked by tone complexes. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 12: 29-44, 2011.
178. Meenderink SW, van der Heijden M. Reverse cochlear propagation in the intact cochlea of the gerbil: evidence for slow traveling waves. J Neurophysiol 103: 1448-1455, 2010.
179. Meyer MF. Tartini versus Helmholtz judged by modern sensory observation. J Acoust Soc Am 26: 761-764, 1954.
180. Michalski N, Michel V, Caberlotto E, Lefevre GM, van Aken AF, Tinevez JY, Bizard E, Houbron C, Weil D, Hardelin JP, Richardson GP, Kros CJ, Martin P, Petit C. Harmonin-b, an actin-binding scaffold protein, is involved in the adaptation of mechanoelectrical transduction by sensory hair cells. Pflügers Arch 459: 115-130, 2009.
181. Mills DM. Interpretation of distortion product otoacoustic emission measurements. I. Two stimulus tones. J Acoust Soc Am 102: 413-429, 1997.
182. Mills DM, Norton SJ, Rubel EW. Vulnerability and adaptation of distortion product otoacoustic emissions to endocochlear potential variation. J Acoust Soc Am 94: 2108-2122, 1993.
183. Mills DM, Rubel EW. Variation of distortion product otoacoustic emissions with furosemide injection. Hear Res 77: 183-199, 1994.
184. Mom T, Avan P, Romand R, Gilain L. Monitoring of functional changes after transient ischemia in gerbil cochlea. Brain Res 751: 20-30, 1997.
185. Mom T, Bonfils P, Gilain L, Avan P. Origin of cubic difference tones generated by high-intensity stimuli: effect of ischemia and auditory fatigue on the gerbil cochlea. J Acoust Soc Am 110: 1477-1488, 2001.
186. Moore BCJ. Psychophysical tuning curves measured in simultaneous and forward masking. J Acoust Soc Am 63: 524-532, 1978.
187. Moulin A, Kemp DT. Multicomponent acoustic distortion product otoacoustic emission phase in humans. I. General characteristics. J Acoust Soc Am 100: 1617-1639, 1996.
188. Moulin A, Kemp DT. Multicomponent acoustic distortion product otoacoustic emission phase in humans. II. Implications for distortion product otoacoustic emissions generation. J Acoust Soc Am 100: 1640-1662, 1996.
189. Mountain DC. Changes in endolymphatic potential and crossed olivocochlear bundle stimulation alter cochlear mechanics. Science 210: 71-72, 1980.
190. Murata K, Moriyama T, Hosokawa Y, Minami S. Alternating current induced otoacoustic emissions in the guinea pig. Hear Res 55: 201-214, 1991.
191. 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.
192. Nam JH, Cotton JR, Grant W. A virtual hair cell. I. Addition of gating spring theory into a 3-D bundle mechanical model. Biophys J 92: 1918-1928, 2007.
193. Nam JH, Fettiplace R. Theoretical conditions for high-frequency hair bundle oscillations in auditory hair cells. Biophys J 95: 4948-4962, 2008.
194. Neely ST, Johnson TA, Garner CA, Gorga MP. Stimulus-frequency otoacoustic emissions measured with amplitude-modulated suppressor tones (L). J Acoust Soc Am 118: 2124-2127, 2005.
195. Newman EB, Stevens SS, Davis H. Factors in the production of aural harmonics and combination tones. J Acoust Soc Am 9: 107-118, 1937.
196. Nin F, Reichenbach T, Fisher JA, Hudspeth AJ. Contribution of active hair-bundle motility to nonlinear amplification in the mammalian cochlea. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 109: 21076-21080, 2012.
197. Nuttall AL, Grosh K, Zheng J, de Boer E, Zou Y, Ren T. Spontaneous basilar membrane oscillation and otoacoustic emission at 15 kHz in a guinea pig. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 5: 337-348, 2004.
198. Ohlms LA, Lonsbury-Martin BL, Martin GK. Acoustic-distortion products: separation of sensory from neural dysfunction in sensorineural hearing loss in human beings and rabbits. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 104: 159-174, 1991.
199. Olson ES. Harmonic distortion in intracochlear pressure and its analysis to explore the cochlear amplifier. J Acoust Soc Am 115: 1230-1241, 2004.
200. Oxenham AJ, Plack CJ. Suppression and the upward spread of masking. J Acoust Soc Am 104: 3500-3510, 1998.
201. Pang XD, Guinan JJ Jr. Growth rate of simultaneous masking in cat auditory-nerve fibers: relationship to the growth of basilar-membrane motion and the origin of two-tone suppression. J Acoust Soc Am 102: 3564-3575, 1997.
202. Patuzzi R, Robertson D. Tuning in the mammalian cochlea. Physiol Rev 68: 1009-1082, 1988.
203. Patuzzi R, Sellick PM, Johnstone BM. The modulation of the sensitivity of the mammalian cochlea by low frequency tones. I. Primary afferent activity. Hear Res 13: 1-8, 1984.
204. Patuzzi R, Sellick PM, Johnstone BM. The modulation of the sensitivity of the mammalian cochlea by low frequency tones. III. Basilar membrane motion. Hear Res 13: 19-27, 1984.
205. Patuzzi RB. Cochlear micromechanics and macromechanics. In: The Cochlea, edited by Dallos P, Popper AN, and Fay RR. New York: Springer, 1996, p. 186-257.
206. Peake WT, Ling A Jr. Basilar-membrane motion in the alligator lizard: its relation to tonotopic organization and frequency selectivity. J Acoust Soc Am 67: 1736-1745, 1980.
207. Peng AW, Ricci AJ. Somatic motility and hair bundle mechanics, are both necessary for cochlear amplification? Hear Res 273: 109-122, 2011.
208. Peterson LC, Bogert BP. A dynamical theory of the cochlea. J Acoust Soc Am 22: 369-381, 1950.
209. Pickles JO, Comis SD, Osborne MP. Cross-links between stereocilia in the guinea pig organ of Corti, and their possible relation to sensory transduction. Hear Res 15: 103-112, 1984.
210. Plomp R. Detectability threshold for combination tones. J Acoust Soc Am 37: 1110-1123, 1965.
211. Pressnitzer D, Patterson R. Distortion products and the perceived pitch of harmonic complex tones. In: Physiological and Psychophysical Bases of Auditory Function, edited by Breebart DJ, Houtsma AJM, Kohlrausch A, Prijs VF, and Schoonhoven R. Maastricht, The Netherlands: Shaker Publishing BV, 2001, p. 97-104.
212. Probst R, Lonsbury-Martin BL, Martin GK. A review of otoacoustic emissions. J Acoust Soc Am 89: 2027-2067, 1991.
213. 2: evidence that the medial efferent system is involved. J Acoust Soc Am 87: 1630-1635, 1990.
214. Puria S. Measurements of human middle ear forward and reverse acoustics: implications for otoacoustic emissions. J Acoust Soc Am 113: 2773-2789, 2003.
215. Rao A, Long GR. Effects of aspirin on distortion product fine structure: interpreted by the two-source model for distortion product otoacoustic emissions generation. J Acoust Soc Am 129: 792-800, 2011.
216. Recio-Spinoso A, Narayan SS, Ruggero MA. Basilar membrane responses to noise at a basal site of the chinchilla cochlea: quasi-linear filtering. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 10: 471-484, 2009.
217. Recio-Spinoso A, Temchin AN, van Dijk P, Fan YH, Ruggero MA. Wiener-kernel analysis of responses to noise of chinchilla auditory-nerve fibers. J Neurophysiol 93: 3615-3634, 2005.
218. Reichenbach T, Hudspeth AJ. A ratchet mechanism for amplification in low-frequency mammalian hearing. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 107: 4973-4978, 2010.
219. Reichenbach T, Stefanovic A, Nin F, Hudspeth AJ. Waves on Reissner's membrane: a mechanism for the propagation of otoacoustic emissions from the cochlea. Cell Reports 1: 374-384, 2012.
220. Ren T. Longitudinal pattern of basilar membrane vibration in the sensitive cochlea. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99: 17101-17106, 2002.
221. Ren T. Reverse propagation of sound in the gerbil cochlea. Nat Neurosci 7: 333-334, 2004.
222. Ren T, He W, Porsov E. Localization of the cochlear amplifier in living sensitive ears. PLoS One 6: e20149, 2011.
223. Ren T, He W, Scott M, Nuttall AL. Group delay of acoustic emissions in the ear. J Neurophysiol 96: 2785-2791, 2006.
224. Ren T, Nuttall AL. Cochlear compression wave: an implication of the Allen-Fahey experiment. J Acoust Soc Am 119: 1940-1942, 2006.
225. Rhode WS. Basilar membrane mechanics in the 6-9 kHz region of sensitive chinchilla cochleae. J Acoust Soc Am 121: 2792-2804, 2007.
226. Rhode WS. Distortion product otoacoustic emissions and basilar membrane vibration in the 6-9 kHz region of sensitive chinchilla cochleae. J Acoust Soc Am 122: 2725-2737, 2007.
227. Rhode WS. Observations of the vibration of the basilar membrane in squirrel monkeys using the Mossbauer technique. J Acoust Soc Am 49 Suppl 2: 1218, 1971.
228. Rhode WS. Some observations on two-tone interaction measured with the Mössbauer effect. In: Psychophysics and Physiology of Hearing, edited by Evans EF and Wilson JP. London: Academic, 1977, p. 27-41.
229. Rhode WS, Recio A. Study of mechanical motions in the basal region of the chinchilla cochlea. J Acoust Soc Am 107: 3317-3332, 2000.
230. Robles L, Ruggero MA. Mechanics of the mammalian cochlea. Physiol Rev 81: 1305-1352, 2001.
231. Robles L, Ruggero MA, Rich NC. Two-tone distortion in the basilar membrane of the cochlea. Nature 349: 413-414, 1991.
232. Robles L, Ruggero MA, Rich NC. Two-tone distortion on the basilar membrane of the chinchilla cochlea. J Neurophysiol 77: 2385-2399, 1997.
233. Ruggero MA. Comparison of group delays of 2f(1)-f(2) distortion product otoacoustic emissions and cochlear travel times. Acoust Res Lett Online 5: 143-147, 2004.
234. 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.
235. Ruggero MA, Robles L, Rich NC. Two-tone suppression in the basilar membrane of the cochlea: mechanical basis of auditory-nerve rate suppression. J Neurophysiol 68: 1087-1099, 1992.
236. Russell IJ, Cody AR, Richardson GP. The responses of inner and outer hair cells in the basal turn of the guinea-pig cochlea and in the mouse cochlea grown in vitro. Hear Res 22: 199-216, 1986.
237. Russell IJ, Kossl M, Richardson GP. Nonlinear mechanical responses of mouse cochlear hair bundles. Proc Biol Sci 250: 217-227, 1992.
238. Sachs MB, Kiang NY. Two-tone inhibition in auditory-nerve fibers. J Acoust Soc Am 43: 1120-1128, 1968.
239. Sachs MB, Young ED. Effects of nonlinearities on speech encoding in the auditory nerve. J Acoust Soc Am 68: 858-875, 1980.
240. Salt AN, Brown DJ, Hartsock JJ, Plontke SK. Displacements of the organ of Corti by gel injections into the cochlear apex. Hear Res 250: 63-75, 2009.
241. Salt AN, Hullar TE. Responses of the ear to low frequency sounds, infrasound and wind turbines. Hear Res 268: 12-21, 2010.
242. Santos-Sacchi J. Harmonics of outer hair cell motility. Biophys J 65: 2217-2227, 1993.
243. Schmiedt RA. Acoustic distortion in the ear canal. I. Cubic difference tones: effects of acute noise injury. J Acoust Soc Am 79: 1481-1490, 1986.
244. Shannon RV. Two-tone unmasking and suppression in a forward-masking situation. J Acoust Soc Am 59: 1460-1470, 1976.
245. Shera CA. Mammalian spontaneous otoacoustic emissions are amplitude-stabilized cochlear standing waves. J Acoust Soc Am 114: 244-262, 2003.
246. Shera CA, Guinan JJ. Mechanisms of mammalian otoacoustic emission. In: Active Processes and Otoacoustic Emissions, edited by Manley GA, Lonsbury-Martin BL, Popper AN, and Fay RR. New York: Springer, 2007.
247. Shera CA, Guinan JJ Jr. Cochlear traveling-wave amplification, suppression, and beamforming probed using noninvasive calibration of intracochlear distortion sources. J Acoust Soc Am 121: 1003-1016, 2007.
248. Shera CA, Guinan JJ Jr. Evoked otoacoustic emissions arise by two fundamentally different mechanisms: a taxonomy for mammalian OAEs. J Acoust Soc Am 105: 782-798, 1999.
249. Shera CA, Guinan JJ Jr. Stimulus-frequency-emission group delay: a test of coherent reflection filtering and a window on cochlear tuning. J Acoust Soc Am 113: 2762-2772, 2003.
250. Shera CA, Guinan JJ Jr, Oxenham AJ. Otoacoustic estimation of cochlear tuning: validation in the chinchilla. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 11: 343-365, 2010.
251. Shera CA, Guinan JJ Jr, Oxenham AJ. Revised estimates of human cochlear tuning from otoacoustic and behavioral measurements. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99: 3318-3323, 2002.
252. Shera CA, Tubis A, Talmadge CL, de Boer E, Fahey PF, Guinan JJ Jr. Allen-Fahey and related experiments support the predominance of cochlear slow-wave otoacoustic emissions. J Acoust Soc Am 121: 1564-1575, 2007.
253. Siegel JH, Cerka AJ, Recio-Spinoso A, Temchin AN, van Dijk P, Ruggero MA. Delays of stimulus-frequency otoacoustic emissions and cochlear vibrations contradict the theory of coherent reflection filtering. J Acoust Soc Am 118: 2434-2443, 2005.
254. 2. J Neurophysiol 47: 303-328, 1982.
255. 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.
256. Sisto R, Moleti A, Botti T, Bertaccini D, Shera CA. Distortion products and backwardtraveling waves in nonlinear active models of the cochlea. J Acoust Soc Am 129: 3141-3152, 2011.
257. Smalt CJ, Krishnan A, Bidelman GM, Ananthakrishnan S, Gandour JT. Distortion products and their influence on representation of pitch-relevant information in the human brainstem for unresolved harmonic complex tones. Hear Res 292: 26-34, 2012.
258. Smith RL. Adaptation, saturation and physiological masking in single auditory-nerve fibers. J Acoust Soc Am 65: 166-178, 1979.
259. Smith RL. Short-term adaptation in single auditory-nerve fibers: some poststimulatory effects. J Neurophysiol 40: 1098-1112, 1977.
260. Smith ST, Chadwick RS. Simulation of the response of the inner hair cell stereocilia bundle to an acoustical stimulus. PLoS One 6: e18161, 2011.
261. Smoorenburg GF. Combination tones and their origin. J Acoust Soc Am 52: 615-632, 1972.
262. Sokolich WG. Improved acoustic system for auditory research. J Acoust Soc Am Suppl 1: S12, 1977.
263. Starr A, Picton TW, Sininger Y, Hood LJ, Berlin CI. Auditory neuropathy. Brain 119: 741-753, 1996.
264. Stoop R, Kern A. Essential auditory contrast-sharpening is preneuronal. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 101: 9179-9181, 2004.
265. Stover LJ, Neely ST, Gorga MP. Latency and multiple sources of distortion product otoacoustic emissions. J Acoust Soc Am 99: 1016-1024, 1996.
266. Strube HW. Evoked otoacoustic emissions as cochlear Bragg reflections. Hear Res 38: 35-45, 1989.
267. Szalai R, Tsaneva-Atanasova K, Homer ME, Champneys AR, Kennedy HJ, Cooper NP. Nonlinear models of development, amplification and compression in the mammalian cochlea. Philos Transact A Math Phys Eng Sci 369: 4183-4204, 2011.
268. Talmadge CL, Tubis A, Long GR, Piskorski P. Modeling otoacoustic emission and hearing threshold fine structures. J Acoust Soc Am 104: 1517-1543, 1998.
269. Tartini G. Trattato di musica secondo la vera scienza dell'armonia. PADOVA: Nella Stamperia del Seminario, Appresso Giovanni Manfrè, 1754.
270. Tonndorf J. Endolymphatic hydrops: mechanical causes of hearing loss. Arch Oto-Rhino-Laryngol 212: 293-299, 1976.
271. Trautwein P, Hofstetter P, Wang J, Salvi R, Nostrant A. Selective inner hair cell loss does not alter distortion product otoacoustic emissions. Hear Res 96: 71-82, 1996.
272. Valk WL, Wit HP, Albers FW. Evaluation of cochlear function in an acute endolymphatic hydrops model in the guinea pig by measuring low-level DPOAEs. Hear Res 192: 47-56, 2004.
273. Van der Heijden M. Cochlear gain control. J Acoust Soc Am 117: 1223-1233, 2005.
274. Van der Heijden M, Joris PX. Cochlear phase and amplitude retrieved from the auditory nerve at arbitrary frequencies. J Neurosci 23: 9194-9198, 2003.
275. Van der Heijden M, Joris PX. The speed of auditory low-side suppression. J Neurophysiol 93: 201-209, 2005.
276. Van Dijk P, Wit HP. Amplitude and frequency fluctuations of spontaneous otoacoustic emissions. J Acoust Soc Am 88: 1779-1793, 1990.
277. Van Dijk P, Wit HP, Segenhout JM, Tubis A. Wiener kernel analysis of inner ear function in the American bullfrog. J Acoust Soc Am 95: 904-919, 1994.
278. Van Netten SM. Hair cell mechano-transduction: its influence on the gross mechanical characteristics of a hair cell sense organ. Biophys Chem 68: 43-52, 1997.
279. Van Netten SM, Kros CJ. Gating energies and forces of the mammalian hair cell transducer channel and related hair bundle mechanics. Proc Biol Sci 267: 1915-1923, 2000.
280. Van Netten SM, Meulenberg CJ, Lennan GW, Kros CJ. Pairwise coupling of hair cell transducer channels links auditory sensitivity and dynamic range. Pflügers Arch 458: 273-281, 2009.
281. Verhulst S, Harte JM, Dau T. Temporal suppression of the click-evoked otoacoustic emission level-curve. J Acoust Soc Am 129: 1452-1463, 2011.
282. Verpy E, Leibovici M, Michalski N, Goodyear RJ, Houdon C, Weil D, Richardson GP, Petit C. Stereocilin connects outer hair cell stereocilia to one another and to the tectorial membrane. J Comp Neurol 519: 194-210, 2011.
283. Verpy E, Masmoudi S, Zwaenepoel I, Leibovici M, Hutchin TP, Del Castillo I, Nouaille S, Blanchard S, Laine S, Popot JL, Moreno F, Mueller RF, Petit C. Mutations in a new gene encoding a protein of the hair bundle cause non-syndromic deafness at the DFNB16 locus. Nat Genet 29: 345-349, 2001.
284. Verpy E, Weil D, Leibovici M, Goodyear RJ, Hamard G, Houdon C, Lefevre GM, Hardelin JP, Richardson GP, Avan P, Petit C. Stereocilin-deficient mice reveal the origin of cochlear waveform distortions. Nature 456: 255-258, 2008.
285. Vetesnik A, Gummer AW. Transmission of cochlear distortion products as slow waves: a comparison of experimental and model data. J Acoust Soc Am 131: 3914-3934, 2012.
286. Volterra V. Theory of Functionals and of Integral and Integro-Differential Equations. Glasgow: Blackie and Son, 1930.
287. Warren B, Gibson G, Russell IJ. Sex recognition through midflight mating duets in Culex mosquitoes is mediated by acoustic distortion. Curr Biol 19: 485-491, 2009.
288. Wegel RL, Lane CE. The auditory masking of one pure tone by another and its possible relation to the dynamics of the inner ear. Physics Rev 23: 266-285, 1924.
289. Weiss TF. Bidirectional transduction in vertebrate hair cells: a mechanism for coupling mechanical and electrical processes. Hear Res 7: 353-360, 1982.
290. Weiss TF, Leong R. A model for signal transmission in an ear having hair cells with free-standing stereocilia. IV. Mechanoelectric transduction stage. Hear Res 20: 175-195, 1985.
291. Wever EG, Bray CW, Lawrence M. The origin of combination tones. J Exp Psychol 27: 217-226, 1940.
292. White KR, Vohr BR, Maxon AB, Behrens TR, McPherson MG, Mauk GW. Screening all newborns for hearing loss using transient evoked otoacoustic emissions. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 29: 203-217, 1994.
293. Whitehead ML. Species differences of distortion-product otoacoustic emissions: comment on "Interpretation of distortion product otoacoustic emission measurements. I. Two stimulus tones" [J Acoust Soc Am 102, 413-429 (1997)]. J Acoust Soc Am 103: 2740-2742, 1998.
294. 2 distortion-product otoacoustic emission in rabbit. II. Differential physiological vulnerability. J Acoust Soc Am 92: 2662-2682, 1992.
295. Whitehead ML, Stagner BB, Martin GK, Lonsbury-Martin BL. Visualization of the onset of distortion-product otoacoustic emissions, and measurement of their latency. J Acoust Soc Am 100: 1663-1679, 1996.
296. Wiener N. Nonlinear Problems in Random Theory. New York: Wiley, 1958.
297. Wilson JP. Evidence for a cochlear origin for acoustic re-emissions, threshold finestructure and tonal tinnitus. Hear Res 2: 233-252, 1980.
298. Wilson JP. Model for cochlear echoes and tinnitus based on an observed electrical correlate. Hear Res 2: 527-532, 1980.
299. Wit HP. Amplitude fluctuations of spontaneous otoacoustic emissions caused by internal and externally applied noise sources. Prog Brain Res 97: 59-65, 1993.
300. Wit HP, Ritsma RJ. Evoked acoustical responses from the human ear: some experimental results. Hear Res 2: 253-261, 1980.
301. Wit HP, van Dijk P. Are human spontaneous otoacoustic emissions generated by a chain of coupled nonlinear oscillators? J Acoust Soc Am 132: 918-926, 2012.
302. Wit HP, van Dijk P, Avan P. On the shape of (evoked) otoacoustic emission spectra. Hear Res 81: 208-214, 1994.
303. Withnell RH, Hazlewood C, Knowlton A. Reconciling the origin of the transient evoked ototacoustic emission in humans. J Acoust Soc Am 123: 212-221, 2008.
304. Withnell RH, Lodde J. In search of basal distortion product generators. J Acoust Soc Am 120: 2116-2123, 2006.
305. Withnell RH, McKinley S. Delay dependence for the origin of the nonlinear derived transient evoked otoacoustic emission. J Acoust Soc Am 117: 281-291, 2005.
306. Wright A. Dimensions of the cochlear stereocilia in man and the guinea pig. Hear Res 13: 89-98, 1984.
307. Yates GK, Withnell RH. The role of intermodulation distortion in transient-evoked otoacoustic emissions. Hear Res 136: 49-64, 1999.
308. Zatorre RJ. Neuroscience: finding the missing fundamental. Nature 436: 1093-1094, 2005.
309. Zheng J, Shen W, He DZ, Long KB, Madison LD, Dallos P. Prestin is the motor protein of cochlear outer hair cells. Nature 405: 149-155, 2000.
310. Zou Y, Zheng J, Ren T, Nuttall A. Cochlear transducer operating point adaptation. J Acoust Soc Am 119: 2232-2241, 2006.
311. Zurek PM, Clark WW, Kim DO. The behavior of acoustic distortion products in the ear canals of chinchillas with normal or damaged ears. J Acoust Soc Am 72: 774-780, 1982.
312. Zweig G. Basilar membrane motion. Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol 40: 619-633, 1976.
313. Zweig G, Shera CA. The origin of periodicity in the spectrum of evoked otoacoustic emissions. J Acoust Soc Am 98: 2018-2047, 1995.
314. 2)-difference tones in a nonlinear cochlear preprocessing model with active feedback. J Acoust Soc Am 80: 163-176, 1986.
315. Zwicker E, Schloth E. Interrelation of different oto-acoustic emissions. J Acoust Soc Am 75: 1148-1154, 1984.
316. Zwislocki JJ, Kletsky EJ. Tectorial membrane: a possible effect on frequency analysis in the cochlea. Science 204: 639-641, 1979.
317. Zwislocki JJ, Szymko YM, Hertig LY. The cochlea is an automatic gain control system after all. In: Diversity in Auditory Mechanics, edited by Lewis ER, Long GR, Lyon RF, Narins PM, Steele CR, and Hecht-Poinar E. Singapore: World Scientific, 1996, p. 354-360.