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.