The brain-stem auditory-evoked response in the big brown bat (Eptesicus fuscus) to clicks and frequency-modulated sweeps.

Three experiments were performed to evaluate the effects of stimulus level on the brain-stem auditory-evoked response (BAER) in the big brown bat (Eptesicus fuscus), a species that uses frequency-modulated (FM) sonar sounds for echolocation. In experiment 1, the effects of click level on the BAER were investigated. Clicks were presented at levels of 30 to 90 dB pSPL in 10-dB steps. Each animal responded reliably to clicks at levels of 50 dB pSPL and above, showing a BAER containing four peaks in the first 3-4 ms from click onset (waves i-iv). With increasing click level, BAER peak amplitude increased and peak latency decreased. A decrease in the i-iv interval also occurred with increasing click level. In experiment 2, stimuli were 1-ms linear FM sweeps, decreasing in frequency from 100 to 20 kHz. Stimulus levels ranged from 20 to 90 dB pSPL. BAERs to FM sweeps were observed in all animals for levels of 40 dB pSPL and above. These responses were similar to the click-evoked BAER in waveform morphology, with the notable exception of an additional peak observed at the higher levels of FM sweeps. This peak (wave ia) occurred prior to the first wave seen at lower levels (wave ib). As the level of the FM sweep increased, there was a decrease in peak latency and an increase in peak amplitude. Similarity in the magnitude and behavior of the i-iv and ib-iv intervals suggests that wave ib to FM sweeps is the homolog of the wave i response to click stimuli. Experiment 3 tested the hypothesis that wave ia represented activity emanating from more basal cochlear regions than wave ib. FM sweeps (100-20 kHz) were presented at 90 dB pSPL, and broadband noise was raised in level until the BAER was eliminated. This "masked threshold" occurred at 85 dB SPL of noise. At masked threshold, the broadband noise was steeply high-pass filtered at five cutoff frequencies ranging from 20 to 80 kHz. Generally, wave ia was eliminated for masker cutoff frequencies of 56.6 kHz and below, while wave ib was typically observed for masker cutoffs down to 28.3 kHz. The results of these three experiments are compared and contrasted with data from other mammalian BAER studies.

[1]  G. Pollak.  Time is traded for intensity in the bat's auditory system , 1988, Hearing Research.

[2]  J. Buchwald,et al.  Far-field acoustic response: origins in the cat. , 1975, Science.

[3]  K. Henry.  Auditory nerve and brain stem volume-conducted potentials evoked by pure-tone pips in the CBA/J laboratory mouse. , 1979, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

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

[5]  J. Simmons.  A view of the world through the bat's ear: The formation of acoustic images in echolocation , 1989, Cognition.

[6]  J S Buchwald,et al.  Factors that affect the amplitudes and latencies of the vertex short latency acoustic responses in the cat. , 1978, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[7]  D. Griffin,et al.  Listening in the Dark , 1959 .

[8]  R. Burkard,et al.  The effect of broadband noise on the human brainstem auditory evoked response. I. Rate and intensity effects. , 1983, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[9]  R. Burkard,et al.  Stimulus dependencies of the gerbil brain-stem auditory-evoked response (BAER). I: Effects of click level, rate, and polarity. , 1989, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[10]  W. Doyle,et al.  Auditory Brain Stem Responses in Rhesus Monkey with Otitis Media with Effusion , 1982, Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery.

[11]  P. Trenque,et al.  Latency of brain stem responses to chirps (linear frequency-ramp bursts). Relationship between certain physical parameters of the stimulus and nervous activity. , 1978, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[12]  J. Simmons,et al.  Automatic gain control in the bat's sonar receiver and the neuroethology of echolocation , 1984, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[13]  M. Feldman,et al.  Brainstem auditory-evoked response in the rat. Normative studies, with observations concerning the effects of ossicular disruption. , 1990, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[14]  J. Stockard,et al.  Brainstem auditory-evoked responses. Normal variation as a function of stimulus and subject characteristics. , 1979, Archives of neurology.

[15]  M L Lenhardt.  Wave V latency and chirp (linear frequency ramp): repetition rate. , 1982, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[16]  J. Simmons.  The resolution of target range by echolocating bats. , 1973, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[17]  Hu Chi-ming,et al.  Interpretation of the vertex short-latency acoustic response: A study of single neurons in the brain stem , 1977, Brain Research.