Distortion-product otoacoustic emissions and their anaesthesia sensitivity in the European Starling and the chicken

https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-5955(95)00053-7Get rights and content

Abstract

The aim of the present experimental series was to provide further information on the distortion-product otoacoustic emissions (DP) of birds and contribute to a general understanding of DP generation. Basic characteristics of the DP 2f1f2 and 2f2f1 were measured in the ear canal of both awake and anaesthetized European Starlings and chickens. The effect of a third suppressive tone and the behaviour of the DP under anaesthesia were also studied. In general, the DP characteristics of both bird species resembled those of lizards and mammals, but first appeared at somewhat higher primary-tone levels. The best frequencies of third tones suppressing 2f1f2 lay near the first primary tone (f1), but for 2f2f1, the situation was more complex. Facilitation via a third tone was also seen for both DP, often at levels below those eliciting suppression. The DP 2f1f2 disappeared completely at the onset of deep anaesthesia and recovered to its original magnitude when the anaesthesia was lightened, sometimes with a considerable delay. The compound action potential (CAP) was somewhat more sensitive to anaesthesia than the DP. Control experiments showed that the anaesthesia effect was not a result of hypoxia.

Avian DP at low and intermediate sound levels are thus physiologically-sensitive manifestations of normal hair-cell function that are, in contrast to mammals, also anaesthesia-sensitive.

References (40)

  • A. Moulin et al.

    Contralateral auditory stimulation alters acoustic distortion products in humans

    Hear. Res.

    (1993)
  • M.L. Whitehead et al.

    Slow variation of the amplitude of acoustic distortion at f2f1 in awake rabbits

    Hear. Res.

    (1991)
  • E. Zwicker

    Nonmonotonic behaviour (2f1f2) explained by a saturation feedback model

    Hear. Res.

    (1980)
  • A.M. Brown

    Acoustic distortion from rodent ears: A comparison of responses from rats, guinea pigs and gerbils

    Hear. Res.

    (1987)
  • F.P. Fischer et al.

    Morphological gradients in the Starling basilar papilla

    J. Morphol.

    (1992)
  • S.A. Gaskill et al.

    The behavior of the acoustic distortion products, 2f1f2, from the human ear and its relation to auditory sensitivity

    J. Acoust. Soc. Am.

    (1990)
  • O. Gleich

    Auditory primary afferents in the starling: Correlation of function and morphology

    Hear. Res.

    (1989)
  • F.P. Harris et al.

    Acoustic distortion products in humans: Systematic changes in amplitude as a function of f2f1 ratio

    J. Acoust. Soc. Am.

    (1989)
  • K.C. Horner et al.

    Distortion product otoacoustic emissions in hearing-impaired mutant mice

    J. Acoust. Soc. Am.

    (1985)
  • F. Jaramillo et al.

    Auditory illusions and the single hair cell

    Nature

    (1993)
  • Cited by (43)

    • A Prestin Motor in Chicken Auditory Hair Cells: Active Force Generation in a Nonmammalian Species

      2013, Neuron
      Citation Excerpt :

      We suggest that the two “active” processes could sum to function as a negative feedback control on hair bundle position and with fast kinetics might amplify extrinsic mechanical stimuli. They might also underlie the otoacoustic emissions, spontaneous or evoked sound production at the tympanum, which have been recorded in birds (Kettembeil et al., 1995; Burkard et al., 1996; Chen et al., 2001). Electrically evoked hair bundle movements were previously reported in chicken hair cells but neither the underlying mechanism nor the link to mechanotransduction was examined (Brix and Manley, 1994).

    • Multifrequency forcing of a Hopf oscillator model of the inner ear

      2008, Biophysical Journal
      Citation Excerpt :

      Then the effect of the suppressor tone on the response at each of the primary frequencies and the distortion product frequencies can be recorded. In nonmammals, multifrequency forcing experiments, including two primary frequencies ω1 and ω2 (ω1 <ω2) and a suppressor frequency, indicate that maximum suppression of the 2ω1 −ω2 distortion product frequency occurs when the suppressor tone is near the ω1 frequency (36–38). Oddly, in mammals, the reverse trend is observed and maximum suppression of 2ω1 −ω2 occurs when the suppressor frequency is near the ω2 frequency (39,40).

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text