Frequency tuning of medial-olivocochlear-efferent acoustic reflexes in humans as functions of probe frequency
Frequency tuning of medial-olivocochlear-efferent acoustic reflexes in humans as functions of probe frequency
复制标题
DOI：
10.1152/jn.00549.2011
复制
发表时间：
2012-03-01
影响因子：
2.5
通讯作者：
Guinan, John J., Jr.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Lilaonitkul, Watjana;Guinan, John J., Jr.
Lilaonitkul W，Guinan JJ Jr.人类内侧橄榄耳蜗传出声反射的频率调谐作为探测频率的函数。J Neurophysiol 107：1598-1611，2012.首次发表于2011年12月21日; doi：10.1152/jn.00549.2011.-内侧橄榄耳蜗（MOC）声反射被认为是提供频率特异性反馈，调整耳蜗放大的增益，但很少有人知道如何频率特异性反射实际上是。我们测量人类MOC调谐通过刺激频率耳声发射（SFOAE）的变化，从40分贝声压级音调在探头频率（f（p）s）接近0.5，1.0，和4.0 kHz。MOC活动由60-dB-SPL同侧、对侧或双侧音调或半倍频程噪声带引起，激发子频率（f（e））以半倍频程步长变化。音调和噪音激发子产生了类似的结果。在所有的探头频率，SFOAE的变化产生了广泛的激发子频率与激发子频率附近的0.7-2.0 kHz是特别有效的。MOC诱导的SFOAE幅度和SFOAE相位的变化是令人惊讶的不同函数f（e）：幅度抑制最大的f（e）接近f（p），相位变化最大的f（e）远离f（p）。度量Delta SFOAE结合了幅度和相位变化，提供了与报告的（猫）MOC神经抑制的最佳匹配。同侧和对侧的MOC反射往往表现出显着的差异，MOC效应与激发子频率的图，表明对侧反射不给同侧反射特性的准确图片。MOC效应的这些差异似乎意味着同侧和对侧反射在耳蜗中具有不同的作用。MOC功能，耳蜗力学，和生产的SFOAE这些结果的影响进行了讨论。
Lilaonitkul W, Guinan JJ Jr. Frequency tuning of medial-olivocochlear-efferent acoustic reflexes in humans as functions of probe frequency. J Neurophysiol 107: 1598-1611, 2012. First published December 21, 2011; doi:10.1152/jn.00549.2011.-The medial-olivocochlear (MOC) acoustic reflex is thought to provide frequency-specific feedback that adjusts the gain of cochlear amplification, but little is known about how frequency specific the reflex actually is. We measured human MOC tuning through changes in stimulus frequency otoacoustic emissions (SFOAEs) from 40-dB-SPL tones at probe frequencies (f(p)s) near 0.5, 1.0, and 4.0 kHz. MOC activity was elicited by 60-dB-SPL ipsilateral, contralateral, or bilateral tones or half-octave noise bands, with elicitor frequency (f(e)) varied in half-octave steps. Tone and noise elicitors produced similar results. At all probe frequencies, SFOAE changes were produced by a wide range of elicitor frequencies with elicitor frequencies near 0.7-2.0 kHz being particularly effective. MOC-induced changes in SFOAE magnitude and SFOAE phase were surprisingly different functions of f(e): magnitude inhibition largest for f(e) close to f(p), phase change largest for f(e) remote from f(p). The metric Delta SFOAE, which combines both magnitude and phase changes, provided the best match to reported (cat) MOC neural inhibition. Ipsilateral and contralateral MOC reflexes often showed dramatic differences in plots of MOC effect vs. elicitor frequency, indicating that the contralateral reflex does not give an accurate picture of ipsilateral-reflex properties. These differences in MOC effects appear to imply that ipsilateral and contralateral reflexes have different actions in the cochlea. The implication of these results for MOC function, cochlear mechanics, and the production of SFOAEs are discussed.