Input/output functions of different-latency components of transient-evoked and stimulus-frequency otoacoustic emissions

Sisto, Renata; Sanjust, Filippo; Moleti, Arturo

doi:10.1121/1.4794382

Cited by 42 publications

(66 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As such, the generalization of the findings to other frequencies is unclear. Similar temporal spacing between different-latency components and growth rates to those reported in the current study have been observed at frequencies through 8 kHz (e.g., Goodman et al 2009 andSisto et al 2013) and demonstrate that the phenomenon of different-latency components is not unique to the 2 kHz TEOAE. SL components have also been measured for TEOAE frequencies between 1 and 1.5 kHz (e.g., Goodman et al 2009;Moleti et al 2012), which is closer to the transition frequency between basal and apical mechanics (Shera et al 2010;Dhar et al 2011).…”

Section: Generalization To Other Teoae Frequenciessupporting

confidence: 87%

“…The current study extended previous work that has reported on the growth rates and latencies of different-latency TEOAE components (e.g., Goodman et al 2009;Sisto et al 2013) by examining the relationship between each component's latency and the suppressor frequency that caused the greatest change in the component's magnitude. This relationship was of interest as it provides an empirical test of the hypothesis that shorter-latency components are generated basal to longer-latency components of similar frequency (Withnell et al 2008;Goodman et al 2011;Moleti et al 2013).…”

Section: Basal Contributions To Sl Teoae Componentssupporting

confidence: 51%

“…The advantage of this extraction technique is that the stimulus is effectively removed from the recording, assuming linear transducers, thereby permitting (1) retention of very early time portions of the OAE and (2) extraction of the OAE from the stimulus when the two overlap in time. This technique has been used to measure TEOAEs at frequencies up to 15 kHz (Goodman et al 2009;Keefe et al 2011 Sisto et al 2013). While the nonlinear differential method allows examination of early-occurring emissions, such as SL TEOAE components, in some cases it may underestimate the emission's true magnitude (Kalluri and Shera 2007b;Moleti et al 2012).…”

Section: Measurement and Analysis Of Teoaesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Basal Contributions to Short-Latency Transient-Evoked Otoacoustic Emission Components

Lewis

Goodman

2014

JARO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The presence of short-latency (SL), less compressivegrowing components in bandpass-filtered transientevoked otoacoustic emission (TEOAE) waveforms may implicate contributions from cochlear regions basal to the tonotopic place. Recent empirical work suggests a region of SL generation between ∼1/5 and 1/10-octave basal to the TEOAE frequency's tonotopic place. However, this estimate may be biased to regions closer to the tonotopic place as the TEOAE extraction technique precluded measurement of components with latencies shorter than ∼5 ms. Using a variant of the non-linear, double-evoked extraction paradigm that permitted extraction of components with latencies as early as 1 ms, the current study empirically estimated the spatial-extent of the cochlear region contributing to 2 kHz SL TEOAE components. TEOAEs were evoked during simultaneous presentation of a suppressor stimulus, in order to suppress contributions to the TEOAE from different places along the cochlear partition. Three or four different-latency components of similar frequency content (∼2 kHz) were identified for most subjects. Component latencies ranged from 1.4 to 9.6 ms; latency was predictive of the component's growth rate and the suppressor frequency to which the component's magnitude was most sensitive to change. As component latency decreased, growth became less compressive and suppressor-frequency sensitivity shifted to higher frequencies. The shortest-latency components were most sensitive to suppressors approximately 3/5-octave higher than their nominal frequency of 2 kHz. These results are consistent with a distributed region of generation extending to approximately 3/5-octave basal to the TEOAE frequency's tonotopic place. The empirical estimates of TEOAE generation are similar to model-based estimates where generation of the different-latency components occurs through linear reflection from impedance discontinuities distributed across the cochlear partition.

show abstract

Section: Generalization To Other Teoae Frequenciessupporting

confidence: 87%

Section: Basal Contributions To Sl Teoae Componentssupporting

confidence: 51%

Section: Measurement and Analysis Of Teoaesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Basal Contributions to Short-Latency Transient-Evoked Otoacoustic Emission Components

Lewis

Goodman

2014

JARO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Suppression patterns, noise-exposure experiments, component decomposition analysis and correlations between OAEs and hearing threshold suggest that SFOAEs, transient-evoked (TE) OAEs, and distortion-product (DP) OAEs in humans and several laboratory species may have an extended generation region (e.g. Sutton 1985;Guinan 1990;Avan et al 1993Avan et al , 1995Avan et al , 1997Withnell et al 2000;Harding et al 2002;Ellison and Keefe 2005;Dreisbach et al 2008;Martin et al 2009Martin et al , 2010Charaziak et al 2013;Sisto et al 2013). …”

Section: Extended Region Of Sfoae Generation At Low Frequenciesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Estimating Cochlear Frequency Selectivity with Stimulus-frequency Otoacoustic Emissions in Chinchillas

Charaziak

Siegel

2014

JARO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It has been suggested that the tuning of the cochlear filters can be derived from measures of otoacoustic emissions (OAEs). Two approaches have been proposed to estimate cochlear frequency selectivity using OAEs evoked with a single tone (stimulus-frequency (SF)) OAEs: based on SFOAE group delays (SF-GDs) and on SFOAE suppression tuning curves (SF-STCs). The aim of this study was to evaluate whether either SF-GDs or SF-STCs obtained with low probe levels (30 dB SPL) correlate with more direct measures of cochlear tuning (compound action potential suppression tuning curves (CAP-STCs)) in chinchillas. The SFOAE-based estimates of tuning covaried with CAPSTCs tuning for 93 kHz probe frequencies, indicating that these measures are related to cochlear frequency selectivity. However, the relationship may be too weak to predict tuning with either SFOAE method in an individual. The SF-GD prediction of tuning was sharper than CAP-STC tuning. On the other hand, SF-STCs were consistently broader than CAP-STCs implying that SFOAEs may have less restricted region of generation in the cochlea than CAPs. Inclusion of G3 kHz data in a statistical model resulted in no significant or borderline significant covariation among the three methods: neither SFOAE test appears to reliably estimate an individual's CAP-STC tuning at low-frequencies. At the group level, SF-GDs and CAP-STCs showed similar tuning at low frequencies, while SF-STCs were over five times broader than the CAP-STCs indicating that low-frequency SFOAE may originate over a very broad region of the cochlea extending ≥5 mm basal to the tonotopic place of the probe.

show abstract

“…Recently, it has been demonstrated that significant SFOAE generation may occur slightly basally to the resonant region, within 1-2 mm in humans, corresponding to a relative frequency shift of order 15-30 % (e.g., Moleti et al 2013). Such nearbasal sources should correspond to the short-latency OAE components observed in humans (e.g., Sisto et al 2013). Significant delay differences are associated indeed to short spatial differences in the hightuning, sensitive human cochlea.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Localization of the Reflection Sources of Stimulus-Frequency Otoacoustic Emissions

Moleti

Sisto

2016

JARO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The generation of stimulus-frequency otoacoustic emission (SFOAE) residuals in humans is analyzed both theoretically and experimentally to investigate the relation between the frequency difference between the probe and the suppressor tone and the localization of the residual source. Experimental measurements of the SFOAE residual were performed using suppressors of increasing frequency to separate the otoacoustic response from the probe stimulus. From the response to the probe alone, the SFOAE response was also estimated, using spectral smoothing, and compared with the residuals obtained for different frequency suppressors. A nonlinear delayedstiffness active cochlear model was used to compute the spatial distribution of the residual sources according to a recent model of the local reflectivity from roughness, as a function of the suppressor frequency. The simulations clarified the role of high-frequency suppressors, showing that in humans, with increasing suppressor frequency, the generation region of the residual is only slightly basally shifted with respect to the case of a near-frequency suppressor, near the basal edge of the peak of the resonant basilar membrane response. As a consequence, the hierarchy among different-delay components correspondingly changes, gradually favoring short-delay components, with increasing suppressor frequency. Good agreement between the experimental and theoretical dependence of the level of otoacoustic components of different delay on the frequency shift between probe and suppressor confirms the validity of this interpretation.

show abstract

Input/output functions of different-latency components of transient-evoked and stimulus-frequency otoacoustic emissions

Cited by 42 publications

References 39 publications

Basal Contributions to Short-Latency Transient-Evoked Otoacoustic Emission Components

Basal Contributions to Short-Latency Transient-Evoked Otoacoustic Emission Components

Estimating Cochlear Frequency Selectivity with Stimulus-frequency Otoacoustic Emissions in Chinchillas

Localization of the Reflection Sources of Stimulus-Frequency Otoacoustic Emissions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About