The Spatial Origins of Cochlear Amplification Assessed by Stimulus-Frequency Otoacoustic Emissions.

Cochlear amplification of basilar membrane traveling waves is thought to occur between a tone's characteristic frequency (CF) place and within one octave basal of the CF. Evidence for this view comes only from the cochlear base. Stimulus-frequency otoacoustic emissions (SFOAEs) provide a noninvasive alternative to direct measurements of cochlear motion that can be measured across a wide range of CF regions. Coherent reflection theory indicates that SFOAEs arise mostly from the peak region of the traveling wave, but several studies using far-basal suppressor tones claimed that SFOAE components originate many octaves basal of CF. We measured SFOAEs while perfusing guinea pig cochleas from apex to base with salicylate or KCl solutions that reduced outer-hair-cell function and SFOAE amplification. Solution effects on inner hair cells reduced auditory nerve compound action potentials (CAPs) and provided reference times for when solutions reached the SFOAE-frequency CF region. As solution flowed from apex to base, SFOAE reductions generally occurred later than CAP reductions and showed that the effects of cochlear amplification usually peaked ∼1/2 octave basal of the CF region. For tones ≥2 kHz, cochlear amplification typically extended ∼1.5 octaves basal of CF, and the data are consistent with coherent reflection theory. SFOAE amplification did not extend to the basal end of the cochlea, even though reticular lamina motion is amplified in this region, which indicates that reticular lamina motion is not directly coupled to basilar membrane traveling waves. Previous reports of SFOAE-frequency residuals produced by suppressor frequencies far above the SFOAE frequency are most likely due to additional sources created by the suppressor. For some tones <2 kHz, SFOAE amplification extended two octaves apical of CF, which highlights that different vibratory motions produce SFOAEs and CAPs, and that the amplification region depends on the cochlear mode of motion considered. The concept that there is a single "cochlear amplification region" needs to be revised.

[1]  Tianying Ren,et al.  Reticular lamina and basilar membrane vibrations in living mouse cochleae , 2016, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[2]  G. Zweig Basilar membrane motion. , 1976, Cold Spring Harbor symposia on quantitative biology.

[3]  John J. Guinan,et al.  How are inner hair cells stimulated? Evidence for multiple mechanical drives , 2012, Hearing Research.

[4]  J. Guinan,et al.  Auditory-nerve-fiber responses to high-level clicks: interference patterns indicate that excitation is due to the combination of multiple drives. , 2000, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[5]  L. Robles,et al.  Mechanics of the mammalian cochlea. , 2001, Physiological reviews.

[6]  K. D. Karavitaki,et al.  Imaging electrically evoked micromechanical motion within the organ of corti of the excised gerbil cochlea. , 2007, Biophysical journal.

[7]  Alberto Recio-Spinoso,et al.  Unusual mechanical processing of sounds at the apex of the Guinea pig cochlea , 2018, Hearing Research.

[8]  John S Oghalai,et al.  Two-Dimensional Cochlear Micromechanics Measured In Vivo Demonstrate Radial Tuning within the Mouse Organ of Corti , 2016, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[9]  James B. Dewey,et al.  Amplification and Suppression of Traveling Waves along the Mouse Organ of Corti: Evidence for Spatial Variation in the Longitudinal Coupling of Outer Hair Cell-Generated Forces , 2019, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[10]  J. Lichtenhan 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 , 2012, Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology.

[11]  Simon S Gao,et al.  Vibration of the organ of Corti within the cochlear apex in mice. , 2014, Journal of neurophysiology.

[12]  J. Santos-Sacchi,et al.  Effects of Salicylate and Lanthanides on Outer Hair Cell Motility and Associated Gating Charge , 1996, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[13]  J. Guinan,et al.  Cochlear compound action potentials from high-level tone bursts originate from wide cochlear regions that are offset toward the most sensitive cochlear region. , 2019, Journal of neurophysiology.

[14]  Andrew J. Oxenham,et al.  Otoacoustic Estimation of Cochlear Tuning: Validation in the Chinchilla , 2010, Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology.

[15]  A. Nuttall,et al.  Effect of salicylate on KCNQ4 of the guinea pig outer hair cell. , 2010, Journal of neurophysiology.

[16]  A. Cody,et al.  Acoustic lesions in the mammalian cochlea: Implications for the spatial distribution of the ‘active process’ , 1992, Hearing Research.

[17]  Christopher A Shera,et al.  Stimulus-frequency-emission group delay: a test of coherent reflection filtering and a window on cochlear tuning. , 2003, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[18]  G. Zweig,et al.  The origin of periodicity in the spectrum of evoked otoacoustic emissions. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[19]  J. Siegel,et al.  Low-frequency tone-pip-evoked otoacoustic emissions originate over a broad cochlear region in chinchillas , 2015 .

[20]  J. Siegel,et al.  Tuning of SFOAEs Evoked by Low-Frequency Tones Is Not Compatible with Localized Emission Generation , 2015, Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology.

[21]  A. Salt,et al.  Direct administration of 2-Hydroxypropyl-Beta-Cyclodextrin into guinea pig cochleae: Effects on physiological and histological measurements , 2017, PloS one.

[22]  Sumitrajit Dhar,et al.  The breaking of cochlear scaling symmetry in human newborns and adults. , 2011, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[23]  William F. Sewell,et al.  The effects of furosemide on the endocochlear potential and auditory-nerve fiber tuning curves in cats , 1984, Hearing Research.

[24]  Pamela Souza,et al.  Stimulus-Frequency Otoacoustic Emission Suppression Tuning in Humans: Comparison to Behavioral Tuning , 2013, Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology.

[25]  D H Keefe,et al.  Double-evoked otoacoustic emissions. II. Intermittent noise rejection, calibration and ear-canal measurements. , 1998, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[26]  Jeffery T Lichtenhan,et al.  A New Auditory Threshold Estimation Technique for Low Frequencies: Proof of Concept , 2013, Ear and hearing.

[27]  J. Siegel,et al.  Estimating Cochlear Frequency Selectivity with Stimulus-frequency Otoacoustic Emissions in Chinchillas , 2014, Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology.

[28]  Nigel P Cooper,et al.  Medial olivocochlear efferent inhibition of basilar-membrane responses to clicks: evidence for two modes of cochlear mechanical excitation. , 2008, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[29]  A. Salt,et al.  Drug delivery into the cochlear apex: Improved control to sequentially affect finely spaced regions along the entire length of the cochlear spiral , 2016, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

[30]  Alberto Recio-Spinoso,et al.  Mechanical tuning and amplification within the apex of the guinea pig cochlea , 2017, The Journal of physiology.

[31]  G. Long,et al.  Modeling the combined effects of basilar membrane nonlinearity and roughness on stimulus frequency otoacoustic emission fine structure. , 2000, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[32]  M. Liberman,et al.  Intracellular labeling of auditory nerve fibers in guinea pig: central and peripheral projections , 1997 .

[33]  I. Russell,et al.  The location of the cochlear amplifier: spatial representation of a single tone on the guinea pig basilar membrane. , 1997, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[34]  N. Cooper,et al.  Vibration hotspots reveal longitudinal funneling of sound-evoked motion in the mammalian cochlea , 2018, Nature Communications.

[35]  Hui Nam,et al.  Auditory-nerve phenomena relevant to cochlear mechanics , 2018 .

[36]  J. Siegel Does reticular lamina active gain explain broad suppression tuning of SFOAEs , 2018 .

[37]  J. Guinan,et al.  The Auditory Nerve Overlapped Waveform (ANOW) Originates in the Cochlear Apex , 2014, Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology.

[38]  Anthony W. Gummer,et al.  Nanomechanics of the subtectorial space caused by electromechanics of cochlear outer hair cells , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[39]  Stephen T Neely,et al.  Stimulus-frequency otoacoustic emission: measurements in humans and simulations with an active cochlear model. , 2008, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[40]  C. Daniel Geisler,et al.  Saturation of outer hair cell receptor currents causes two-tone suppression , 1990, Hearing Research.

[41]  E. Olson,et al.  Nonlinearity and amplification in cochlear responses to single and multi-tone stimuli , 2019, Hearing Research.

[42]  Patrick D. Raphael,et al.  Organ of Corti vibration within the intact gerbil cochlea measured by volumetric optical coherence tomography and vibrometry. , 2018, Journal of neurophysiology.

[43]  E. Evans,et al.  Ototoxic effects of salicylates on the responses of single cochlear nerve fibres and on cochlear potentials. , 1982, British journal of audiology.

[44]  Tobias Reichenbach,et al.  The Spatial Pattern of Cochlear Amplification , 2012, Neuron.

[45]  J. Guinan Changes in Stimulus Frequency Otoacoustic Emissions Produced by Two-Tone Suppression and Efferent Stimulation in Cats , 1990 .

[46]  A. Salt,et al.  Large endolymphatic potentials from low-frequency and infrasonic tones in the guinea pig. , 2013, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.