Ohc Somatic Supp

download Ohc Somatic Supp

of 5

Transcript of Ohc Somatic Supp

  • 8/14/2019 Ohc Somatic Supp

    1/5

    b

    c d

    a

    20 30 40 50 60 70

    Stimulus frequency (kHz)

    10

    100

    1000

    10000

    B M g a

    i n r e m a

    l l e u s

    CFR1 R2

    20 30 40 50 60 70

    Stimulus frequency (kHz)

    -4.0-3.5-3.0-2.5-2.0-1.5-1.0-0.50.00.5

    B M p

    h a s e r e m a

    l l e u s

    ( c y c

    l e s )

    10

    20

    30

    40

    5060

    70

    B M t h r e s

    h o

    l d ( d B

    S P L )

    CFR1 R2

    Supplementary Figure: Additional data from single preparations illustrating

    basilar membrane responses to acoustic stimulation of the mouse cochlea.

    Threshold frequency tuning curves (open symbols), referred to the malleus,

    measured from the basal turn BM in the cochleae of (a) a Tecta+/+

    and (b) a

    Tecta ENT/ ENT mouse. The phase of BM displacement relative to the motion of the

    malleus (solid symbols) measured 15 dB above threshold are also shown, relative

    to the right vertical axis. (c, d). Basilar membrane displacement divided by malleus

    displacement as a function of stimulus frequency measured from (c) the Tecta +/+

    mouse used for (a) for tones at levels between 20 60 dB SPL in 5 dB steps and

    (d) the Tecta ENT/ ENT mouse used for (b) for tones at levels between 48 80 dB

    SPL in 2 dB steps. Black traces in (c and d) are for the highest levels. Vertical

    dashed lines indicate characteristic frequency (CF), estimated CF (CF e ), R2, and

    R1 frequencies.

    20 30 40 50 60 70

    Stimulus frequency (kHz)

    10

    100

    1000

    10000

    B M d i s p

    l a c e e n

    t /

    m a l

    l e u s

    d i s p

    l a c e m e n

    tCFeR2

    20 30 40 50 60 70

    Stimulus frequency (kHz)

    -2.0

    -1.5

    -1.0

    -0.5

    0.0

    0.5

    B M p h a s e r e m a l

    l e u s

    ( c y c

    l e s )

    20

    30

    40

    50

    6070

    80

    B M t h r e s h o l

    d ( d B S P L )

    CFeR2

  • 8/14/2019 Ohc Somatic Supp

    2/5

  • 8/14/2019 Ohc Somatic Supp

    3/5

    Electrophysiological recording and stimulation

    We adopted Nuttall and Rens 2 technique to deliver extracochlear electrical stimulation and

    to record cochlear microphonic and compound action potentials using either a silver, or a

    tungsten electrode placed on the round window and a Ag/ AgCl reference electrode in the

    neck tissue.

    Sodium salicylate application

    Sodium salicylate was applied as a crystal on the round window membrane for 5 minutes.

    This technique, and not cochlear perfusion, was employed to avoid cochlear sensitivity

    reduction when the round window is breached. We were therefore unable to quantify the

    concentration of salicylate in the perilymph. Enhancement of the CM due to increases in the

    basolateral and not the mechanoelectrical conductance of the OHCs, which occur when the

    level of salicylate in the perilymph exceeds ~ 2mM 3, were not however observed.

    Sound system and electrical stimulation

    The sound system, its calibration in dB SPL re 2 x 10 -5 Pa, and the method of

    generating computer-controlled command voltages, have been described 1, 4, but here we

    used a custom-built condenser loudspeaker 5. For electrical stimulation the loudspeaker was

    unplugged and the output signal from the GPIB-controlled attenuator was used as the

    command voltage for a custom-built current-pump with a sensitivity of 100 A/V. The

  • 8/14/2019 Ohc Somatic Supp

    4/5

    current pump delivered sinusoidal current of constant amplitude through the round window

    electrode corresponding to the applied sinusoidal command voltage.

    Basilar membrane measurements

    BM displacements were measured by focusing the beam of a self-mixing, laser-

    diode interferometer 6 through the round window membrane to form an ~5 m spot on the

    centre of the BM in the 6065 kHz region of the cochlea as previously described 1, 6, 7 .

    Experimental control, data acquisition, and data analysis were performed using

    programs written in TestPoint (CEC).

    All procedures involving animals were performed in accordance with UK Home

    Office regulations with approval from the local ethics committee.

    REFERENCES

    1. Legan, P.K. et al. A targeted deletion in -tectorin reveals the tectorial membrane is

    required for the gain and timing of cochlear feedback. Neuron 28 , 273285 (2000).

    2. Nuttall, A. L. & Ren, T. Electromotile hearing: evidence from basilar membrane

    motion and otoacoustic emissions. Hear. Res. 92 , 170177 (1995).

    3. Fitzgerald, J. J., Robertson, D. & Johnstone, B.M. Effects of intra-cochlear

    perfusion of salicylates on cochlear microphonic and other auditory responses in theguinea pig. Hear. Res . 67, 147-56 (1993).

    4. Russell, I. J., et al. Sharpened cochlear tuning in a mouse with a genetically

    modified tectorial membrane. Nat. Neurosci. 10 , 215-23 (2007).

    5. Schuller, G. A cheap earphone for small animals with good frequency response in

    the ultrasonic frequency range. J. Neurosci. Methods . 71 , 187-90 (1997).

  • 8/14/2019 Ohc Somatic Supp

    5/5

    6. Murugasu, E. & Russell, I. J. Salicylate ototoxicity: the effects on basilar

    membrane displacement, cochlear microphonics, and neural responses in the basal turn of the guinea pig cochlea. Audit. Neurosci . 1 , 139-150 (1995).

    7. Lukashkin, A. N., Bashtanov, M. E. & Russell, I. J. A self-mixing laser-diode

    interferometer for measuring basilar membrane vibrations without opening the

    cochlea. J. Neurosci. Methods 148, 122129 (2005).