Display options
Share it on

Audit Neurosci. 1995 Jan 01;1(4):385-400.

Effects of Bilateral Olivocochlear Lesions on Pure-Tone Intensity Discrimination in Cats.

Auditory neuroscience

Bradford J May, Shelly J McQuone

Affiliations

  1. Department of Otolaryngology-HNS, Center for Hearing and Balance, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21205.

PMID: 23814451 PMCID: PMC3695712

Abstract

Behavioral experiments examined the effects of olivocochlear efferent lesions on performance in an intensity discrimination task. Five cats were trained with food reinforcement to signal the detection of a change in the intensity of pure tones by releasing a response lever. Intensity cues were conveyed by 1 and 8-kHz tone bursts in quiet and in the presence of continuous broadband noise. After the collection of baseline behavioral data, the olivocochlear bundle (OCB) was sectioned with bilateral knife cuts on the floor of the IVth ventricle. The completeness of OCB lesions was evaluated at the conclusion of post-lesion behavioral testing by light microscopic examination of cochlear acetylcholinesterase staining and electrophysiological measures of contralateral noise suppression of compound action potentials (CAPs). Cats with OCB lesions showed greatest performance deficits for the discrimination of 8-kHz intensity changes in continuous background noise. The subjects' ability to discriminate 1-kHz intensity changes in noise was poor prior to OCB lesioning and did not change after the surgical procedure. Lesioning effects were not observed at either frequency when tests were conducted in quiet. These results suggest that olivocochlear feedback contributes to the auditory processing of mid-frequency acoustic signals in noisy backgrounds.

Keywords: Olivocochlear efferent lesion; acetylcholinesterase; compound action potential; intensity discrimination; noise

References

  1. J Neurophysiol. 1987 Apr;57(4):1002-21 - PubMed
  2. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 1965 Jun;74:386-408 - PubMed
  3. J Acoust Soc Am. 1990 Feb;87(2):757-81 - PubMed
  4. Acta Otolaryngol. 1972 Jun;73(6):455-66 - PubMed
  5. Exp Biol. 1986;45(3):219-32 - PubMed
  6. Am J Psychol. 1946 Jan;59:127-36 - PubMed
  7. Hear Res. 1989 Jan;37(2):105-21 - PubMed
  8. Science. 1983 Sep 16;221(4616):1206-8 - PubMed
  9. Brain Res. 1971 Apr 2;27(2):251-70 - PubMed
  10. Acta Otolaryngol. 1979 May-Jun;87(5-6):429-33 - PubMed
  11. Acta Otolaryngol. 1977 May-Jun;83(5-6):410-6 - PubMed
  12. Hear Res. 1989 Mar;38(1-2):47-56 - PubMed
  13. J Acoust Soc Am. 1970 Feb;47(2):592-6 - PubMed
  14. J Neurophysiol. 1992 Nov;68(5):1589-602 - PubMed
  15. Hear Res. 1990 Nov;49(1-3):209-23 - PubMed
  16. Hear Res. 1987;26(1):1-10 - PubMed
  17. J Comp Neurol. 1946 Apr;84:141-219 - PubMed
  18. J Acoust Soc Am. 1970 Oct;48(4):966-77 - PubMed
  19. J Neurophysiol. 1984 Jun;51(6):1326-44 - PubMed
  20. Hear Res. 1989 Jan;37(2):89-104 - PubMed
  21. J Neurophysiol. 1956 Sep;19(5):424-37 - PubMed
  22. Am J Psychol. 1946 Jan;59:59-83 - PubMed
  23. J Comp Neurol. 1975 May 15;161(2):159-81 - PubMed
  24. Exp Neurol. 1968 Jun;21(2):147-58 - PubMed
  25. Acta Otolaryngol. 1974 May;77(5):311-7 - PubMed
  26. Hear Res. 1986;24(1):17-36 - PubMed
  27. Brain Res. 1979 Sep 7;173(1):152-5 - PubMed
  28. Hear Res. 1988 May;33(2):97-113 - PubMed
  29. Hear Res. 1992 Mar;58(2):132-52 - PubMed
  30. J Neurophysiol. 1983 Jul;50(1):27-45 - PubMed
  31. Hear Res. 1988 Sep 15;35(2-3):165-89 - PubMed
  32. J Comp Neurol. 1990 Nov 15;301(3):443-60 - PubMed
  33. Acta Otolaryngol. 1984 Sep-Oct;98(3-4):255-69 - PubMed
  34. J Neurophysiol. 1988 Nov;60(5):1779-98 - PubMed
  35. Acta Otolaryngol. 1979 Jan-Feb;87(1-2):79-83 - PubMed
  36. J Neurophysiol. 1968 Jan;31(1):122-30 - PubMed
  37. Brain Res. 1969 Nov;16(1):165-85 - PubMed

Publication Types

Grant support