Cochlear traveling-wave amplification, suppression, and beamforming probed using noninvasive calibration of intracochlear distortion sources.

Originally developed to estimate the power gain of the cochlear amplifier, so-called "Allen-Fahey" and related experiments have proved invaluable for probing the mechanisms of wave generation and propagation within the cochlea. The experimental protocol requires simultaneous measurement of intracochlear distortion products (DPs) and ear-canal otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs) under tightly controlled conditions. To calibrate the intracochlear response to the DP, Allen-Fahey experiments traditionally employ invasive procedures such as recording from auditory-nerve fibers or measuring basilar-membrane velocity. This paper describes an alternative method that allows the intracochlear distortion source to be calibrated noninvasively. In addition to the standard pair of primary tones used to generate the principal DP the noninvasive method employs a third, fixed tone to create a secondary DPOAE whose amplitude and phase provide a sensitive assay of the intracochlear value of the principal DP near its characteristic place. The method is used to perform noninvasive Allen-Fahey experiments in cat and shown to yield results in quantitative agreement with the original, auditory-nerve-based paradigm performed in the same animal. Data obtained using a suppression-compensated variation of the noninvasive method demonstrate that neither traveling-wave amplification nor two-tone suppression constitutes the controlling influence in DPOAE generation at close frequency ratios. Rather, the dominant factor governing the emission magnitude appears to be the variable directionality of the waves radiated by the distortion-source region, which acts as a distortion beamformer tuned by the primary frequency ratio.

[1]  J. Allen,et al.  Nonlinear phenomena as observed in the ear canal and at the auditory nerve. , 1985, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[2]  D T Kemp,et al.  Indications of different distortion product otoacoustic emission mechanisms from a detailed f1,f2 area study. , 2000, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[3]  C. A. Shera,et al.  WAVE INTERFERENCE IN THE GENERATION OF REFLECTION- AND DISTORTION-SOURCE EMISSIONS , 2003 .

[4]  M. Liberman,et al.  Auditory-nerve response from cats raised in a low-noise chamber. , 1978, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[5]  J. Guinan,et al.  Medial efferent inhibition produces the largest equivalent attenuations at moderate to high sound levels in cat auditory-nerve fibers. , 1996, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[6]  A. Nuttall,et al.  Cochlear compression wave: an implication of the Allen-Fahey experiment. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[7]  J. L. Goldstein,et al.  Neural correlates of the aural combination tone 2f 1 - f 2 , 1968 .

[8]  J. Allen,et al.  Using acoustic distortion products to measure the cochlear amplifier gain on the basilar membrane. , 1992, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[9]  E. Evans Cochlear Nerve and Cochlear Nucleus , 1975 .

[10]  Philip X Joris,et al.  Cochlear Phase and Amplitude Retrieved from the Auditory Nerve at Arbitrary Frequencies , 2003, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[11]  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.

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

[13]  Low-noise chambers for auditory research. , 1975, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[14]  C. Shera,et al.  Analyzing reverse middle-ear transmission: noninvasive Gedankenexperiments. , 1992, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[15]  E. Olson,et al.  Two-tone distortion in intracochlear pressure. , 2005, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[16]  P. Fahey,et al.  Mechanism for bandpass frequency characteristic in distortion product otoacoustic emission generation. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[17]  J. Allen,et al.  A second cochlear-frequency map that correlates distortion product and neural tuning measurements. , 1993, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[18]  John J. Guinan,et al.  Effects of electrical stimulation of efferent olivocochlear neurons on cat auditory-nerve fibers. I. Rate-level functions , 1988, Hearing Research.

[19]  Christopher A Shera,et al.  Coherent reflection in a two-dimensional cochlea: Short-wave versus long-wave scattering in the generation of reflection-source otoacoustic emissions. , 2005, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[20]  G. Long,et al.  Modeling otoacoustic emission and hearing threshold fine structures. , 1998, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[21]  M. Liberman The cochlear frequency map for the cat: labeling auditory-nerve fibers of known characteristic frequency. , 1982, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[22]  Egbert de Boer THE INVERSE PROBLEM SOLVED FOR A THREE-DIMENSIONAL MODEL OF THE COCHLEA.II: APPLICATION TO EXPERIMENTAL DATA SETS , 1995 .

[23]  J. L. Goldstein,et al.  Compatibility between psychophysical and physiological measurements of aural combination tones. , 1978, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[24]  Ning Hu,et al.  The Allen-Fahey experiment extended. , 2005, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[25]  M R Schroeder,et al.  Amplitude behavior of the cubic difference tone. , 1975, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[26]  G. Zweig,et al.  Finding the impedance of the organ of Corti. , 1991, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

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

[28]  L. Kanis,et al.  Frequency dependence of acoustic distortion products in a locally active model of the cochlea. , 1997, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[29]  van Hengel,et al.  Emissions from cochlear modelling , 1996 .

[30]  P. Fahey,et al.  Nonlinear interactions that could explain distortion product interference response areas. , 2000, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[31]  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.

[32]  A. M. Brown,et al.  Mechanical filtering of sound in the inner ear , 1992, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.