Physiological Correlates of Comodulation Masking Release in the Mammalian Ventral Cochlear Nucleus

Comodulation masking release (CMR) enhances the detection of signals embedded in wideband, amplitude-modulated maskers. At least part of the CMR is attributable to across-frequency processing, however, the relative contribution of different stages in the auditory system to across-frequency processing is unknown. We have measured the responses of single units from one of the earliest stages in the ascending auditory pathway, the ventral cochlear nucleus, where across frequency processing may take place. A sinusoidally amplitude-modulated tone at the best frequency of each unit was used as a masker. A pure tone signal was added in the dips of the masker modulation (reference condition). Flanking components (FCs) were then added at frequencies remote from the unit best frequency. The FCs were pure tones amplitude modulated either in phase (comodulated) or out of phase (codeviant) with the on-frequency component. Psychophysically, this CMR paradigm reduces within-channel cues while producing an advantage of ∼10 dB for the comodulated condition in comparison with the reference condition. Some of the recorded units showed responses consistent with perceptual CMR. The addition of the comodulated FCs produced a strong reduction in the response to the masker modulation, making the signal more salient in the poststimulus time histograms. A decision statistic based on d′ showed that threshold was reached at lower signal levels for the comodulated condition than for reference or codeviant conditions. The neurons that exhibited such a behavior were mainly transient chopper or primary-like units. The results obtained from a subpopulation of transient chopper units are consistent with a possible circuit in the cochlear nucleus consisting of a wideband inhibitor contacting a narrowband cell. A computational model was used to confirm the feasibility of such a circuit.

[1]  R. Meddis,et al.  Implementation details of a computation model of the inner hair‐cell auditory‐nerve synapse , 1990 .

[2]  B A Wright,et al.  Comodulation masking release in a forward-masking paradigm. , 1987, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[3]  J. Mott,et al.  Neural correlates of psychophysical release from masking. , 1990, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[4]  M. Sachs,et al.  Classification of unit types in the anteroventral cochlear nucleus: PST histograms and regularity analysis. , 1989, Journal of neurophysiology.

[5]  J H Grose,et al.  Comodulation masking release: is comodulation sufficient? , 1993, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[6]  W. S. Rhode,et al.  Physiological response properties of cells labeled intracellularly with horseradish peroxidase in cat ventral cochlear nucleus , 1983, The Journal of comparative neurology.

[7]  D. Oertel,et al.  Morphology and physiology of cells in slice preparations of the posteroventral cochlear nucleus of mice , 1990, The Journal of comparative neurology.

[8]  M. Sachs,et al.  The representations of the steady-state vowel sound /e/ in the discharge patterns of cat anteroventral cochlear nucleus neurons. , 1990, Journal of neurophysiology.

[9]  I. Nelken,et al.  Two separate inhibitory mechanisms shape the responses of dorsal cochlear nucleus type IV units to narrowband and wideband stimuli. , 1994, Journal of neurophysiology.

[10]  Israel Nelken,et al.  Responses of auditory-cortex neurons to structural features of natural sounds , 1999, Nature.

[11]  W. Shofner,et al.  Regularity and latency of units in ventral cochlear nucleus: implications for unit classification and generation of response properties. , 1988, Journal of neurophysiology.

[12]  J H Grose,et al.  Comodulation masking release using SAM tonal complex maskers: effects of modulation depth and signal position. , 1989, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[13]  M F Cohen Comodulation masking release over a three octave range. , 1991, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[14]  D. Oertel,et al.  Morphology and physiology of cells in slice preparations of the dorsal cochlear nucleus of mice , 1989, The Journal of comparative neurology.

[15]  S Buus,et al.  Release from masking caused by envelope fluctuations. , 1985, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[16]  Ronald J. MacGregor,et al.  Neural and brain modeling , 1987 .

[17]  I. Winter,et al.  Frequency extent of two-tone facilitation in onset units in the ventral cochlear nucleus. , 1996, Journal of neurophysiology.

[18]  B C Moore,et al.  Across-channel masking and comodulation masking release. , 1990, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[19]  R. H. Wiley,et al.  Reverberations and Amplitude Fluctuations in the Propagation of Sound in a Forest: Implications for Animal Communication , 1980, The American Naturalist.

[20]  Joseph W. Hall,et al.  Detection in noise by spectro-temporal pattern analysis. , 1984, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[21]  J H Grose,et al.  Comodulation masking release: evidence for multiple cues. , 1988, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[22]  William Bialek,et al.  Statistics of Natural Images: Scaling in the Woods , 1993, NIPS.

[23]  D. A. Godfrey,et al.  Descending projections to the dorsal and ventral divisions of the cochlear nucleus in guinea pig , 1991, Hearing Research.

[24]  W. S. Rhode,et al.  Physiological response properties of cells labeled intracellularly with horseradish peroxidase in cat dorsal cochlear nucleus , 1983, The Journal of comparative neurology.

[25]  A R Palmer,et al.  Temporal responses of primarylike anteroventral cochlear nucleus units to the steady-state vowel /i/. , 1990, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[26]  Nace L. Golding,et al.  Synaptic inputs to stellate cells in the ventral cochlear nucleus. , 1998, Journal of neurophysiology.

[27]  W. S. Rhode,et al.  Structural and functional properties distinguish two types of multipolar cells in the ventral cochlear nucleus , 1989, The Journal of comparative neurology.

[28]  Mary Florentine,et al.  Comodulation masking release for three types of modulator as a function of modulation rate , 1989, Hearing Research.

[29]  A R Palmer,et al.  Level dependence of cochlear nucleus onset unit responses and facilitation by second tones or broadband noise. , 1995, Journal of neurophysiology.

[30]  Philip H Smith,et al.  Temporal and Binaural Properties in Dorsal Cochlear Nucleus and Its Output Tract , 1998, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[31]  R. Gacek,et al.  The Primary Acoustic Nuclei , 1983 .

[32]  E D Schubert,et al.  Influence of place synchrony on detection of a sinusoid. , 1987, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[33]  J H Grose,et al.  Effects of flanking band proximity, number, and modulation pattern on comodulation masking release. , 1990, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[34]  G. Klump,et al.  Signal detection in amplitude‐modulated maskers. I. Behavioural auditory thresholds in a songbird , 2001, The European journal of neuroscience.

[35]  R Meddis,et al.  Regularity of cochlear nucleus stellate cells: a computational modeling study. , 1993, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[36]  B. Kollmeier,et al.  Within-channel cues in comodulation masking release (CMR): experiments and model predictions using a modulation-filterbank model. , 1999, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[37]  Philip H Smith,et al.  Responses of Cochlear Nucleus Cells and Projections of their Axons , 1993 .

[38]  D. Kroodsma,et al.  Ecology and evolution of acoustic communication in birds , 1997 .

[39]  John H. Grose,et al.  Chapter 7 – Across-Channel Processes in Masking , 1995 .

[40]  M. Sachs,et al.  Effects of OFF-BF tones on responses of chopper units in ventral cochlear nucleus. I. Regularity and temporal adaptation patterns. , 1992, Journal of neurophysiology.

[41]  B C Moore,et al.  Comodulation masking release (CMR): effects of signal frequency, flanking-band frequency, masker bandwidth, flanking-band level, and monotic versus dichotic presentation of the flanking band. , 1987, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[42]  N. Kiang,et al.  Single unit activity in the posteroventral cochlear nucleus of the cat , 1975, The Journal of comparative neurology.

[43]  A. Parker,et al.  Sense and the single neuron: probing the physiology of perception. , 1998, Annual review of neuroscience.

[44]  A. Nieder,et al.  Signal detection in amplitude‐modulated maskers. II. Processing in the songbird's auditory forebrain , 2001, The European journal of neuroscience.

[45]  Neil A. Macmillan,et al.  Detection Theory: A User's Guide , 1991 .

[46]  G. Klump,et al.  Comodulation masking release in a songbird , 1995, Hearing Research.

[47]  R Delahaye Across-channel effects on masked signal thresholds in hearing. , 1999 .

[48]  I. Winter,et al.  Responses of single units in the anteroventral cochlear nucleus of the guinea pig , 1990, Hearing Research.

[49]  B C Moore,et al.  Comodulation masking release as a function of type of signal, gated or continuous masking, monaural or dichotic presentation of flanking bands, and center frequency. , 1993, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[50]  I. Winter,et al.  Temporal and mean rate discharge patterns of single units in the dorsal cochlear nucleus of the anesthetized guinea pig. , 1996, Journal of neurophysiology.