Tuning curves of the difference tone auditory nerve neurophonic

When a pair of tonal stimuli of different frequencies (F1 and F2, where F2 > F1) are simultaneously presented to the ear, an electrical response with a frequency of F2-F1 can be recorded from the round window (RW) of the gerbil's cochlea. By using phase-locked tones of alternating polarity, the cochlear microphonics are canceled, leaving a time-averaged difference tone-auditory nerve neurophonic (DT-ANN). When the F1 frequency ranges from 1.25 to 30 kHz and F2-F1 approximately 900 Hz, a DT-ANN audiogram can be constructed which parallels (but is at least 10 dB more sensitive than) the compound action potential (CAP) audiogram. In addition to this DT response, a smaller magnitude, higher threshold response having a frequency of 2 DT can often be measured. Both the DT-ANN and the 2 DT-ANN show non-monotonic amplitude input-output functions. The DT- and 2 DT-ANN responses can be forward masked. Masking of low level (e.g., 30 dB SPL) probe stimuli results in DT- and 2 DT-ANN V-shaped tuning curves (TC) with low tip thresholds (approximately 20-30 dB SPL) and a tip frequency close to that of F1 and F2. The Q10 dB values of the forward masked DT-ANN TCs ranges from 1.54 to 20.0 for F1 frequencies varying from 2 to 20 kHz, respectively. The V-shaped DT-ANN TCs generated with simultaneous maskers are often flanked, outside their high- and low-frequency slopes, by frequency-intensity domains where the masker enhances the amplitude of the DT-ANN response. These data (1) provide evidence that, in response to low-intensity tones, the DT-ANN is generated by a restricted population of neurons that have characteristic frequencies close to F1 and F2, and (2) provide evidence for sharply tuned, phase-locked activity occurring in response to low-intensity stimuli, by cochlear axons having characteristic frequencies as high as 20 kHz.

[1]  W. Rosenblith,et al.  Electrophysiological Evidence for Auditory Sensitization , 1957 .

[2]  T. Furukawa,et al.  Quantal analysis of the size of excitatory post‐synaptic potentials at synapses between hair cells and afferent nerve fibres in goldfish. , 1978, The Journal of physiology.

[3]  Comment on "Modulation of the hair cell motor: a possible source of odd-order distortion" [J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 96, 2210-2215 (1994)]. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[4]  D. Harris Action potential suppression, tuning curves and thresholds: Comparison with single fiber data , 1979, Hearing Research.

[5]  N. Kiang,et al.  Tails of tuning curves of auditory-nerve fibers. , 1973, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[6]  A. Ryan,et al.  The development of auditory function in the cochlea of the mongolian gerbil , 1984, Hearing Research.

[7]  D. Mountain,et al.  The envelope following response (EFR) in the Mongolian gerbil to sinusoidally amplitude-modulated signals in the presence of simultaneously gated pure tones. , 1993, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[8]  C E Schreiner,et al.  Selectively eliminating cochlear microphonic contamination from the frequency-following response. , 1990, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[9]  Kenneth R. Henry Auditory nerve neurophonic produced by the frequency difference of two simultaneously presented tones , 1996, Hearing Research.

[10]  P Dallos,et al.  Compound action potential (AP) tuning curves. , 1976, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[11]  C. E. Schreiner,et al.  Forward masking of the auditory nerve neurophonic (ANN) and the frequency following response (FFR) , 1985, Hearing Research.

[12]  Enhancement of the cochlear nerve compound action potential: Sharply defined frequency-intensity domains bordering the tuning curve , 1991, Hearing Research.

[13]  T. Furukawa,et al.  Adaptive rundown of excitatory post‐synaptic potentials at synapses between hair cells and eight nerve fibres in the goldfish. , 1978, The Journal of physiology.

[14]  K. Henry Forward masking and unmasking of the offset cochlear compound action potential of the gerbil: Comparison with suppression areas of the onset cochlear compound action potential , 1987, Hearing Research.

[15]  A. Nuttall,et al.  Intermodulation distortion (F2-F1) in inner hair cell and basilar membrane responses. , 1993, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[16]  Modulation of the hair cell motor: a possible source of odd-order distortion. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[17]  D O Kim,et al.  Cochlear mechanics: nonlinear behavior in two-tone responses as reflected in cochlear-nerve-fiber responses and in ear-canal sound pressure. , 1980, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[18]  C. E. Schreiner,et al.  The auditory neurophonic: Basic properties , 1984, Hearing Research.

[19]  Cochlear nerve responses to waveform singularities and envelope corners , 1989, Hearing Research.

[20]  D. Moody,et al.  Low-frequency detection and discrimination following apical hair cell destruction , 1991, Hearing Research.

[21]  A. Ryan,et al.  Hearing sensitivity of the mongolian gerbil, Meriones unguiculatis. , 1976, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[22]  K. Henry,et al.  Latency and amplitude compound action potential tuning curves for tonal stimuli with nontraditional envelopes. , 1991, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[23]  Effects of altering organ of Corti on cochlear distortion products f2 - f1 and 2f1 - f2. , 1982, Journal of neurophysiology.

[24]  A. Nuttall,et al.  Cochlear microphonic enhancement in two tone interactions , 1991, Hearing Research.

[25]  Robert L. Smith,et al.  Some poststimulatory effects on the whole nerve action potential , 1986, Hearing Research.

[26]  G. M. Gerken Enhancement of the medial geniculate evoked response in conscious cat. , 1973, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.