Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Blog
    • Collections
    • Podcast
  • TOPICS
    • Cognition and Behavior
    • Development
    • Disorders of the Nervous System
    • History, Teaching and Public Awareness
    • Integrative Systems
    • Neuronal Excitability
    • Novel Tools and Methods
    • Sensory and Motor Systems
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Editorial Board
    • For the Media
    • Privacy Policy
    • Contact Us
    • Feedback
  • SUBMIT

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
eNeuro
eNeuro

Advanced Search

 

  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Blog
    • Collections
    • Podcast
  • TOPICS
    • Cognition and Behavior
    • Development
    • Disorders of the Nervous System
    • History, Teaching and Public Awareness
    • Integrative Systems
    • Neuronal Excitability
    • Novel Tools and Methods
    • Sensory and Motor Systems
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Editorial Board
    • For the Media
    • Privacy Policy
    • Contact Us
    • Feedback
  • SUBMIT
PreviousNext
Research ArticleResearch Article: New Research, Sensory and Motor Systems

Efferent Activity Controls Hair Cell Response to Mechanical Overstimulation

Chia-Hsi Jessica Lin and Dolores Bozovic
eNeuro 27 June 2022, 9 (4) ENEURO.0198-22.2022; https://doi.org/10.1523/ENEURO.0198-22.2022
Chia-Hsi Jessica Lin
1Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Dolores Bozovic
1Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095
2California NanoSystems Institute, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Figure 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 1.

    A, Spontaneous oscillations before, during, and after efferent stimulation (pulse train: 200 μA, 1 ms on, 10 ms off) are displayed for a representative hair bundle. The onset and offset of the efferent stimulus are indicated by the two green triangles located below the position trace. B, Bright field images showing the application of a large-amplitude (∼1 μm) mechanical deflection to an individual hair bundle via a stiff glass probe. Top, middle, and bottom panels, Hair bundle before, during, and immediately after the mechanical overstimulation, respectively. The width of the scale bar is 1 μm. C, Hair bundle position traces (black) are extracted from high-speed recordings of hair cells undergoing mechanical overstimulation. Hair bundles experience an induced offset before relaxing back to their initial oscillatory dynamic state. The gray vertical bar represents the interval during which the deflection is applied. The baseline (red) of a hair bundle’s relaxation trace (black) is subtracted from the original trace to obtain a flattened recovery trace (D). The blue star annotates the location of the first detected oscillation. The initial (induced) offset, Xo, is the height difference between the position of the hair bundle directly after the withdrawal of the glass probe (red dotted line) and the baseline of the prestimulus spontaneous oscillations (orange line). The baselines are fitted to a function (blue dashed line) that consists of the sum of two exponentials with time constants τ1 and τ2 (where τ2>τ1 ). Scale bars in D are applicable for C. E, The five stimulation protocols were designed as follows: protocol 0 had no efferent stimulation and solely consisted of a large mechanical deflection (black line). Protocol 1 included 20 s of efference (200 μA, 3 ms on/10 ms off) before, during, and after the mechanical overstimulation (indicated by the red line). Protocol 2, protocol 3, and protocol 4 featured efferent actuation exclusively before, during, or after the mechanical overstimulation, respectively.

  • Figure 2.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 2.

    A hair bundle’s relaxation trajectory is dependent on the duration of mechanical overstimulation. A, A series of traces recorded from a single hair cell is shown. Each trace depicts hair bundle recovery following mechanical overstimulation of duration (in seconds) indicated on the right. The hair bundle remains in a quiescent state longer with increasing stimulus duration. The recording order was from bottom to top. B, A series of flattened recovery traces, extracted from the recordings displayed in A, is shown. Three, chronologically subsequent segments are displayed in the first (0–1 s), second (4–5 s), and third (9–10 s) panels. Longer ODs lead to slower recovery of the original oscillation profile. Scale bars in A are applicable for B.

  • Figure 3.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 3.

    Varying the duration of hair bundle deflection affects the induced shifts in the oscillation parameters. Time-series trendlines of instantaneous frequencies, amplitudes, and inferred MET channel open probabilities are plotted for the hair cell in Figure 2 (A, D, G) and another cell from a different sacculus (B, E, H). The four ODs (5, 10, 20, 40 s) are plotted in red, gold, blue, and violet, respectively. The black dashed lines indicate the corresponding values of the cell’s original dynamic state. A hair bundle re-enters the oscillatory regime displaying different characteristics from its initial state. The oscillation parameters reflect this difference before gradually transitioning back to their characteristic values. Frequency, amplitude, and open probability trendlines of the same OD were averaged together to obtain the mean trendlines in C, F, I, respectively. As the OD increases, the initial frequency increases, while the amplitude and open probability decrease. This increased detuning from the original state correlates with a slower recovery from longer mechanical overstimulation. The averaged trendlines reflect data from 13 bundles (6 sacculi). Error bands represent the SDs of data points in a 1 s moving window.

  • Figure 4.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 4.

    Stimulation of efferent neurons provokes an immediate crossover from the quiescent state back to the oscillatory regime. Position traces of four example hair cells recovering from mechanical overstimulation (20 s OD) with concurrent efferent actuation (A) illustrate hair bundles in an oscillatory state despite the large positional offsets. Analogous recordings obtained without concurrent efferent actuation (C) show an initial quiescent interval. B, D, Flattening the traces in A and C, respectively, confirms that a high-amplitude mechanical deflection does not halt oscillatory motion when the efferents are simultaneously activated. Each of the four bundles originated from a distinct sacculus, shown in different colors and offset for clarity. All traces corresponding to the same hair cell are displayed in the same color.

  • Figure 5.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 5.

    Different intervals of efferent stimulation distinctly affect a hair bundle’s oscillation profile as it recovers from mechanical overstimulation. A, A series of traces are shown of recordings from a hair cell undergoing a combination of mechanical overstimulation and efferent actuation. Each trace depicts hair bundle motion following 20 s of large-amplitude mechanical deflection combined with the efference paradigm indicated on the right. The efferents are not actuated in protocol 0, and thus protocol 0 is treated as the control condition against which comparisons are made. In protocol 1, the efferent neurons are activated before, during, and after the mechanical overstimulation for a total of 60 s. Protocol 2, protocol 3, and protocol 4 present efferent modulation exclusively before, during, or after the mechanical overstimulation, respectively. The recording order is from bottom to top. A portion of the observed hair bundles exhibit oscillatory motion immediately on probe release. B, A series of flattened recovery traces corresponding to the traces in A is shown. Three, chronologically subsequent segments are displayed in the first (0–1 s), second (4–5 s), and third (9–10 s) panels. When efference is present during the hair bundle’s recovery (protocol 1 and protocol 4), the bundle’s oscillation profile is significantly altered. Scale bars in A are also applicable for B.

  • Figure 6.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 6.

    Efferent modulation exerts an effect on the quiescent interval observed before recovery of active oscillations. A, A distribution of quiescent times (Tq) across the five efference paradigms, obtained from recordings of 18 bundles across five sacculi, is shown. Bundles whose spontaneous oscillations exhibited “spiking” behavior generally had longer quiescent times and are specifically marked with gray squares. Data points from the same hair bundle are connected together. Efference paradigms that feature efferent activation during the postoverstimulation period (protocol 1 and protocol 4) displayed wider ranges of quiescent times, with seven bundles having their first oscillation occurring within 50 ms. The recordings were separated into three groups: hair bundles that display an immediate return to oscillation (B), those that display regular oscillations and are not immediately affected by efference (C), and bundles that exhibit spike-like motion (D). Box plots illustrate the distribution of quiescent times observed in each group.

  • Figure 7.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 7.

    Among the five efference paradigms, a clear difference can be observed between protocols with or without efferent activation during the hair bundle’s recovery. Time-series trendlines of instantaneous frequencies, amplitudes, and inferred MET channel open probabilities are plotted for the hair cell in Figure 5 (A, D, G) and another cell from a different sacculus (B, E, H). All trendlines were normalized by the specific bundle’s steady state value. The five efference paradigms (protocols 0, 1, 2, 3, 4) are plotted in red, gold, green, blue, and violet, respectively. Under protocol 1 and protocol 4, hair bundles return to the oscillatory regime with a higher frequency, lower amplitude, and smaller open probability than those in the three other protocols. Frequency, amplitude, and open probability trendlines with the same efference protocol were averaged together to obtain the mean normalized trendlines in C, F, I, respectively. The protocol 1 and protocol 4 mean open probability trendlines are initially shifted downwards with respect to the protocol 0 trendline (I), but proceed to gradually increase over time, in contrast to the relatively flat frequency (C) and amplitude (F) trendlines. The averaged trendlines reflect data from 18 bundles (5 sacculi). Error bands represent the SDs of data points in a 1 s moving window.

  • Figure 8.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 8.

    Actuation of the efferent neurons does not significantly affect the slow-component of a hair bundle’s recovery from mechanical overstimulation. A, Box plots illustrate the distribution of initial offsets (Xo) across the five efference paradigms. Bundles whose spontaneous oscillations exhibited “spiking” behavior are specifically marked with gray squares. Data points from the same hair bundle are connected together. There were no statistically significant differences in the mean initial offsets of the four protocols compared with the protocol 0 control. Thus, efferent modulation does not influence a hair bundle’s induced initial offset. Data points in A were obtained from recordings of 18 bundles across five sacculi. An extracted baseline was fitted to the sum of two exponentials, which yielded two time constants, τ1 and τ2 ( τ2>τ1 ). The computed baseline time constants for recovery with simultaneous efferent actuation (“efference on”) are shown in B, and the time constants for the same hair bundles obtained without efferent actuation (“efference off” condition) are illustrated in C. The data shown in B and C were obtained from recordings of 22 hair bundles extracted from nine sacculi. All baselines were uniquely fitted with R2 > 0.95. On average, the presence of efferent stimulation does not substantially alter the hair bundle’s resumption of its steady state position.

Tables

  • Figures
    • View popup
    Table 1.

    Average quiescent times measured under different efference protocols

    〈Tq〉Δ w.r.t. PROT 0One-tailed
    paired t test
    t statisticp value
    Immediate oscillatorsPROT 00.49 ± 0.32 s———
    PROT 10.02 ± 0.01 s−0.47 ± 0.32 st(4) = −3.31p = 0.02*
    PROT 20.72 ± 0.59 s0.23 ± 0.34 st(4) = 1.53p = 0.10
    PROT 31.03 ± 0.88 s0.54 ± 0.57 st(4) = 2.09p = 0.05
    PROT 40.01 ± 0.01 s−0.48 ± 0.32 st(4) = −3.35p = 0.01*
    Unaffected regularPROT 00.38 ± 0.14 s———
    PROT 10.47 ± 0.21 s0.10 ± 0.15 st(8) = 1.81p = 0.06
    PROT 20.47 ± 0.38 s0.09 ± 0.44 st(8) = 0.62p = 0.28
    PROT 30.54 ± 0.22 s0.17 ± 0.27 st(8) = 1.77p = 0.06
    PROT 40.39 ± 0.25 s0.01 ± 0.20 st(8) = 0.16p = 0.44
    SpikingPROT 01.82 ± 0.96 s———
    PROT 11.86 ± 1.16 s0.04 ± 0.22 st(3) = 0.41p = 0.35
    PROT 23.87 ± 2.18 s2.05 ± 1.65 st(3) = 2.48p = 0.05
    PROT 33.87 ± 3.10 s2.05 ± 2.16 st(3) = 1.91p = 0.08
    PROT 42.35 ± 1.74 s0.53 ± 0.87 st(3) = 1.23p = 0.15
    • Each subset of hair bundle response to simultaneous efferent actuation and mechanical overstimulation was separately analyzed (Fig. 6B–D), and the quiescent time (Tq) averages of each efference protocol are listed in the 〈Tq〉 column. With respect to protocol 0, the differences in quiescent times and the results of one-tailed paired t tests are shown. Differences were considered significant if p < 0.05 and are indicated by asterisks. Thus, protocol 1 and protocol 4 both had statistically significant differences in their mean quiescent times for those hair bundles that exhibited oscillatory motion immediately postoverstimulation. On the other hand, neither the unaffected regular hair cells nor the spiking bundles displayed statistically significant differences in their mean quiescent times with respect to protocol 0 for any of the efference paradigms.

    • View popup
    Table 2.

    Average initial offsets measured under different efference protocols

    〈Xo〉Δ w.r.t. PROT 0One-tailed
    paired t test
    t statisticp value
    Immediate oscillatorsPROT 0495.16 ± 39.30 nm———
    PROT 1493.41 ± 59.89 nm−1.75 ± 46.53 nmt(4) = −0.08p = 0.47
    PROT 2476.20 ± 62.06 nm−18.96 ± 27.12 nmt(4) = −1.56p = 0.10
    PROT 3496.99 ± 111.24 nm1.83 ± 83.30 nmt(4) = 0.05p = 0.48
    PROT 4486.40 ± 93.85 nm−8.76 ± 80.25 nmt(4) = −0.24p = 0.41
    Unaffected regularPROT 0461.59 ± 65.51 nm———
    PROT 1432.71 ± 69.80 nm−28.88 ± 68.36 nmt(8) = −1.19p = 0.14
    PROT 2448.08 ± 61.84 nm−13.51 ± 61.35 nmt(8) = −0.62p = 0.28
    PROT 3470.51 ± 87.07 nm8.92 ± 89.07 nmt(8) = 0.28p = 0.39
    PROT 4446.46 ± 71.17 nm−15.13 ± 42.97 nmt(8) = −1.00p = 0.18
    SpikingPROT 0491.16 ± 109.77 nm———
    PROT 1494.64 ± 116.28 nm3.47 ± 30.75 nmt(3) = 0.23p = 0.42
    PROT 2531.89 ± 153.83 nm40.73 ± 108.94 nmt(3) = 0.75p = 0.25
    PROT 3548.70 ± 142.36 nm57.54 ± 99.79 nmt(3) = 1.15p = 0.17
    PROT 4461.80 ± 141.97 nm−29.36 ± 47.56 nmt(3) = −1.23p = 0.15
    • The average initial offsets after mechanical overstimulation were comparable for all of the efference stimulus paradigms (Fig. 8A). The hair bundles were subdivided and further analyzed. The mean initial offsets of the three subcategories are shown in the 〈Xo〉 column. With respect to protocol 0, the differences in initial offsets and the results of one-tailed paired t tests are listed. Differences were considered significant if p < 0.05 and are indicated by asterisks. Hence, there were no statistically significant differences in the initial offsets, for any of the subgroups of hair cells and under any of the efference paradigms.

Back to top

In this issue

eneuro: 9 (4)
eNeuro
Vol. 9, Issue 4
July/August 2022
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
  • Ed Board (PDF)
Email

Thank you for sharing this eNeuro article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Efferent Activity Controls Hair Cell Response to Mechanical Overstimulation
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from eNeuro
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in eNeuro.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
View Full Page PDF
Citation Tools
Efferent Activity Controls Hair Cell Response to Mechanical Overstimulation
Chia-Hsi Jessica Lin, Dolores Bozovic
eNeuro 27 June 2022, 9 (4) ENEURO.0198-22.2022; DOI: 10.1523/ENEURO.0198-22.2022

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Respond to this article
Share
Efferent Activity Controls Hair Cell Response to Mechanical Overstimulation
Chia-Hsi Jessica Lin, Dolores Bozovic
eNeuro 27 June 2022, 9 (4) ENEURO.0198-22.2022; DOI: 10.1523/ENEURO.0198-22.2022
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Significance Statement
    • Introduction
    • Materials and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • References
    • Synthesis
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF

Keywords

  • efferent stimulation
  • hair bundle mechanics
  • hair cell
  • mechanical overstimulation
  • sacculus

Responses to this article

Respond to this article

Jump to comment:

No eLetters have been published for this article.

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

Research Article: New Research

  • Parallel gene expression changes in ventral midbrain dopamine and GABA neurons during normal aging
  • Lactate receptor HCAR1 affects axonal development and contributes to lactate’s protection of axons and myelin in experimental neonatal hypoglycemia
  • Demyelination produces a shift in the population of cortical neurons that synapse with callosal oligodendrocyte progenitor cells
Show more Research Article: New Research

Sensory and Motor Systems

  • Task Modulation of Resting-State Functional Gradient Stability in Lifelong Premature Ejaculation: An fMRI Study
  • Synaptic Drive onto Inhibitory and Excitatory Principal Neurons of the Mouse Lateral Superior Olive
  • The Computational Bottleneck of Basal Ganglia Output (and What to Do About it)
Show more Sensory and Motor Systems

Subjects

  • Sensory and Motor Systems
  • Home
  • Alerts
  • Follow SFN on BlueSky
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Facebook
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on Twitter
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on LinkedIn
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Youtube
  • Follow our RSS feeds

Content

  • Early Release
  • Current Issue
  • Latest Articles
  • Issue Archive
  • Blog
  • Browse by Topic

Information

  • For Authors
  • For the Media

About

  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Privacy Notice
  • Contact
  • Feedback
(eNeuro logo)
(SfN logo)

Copyright © 2025 by the Society for Neuroscience.
eNeuro eISSN: 2373-2822

The ideas and opinions expressed in eNeuro do not necessarily reflect those of SfN or the eNeuro Editorial Board. Publication of an advertisement or other product mention in eNeuro should not be construed as an endorsement of the manufacturer’s claims. SfN does not assume any responsibility for any injury and/or damage to persons or property arising from or related to any use of any material contained in eNeuro.