Stimulus Frequency Otoacoustic Emission Delays and Generating Mechanisms in Guinea Pigs, Chinchillas, and Simulations

According to coherent reflection theory (CRT), stimulus frequency otoacoustic emissions (SFOAEs) arise from cochlear irregularities coherently reflecting energy from basilar membrane motion within the traveling-wave peak. This reflected energy arrives in the ear canal predominantly with a single delay at each frequency. However, data from humans and animals indicate that (1) SFOAEs can have multiple delay components, (2) low-frequency SFOAE delays are too short to be accounted for by CRT, and (3) “SFOAEs” obtained with a 2nd (“suppressor”) tone ≥2 octaves above the probe tone have been interpreted as arising from the area basal to the region of cochlear amplification. To explore these issues, we collected SFOAEs by the suppression method in guinea pigs and time-frequency analyzed these data, simulated SFOAEs, and published chinchilla SFOAEs. Time-frequency analysis revealed that most frequencies showed only one SFOAE delay component while other frequencies had multiple components including some with short delays. We found no systematic patterns in the occurrence of multiple delay components. Using a cochlear model that had significant basilar membrane motion only in the peak region of the traveling wave, simulated SFOAEs had single and multiple delay components similar to the animal SFOAEs. This result indicates that multiple components (including ones with short delays) can originate from cochlear mechanical irregularities in the SFOAE peak region and are not necessarily indicative of SFOAE sources in regions ≥2 octaves basal of the SFOAE peak region. We conclude that SFOAEs obtained with suppressors close to the probe frequency provide information primarily about the mechanical response in the region that receives amplification, and we attribute the too-short SFOAE delays at low frequencies to distortion-source SFOAEs and coherent reflection from multiple cochlear motions. Our findings suggest that CRT needs revision to include reflections from multiple motions in the cochlear apex.

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

[2]  Mario A Ruggero,et al.  Threshold tuning curves of chinchilla auditory-nerve fibers. I. Dependence on characteristic frequency and relation to the magnitudes of cochlear vibrations. , 2008, Journal of neurophysiology.

[3]  Christopher A. Shera,et al.  The origin of SFOAE microstructure in the guinea pig , 2003, Hearing Research.

[4]  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.

[5]  Single-fibre responses to clicks in relationship to the compound action potential in the guinea pig , 1990, Hearing Research.

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

[7]  M. Ruggero,et al.  Wiener kernels of chinchilla auditory-nerve fibers: verification using responses to tones, clicks, and noise and comparison with basilar-membrane vibrations. , 2005, Journal of neurophysiology.

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

[9]  Christopher A Shera,et al.  Near equivalence of human click-evoked and stimulus-frequency otoacoustic emissions. , 2007, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[10]  S. Goodman,et al.  The Effect of Stimulus Bandwidth on the Nonlinear-Derived Tone-Burst-Evoked Otoacoustic Emission , 2014, Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology.

[11]  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.

[12]  W. S. Rhode,et al.  Basilar membrane mechanics in the 6-9 kHz region of sensitive chinchilla cochleae. , 2007, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[13]  Arturo Moleti,et al.  Time-frequency domain filtering of evoked otoacoustic emissions. , 2012, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[14]  J. Guinan,et al.  Evoked otoacoustic emissions arise by two fundamentally different mechanisms: a taxonomy for mammalian OAEs. , 1999, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[15]  Sriram Boothalingam,et al.  Effect of contralateral acoustic stimulation on cochlear tuning measured using stimulus frequency and distortion product OAEs , 2012, International journal of audiology.

[16]  Alan R. Palmer,et al.  Variation in the Phase of Response to Low-Frequency Pure Tones in the Guinea Pig Auditory Nerve as Functions of Stimulus Level and Frequency , 2008, Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology.

[17]  P. Joris,et al.  Frequency selectivity in Old-World monkeys corroborates sharp cochlear tuning in humans , 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[18]  Alberto Recio-Spinoso,et al.  Delays of stimulus-frequency otoacoustic emissions and cochlear vibrations contradict the theory of coherent reflection filtering. , 2005, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

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

[20]  Steven L. Jacques,et al.  In Vivo Outer Hair Cell Length Changes Expose the Active Process in the Cochlea , 2012, PloS one.

[21]  Mario A. Ruggero,et al.  Phase-Locked Responses to Tones of Chinchilla Auditory Nerve Fibers: Implications for Apical Cochlear Mechanics , 2010, Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology.

[22]  Steven L. Jacques,et al.  A differentially amplified motion in the ear for near-threshold sound detection , 2011, Nature Neuroscience.

[23]  R. Kalluri,et al.  Measuring stimulus-frequency otoacoustic emissions using swept tones. , 2013, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[24]  C. Talmadge,et al.  Testing coherent reflection in chinchilla: Auditory-nerve responses predict stimulus-frequency emissions. , 2008, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

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

[26]  Christopher A Shera,et al.  Obtaining reliable phase-gradient delays from otoacoustic emission data. , 2012, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[27]  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.

[28]  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.

[29]  John J Guinan,et al.  Medial-olivocochlear-efferent inhibition of the first peak of auditory-nerve responses: evidence for a new motion within the cochlea. , 2005, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

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

[31]  Christopher A Shera,et al.  Revised estimates of human cochlear tuning from otoacoustic and behavioral measurements , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[32]  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.

[33]  R. Kalluri,et al.  Distortion-product source unmixing: a test of the two-mechanism model for DPOAE generation. , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[34]  Filippo Sanjust,et al.  Input/output functions of different-latency components of transient-evoked and stimulus-frequency otoacoustic emissions. , 2013, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[35]  Watjana Lilaonitkul,et al.  Medial Olivocochlear Efferent Reflex in Humans: Otoacoustic Emission (OAE) Measurement Issues and the Advantages of Stimulus Frequency OAEs , 2003, Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology.

[36]  R. Sisto,et al.  Generation place of the long- and short-latency components of transient-evoked otoacoustic emissions in a nonlinear cochlear model. , 2013, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[37]  Russell R. Pfeiffer,et al.  Cochlear Nerve Fiber Discharge Patterns: Relationship to the Cochlear Microphonic , 1970, Science.

[38]  Christopher A Shera,et al.  On the spatial distribution of the reflection sources of different latency components of otoacoustic emissions. , 2015, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[39]  D. A. Ronken,et al.  Anomalous phase relations in threshold-level responses from gerbil auditory nerve fibers. , 1986, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[40]  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.

[41]  N. Kiang Peripheral Neural Processing of Auditory Information , 2011 .

[42]  S. Goodman,et al.  Basal Contributions to Short-Latency Transient-Evoked Otoacoustic Emission Components , 2014, Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology.

[43]  L. Robles,et al.  Basilar-membrane responses to tones at the base of the chinchilla cochlea. , 1997, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[44]  J. Guinan,et al.  Time-course of the human medial olivocochlear reflex. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[45]  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.

[46]  Douglas H. Keefe,et al.  Two-tone suppression of stimulus frequency otoacoustic emissions. , 2008, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

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