Journal of Neurophysiology, Vol 68, Issue 4 1087-1099, Copyright © 1992 by APS

ARTICLES

Two-tone suppression in the basilar membrane of the cochlea: mechanical basis of auditory-nerve rate suppression

M. A. Ruggero, L. Robles and N. C. Rich
Department of Otolaryngology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis 55455.

1. The vibratory response to two-tone stimuli was measured in the basilar membrane of the chinchilla cochlea by means of the Mossbauer technique or laser velocimetry. Measurements were made at sites with characteristic frequency (CF, the frequency at which an auditory structure is most sensitive) of 7-10 kHz, located approximately 3.5 mm from the oval window. 2. Two-tone suppression (reduction in the response to one tone due to the presence of another) was demonstrated for CF probe tones and suppressor tones with frequencies both higher and lower than CF, at moderately low stimulus levels, including probe-suppressor combinations for which responses to the suppressor were lower than responses to the probe tone alone. 3. For a fixed suppressor tone, suppression magnitude decreased as a function of increasing probe intensity. 4. The magnitude of suppression increased monotonically with suppressor intensity. 5. The rate of growth of suppression magnitude with suppressor intensity was higher for suppressors in the region below CF than for those in the region above CF. 6. For low-frequency suppressor tones, suppression magnitude varied periodically, attaining one or two maxima within each period of the suppressor tone. 7. Suppression was frequency tuned: for either above-CF or below-CF suppressor tones, suppression magnitude reached a maximum for probe frequencies near CF. 8. Cochlear damage or death diminished or abolished suppression. There was a clear positive correlation between magnitude of suppression and basilar-membrane sensitivity for responses to CF tones. 9. Suppression tended to be accompanied by small phase lags in responses to CF probe tones. 10. Because all of the features of two-tone suppression at the basilar membrane match qualitatively (and, generally, also quantitatively) the features of two-tone rate suppression in auditory-nerve fibers, it is concluded that neural two-tone rate suppression originates in mechanical phenomena at the basilar membrane. 11. Because the lability of mechanical suppression parallels the loss of sensitivity and frequency tuning due to outer hair cell dysfunction, the present findings suggest that mechanical two-tone suppression arises from an interaction between the outer hair cells and the basilar membrane.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				K. A. Montgomery Multifrequency Forcing of a Hopf Oscillator Model of the Inner Ear Biophys. J., August 1, 2008; 95(3): 1075 - 1079. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. Song, J. McGee, and E. J. Walsh Development of Cochlear Amplification, Frequency Tuning, and Two-Tone Suppression in the Mouse J Neurophysiol, January 1, 2008; 99(1): 344 - 355. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. G. Paolini, J. C. Clarey, K. Needham, and G. M. Clark Fast Inhibition Alters First Spike Timing in Auditory Brainstem Neurons J Neurophysiol, October 1, 2004; 92(4): 2615 - 2621. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. Stoop and A. Kern From The Cover: Essential auditory contrast-sharpening is preneuronal PNAS, June 22, 2004; 101(25): 9179 - 9181. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				I. J. Russell, M. Drexl, E. Foeller, M. Vater, and M. Kossl Synchronization of a Nonlinear Oscillator: Processing the Cf Component of the Echo-Response Signal in the Cochlea of the Mustached Bat J. Neurosci., October 22, 2003; 23(29): 9508 - 9518. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. L. Sutter and W. C. Loftus Excitatory and Inhibitory Intensity Tuning in Auditory Cortex: Evidence for Multiple Inhibitory Mechanisms J Neurophysiol, October 1, 2003; 90(4): 2629 - 2647. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. G. Heinz, H. S. Colburn, and L. H. Carney Evaluating Auditory Performance Limits: I. One-Parameter Discrimination Using a Computational Model for the Auditory Nerve Neural Comput., October 1, 2001; 13(10): 2273 - 2316. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. G. Heinz, H. S. Colburn, and L. H. Carney Evaluating Auditory Performance Limits: II. One-Parameter Discrimination with Random-Level Variation Neural Comput., October 1, 2001; 13(10): 2317 - 2338. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				F. Julicher, D. Andor, and T. Duke Physical basis of two-tone interference in hearing PNAS, July 31, 2001; 98(16): 9080 - 9085. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. Robles and M. A. Ruggero Mechanics of the Mammalian Cochlea Physiol Rev, July 1, 2001; 81(3): 1305 - 1352. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. H. Carney and M. Friedman Spatiotemporal Tuning of Low-Frequency Cells in the Anteroventral Cochlear Nucleus J. Neurosci., February 1, 1998; 18(3): 1096 - 1104. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]