Previous Article | Next Article 
The Journal of Neuroscience, March 15, 1998, 18(6):1996-2003
Cochlear Electrically Evoked Emissions Modulated by Mechanical
Transduction Channels
Graeme K.
Yates and
Desmond L.
Kirk
The Auditory Laboratory, Department of Physiology, The University
of Western Australia, Nedlands 6907, Western Australia, Australia
 |
ABSTRACT |
Cochlear outer hair cells are capable of both
mechanical-to-electrical and electrical-to-mechanical transduction.
Vibration of their stereocilia by sound is believed to stimulate
somatic motility via a receptor potential developed across the
basolateral membrane, thereby enhancing the mechanical vibration and
increasing the sensitivity and frequency selectivity of the ear.
Extrinsic electrical currents, applied at the tops of the cells, also
appear to activate motility in vivo, presumably after
entering the cell. Earlier experiments suggested such currents might
enter through the transduction channels themselves, but an alternative
shunt pathway through the membrane capacitance seems more likely on physical grounds. We therefore recorded electrically evoked
oto-acoustic emissions while modulating the transduction channels by
driving them with low-frequency sound. Recordings of the low-frequency cochlear microphonic provided a measure of the mean electrical conductance through the channels during sound stimulation. Emissions increased during displacement of the basilar membrane toward scala vestibuli, when the channels were biased open, and decreased on the
opposite phase, and the modulation of the emission was in direct
proportion to the cochlear microphonic. The results are the strongest
evidence yet that electrically evoked emissions are generated directly
by mechanisms related to cochlear transduction and lead to the
surprising conclusion that, for frequencies up to at least 12 kHz,
extrinsic electrical currents enter the hair cell predominantly by the
resistive pathway through the transduction channels. Alternatively, the
results might be consistent with direct modulation of a motility source
driven by capacitive currents but whose output depends on the state of
the channels.
Key words:
cochlea; electrical stimulation; mechano-transduction
channels; outer hair cells; oto-acoustic emissions; active process
 |
INTRODUCTION |
The threshold sensitivity and
frequency selectivity of the ear relies on the amplification of basilar
membrane vibration by the uniquely specialized, outer hair cells (OHC)
of the cochlea. There is general consensus that this "cochlear
amplifier" (Davis, 1983
) incorporates mechanical-to-electrical or
"forward" transduction and electrical-to-mechanical or
"reverse" transduction (Kim, 1986
), linked in a regenerative,
feedback loop (Kim et al., 1980
; Mountain et al., 1983
; Patuzzi and
Robertson, 1988
; Dallos, 1992
; Yates et al., 1992
). In forward
transduction, the basilar membrane vibrations modulate mechanically
gated ion channels in OHC stereocilia (Ohmori, 1988
; Jaramillo and
Hudspeth, 1991
). Modulation of the apical transducer conductance
results in voltage fluctuations across the OHC basolateral membrane at
the frequency of the sound stimulus (Dallos, 1986
; Russell et al.,
1986
). Transmembrane voltage changes, in turn, are thought to drive a
protein-based motor (reverse transduction) located in the lateral cell
wall (Santos-Sacchi and Dilger, 1988
; Holley and Ashmore, 1990
;
Hallworth et al., 1993
).
Extrinsically applied electrical currents appear to activate OHC
motility at kilohertz frequencies in vivo. Electrically
evoked oto-acoustic emissions (EEOAEs) are sounds of very low intensity present in the ear canal when sinusoidal current is passed into the
cochlea (Mountain and Hubbard, 1989
; Murata et al., 1991
; Nuttall and
Ren, 1995
; Kirk and Yates, 1996
) and are assumed to be produced by
direct stimulation of the OHC reverse transduction process (Fig.
1). Extrinsic currents applied in scala
media presumably enter the cell from the apical end, in which the
mechanically sensitive transduction channels are located, and then
stimulate the motor element by way of the potential developed across
the basolateral membrane. Earlier experiments (Kirk and Yates, 1998
) suggested that current entered the cell through the transduction channels (Fig. 1). The emissions were attenuated by 4-aminopyridine, a
channel blocker, and there were changes in the cochlear
electrophysiology that implied an increase in the apical resistance of
OHCs. This result is surprising because one would expect current at the
frequencies used to enter through the electrical capacitance of the
apical membrane (Fig. 1). The electrical impedance of a cell membrane is normally dominated by capacitance at high frequencies (Cole, 1940
).

View larger version (65K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 1.
Application of alternating current to scala media
of the cochlea [as shown in longitudinal section
(a), cross section (b) and
magnified cross section (c)] produces measurable
sound (EEOAEs) in the ear canal. EEOAEs are believed to result from
electromotile responses of OHCs (c, d), producing
mechanical energy that propagates to the stapes and through the middle
ear (a). OHC motility is widely held to underlie
the frequency selectivity and threshold sensitivity of hearing.
Evidence (see text) points to a voltage-sensitive motor located in the
basolateral cell wall (d) and presumably activated during sensory transduction by the cell's own receptor potential. Extrinsically applied currents may activate a membrane-based motility source through two parallel pathways; either resistive pathways offered by open transduction channels in stereocilia or
capacitive pathways through the apical cell membranes (e,
f). Modulation of EEOAE waveforms by low-frequency sound
is consistent with high-frequency current entering via
mechano-sensitive resistive pathways. SV, Scala
vestibuli; SM, scala media; ST, scala
tympani; Ra, apical resistance;
Ca, apical capacitance;
Rb, basolateral resistance;
Cb, basolateral capacitance.
|
|
To gain more insight into how the status of the mechanically sensitive
transduction channels might influence OHC motility, we recorded EEOAEs
while simultaneously applying a low-frequency acoustical stimulus at
moderately high intensities. This modulated the mean conductivity of
the channels by amounts estimated from the cochlear microphonic (CM).
EEOAEs were amplitude modulated in proportion to the CM, consistent
with either the high-frequency extrinsic current gaining access to a
membrane-based cellular motor through the forward-transduction
channels, or perhaps with a motility source whose output depends
directly on the status of the channels.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
Experiments were performed on pigmented guinea pigs (250-350
gm) according to a protocol approved by the National Health and Medical
Research Council of Australia and the University of Western Australia.
The animals were anesthetized with Nembutal (35 mg/kg i.p. initially;
20 mg/kg after 2.5 hr) and Leptan (Fentanyl citrate and Droperidol; 1.5 ml/kg i.m. repeated at 45 min intervals). They were paralyzed
(Alloferin; 0.3 ml/kg i.m.) during data collection to prevent middle
ear movement. In unparalyzed animals the anesthetic regimen induced
continuous deep anesthesia, evidenced by lack of withdrawal response
and absence of spontaneous respiration. During paralysis potentially
noxious stimulation produced no change in heart rate.
The basic surgical procedures and the details of electrical and
acoustical stimulation and recording have been described (Kirk and
Yates, 1996
). Briefly, EEOAEs were generated by sinusoidal currents
applied through micropipette electrodes (2-4 µm tip diameter, DC
resistance 5-10 megohms and filled with 200 mM KCl) placed in scala media in turns 1, 2 or 3 of the cochlea. The electrical stimulation circuit, incorporating voltage amplifier, isolation transformer and micropipette, had a frequency response essentially flat
to within a few dB between 1 and 20 kHz. The micropipette electrodes
were also used to record the extracellular CM response to the
acoustical stimulus. Ear canal emissions and stimulus sound pressure
were measured through a condenser microphone (Bruel and Kjaer 4133) in
a calibrated ear bar sound system. The condition of the cochlea was
monitored throughout experiments using the compound action potential
threshold, as described in Kirk and Yates (1996)
. Electrical and
acoustical stimuli were generated and the responses recorded by a
desktop computer equipped with a multimedia sound card (Crystal
CDB4231) and custom software. EEOAE and CM waveforms were displayed
online and stored to disk for later analysis.
Experimental paradigm. Low-frequency tones were used to
shift the basilar membrane alternately toward scala vestibuli to
produce open bias of forward-transduction channels, and toward scala
tympani to produce closed channel bias, during the generation of
EEOAEs. Cyclic changes in the position of the basilar membrane and the status of the transduction channels were inferred from the locally recorded CM response to the low-frequency tone (Konishi and Nielsen, 1978
; Cheatham and Dallos, 1994
).
Electrical stimulation of scala media was paired with acoustical
stimulation at a frequency (fa) well below the
electrical frequency (fe). The electrical and
acoustical stimuli were phase-locked and their frequencies were
constrained in the ratio (n + 1/2), so that precisely
2n + 1 cycles of the electrical stimulus accompanied every
two cycles of the acoustical frequency. The value of n was chosen according to the desired values of fe and
fa and some quantization of the stimulus frequencies was
necessary. This frequency ratio ensured that harmonics of the
low-frequency acoustical stimulus interleaved with the harmonics of the
electrical frequency and with the potential intermodulation frequencies
(fe ± mfa).
The CM was recorded over two cycles of the low-frequency tone for a
range of sound levels, without electrical stimulation (electrical
recordings could not be made during the application of current). The
acoustical stimulus was then presented at each of a range of sound
intensities in turn, together with the phase-locked electrical
stimulus, and the EEOAEs evoked by the electrical stimulus were
recorded, again over two cycles of the low-frequency tone. Recordings
of the CM and EEOAEs were each averaged for a total of 2-3 sec
recording time.
Filtering of the emission waveform. EEOAEs are of very low
intensity, typically around 0-30 dB sound pressure level (SPL), whereas the sound level of the low-frequency acoustical stimulus was
necessarily much higher. We used a high-quality sound source (Beyer
DT48 earphone) but small amounts of harmonic distortion, comparable in
magnitude to the emissions, were produced at the highest intensities
(above 80-90 dB SPL). We therefore filtered the signals electronically
before recording, and numerically during analysis, taking advantage of
the frequency-interleaving of the sound harmonics and electrical
intermodulation components. The output from the microphone recording
the ear canal sound pressure was filtered using a Stanford Research
SR650 filter (48 dB per octave) with the high pass set at least three
octaves above the frequency of the acoustical stimulus. This removed
most of the fundamental and lower harmonics of the acoustical stimulus.
The electronically filtered acoustical waveforms were stored and
subsequently processed mathematically to remove residual acoustical
stimulus contamination and high-level harmonic distortion. The Fourier spectrum of the raw waveform was calculated, and a waveform free of
acoustical stimulus contamination was obtained by two methods: (1) by
Fourier transforming the waveform into the frequency domain, setting to
zero all components at frequencies that were not multiples of the
acoustical stimulus frequency (and which interleaved with the EEOAE
frequencies), inverse-Fourier transforming back to the time domain and
then subtracting from the raw waveform; this removed harmonics of the
acoustical stimulus; and (2) by Fourier transforming the waveform into
the frequency domain, setting to zero all components other than the
fundamental of the electrical stimulus and all intermodulation
frequencies with magnitudes >3 dB above the noise level and then
inverse transforming back to the time domain (the reconstruction
process). This effectively extracts from the recording only those
components which are related to the electrical stimulus.
The waveforms resulting from (1) subtraction and (2) reconstruction
were compared as a check on the accuracy of the filtering procedures,
because they should differ only in their noise components (Fig.
2).

View larger version (33K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 2.
Typical process of analysis of waveform
modulation. A 2024 Hz 10 µA electrical stimulus
fe, applied to scala media in turn 2, was paired
with an acoustical stimulus fa at 86 Hz, 88 dB SPL. The ear
canal sound field, containing the EEOAE and the acoustical stimulus,
was electronically high- pass filtered to remove most of the spectral
energy at 86 Hz as well as its second and third harmonics. The
resulting "raw" waveform (A), consisting of
the EEOAE and contamination from higher level harmonic distortion of
the acoustical stimulus, had spectral peaks (B)
at fe and the intermodulation sideband frequencies and at
the harmonic distortion frequencies. Decontaminated EEOAE waveforms
were extracted by either (1) subtracting the acoustical contamination
from the raw waveform (steps C-E) or (2) reconstruction
through inverse Fourier transform from the spectral components at
Fe and sideband frequencies (steps F,
G).
|
|
Fitting the extracellular CM to the EEOAE modulation
envelope. In analysis of the stored data each CM record was
superimposed over the corresponding EEOAE waveform acquired at the same
sound pressure level. Because emission and CM waveforms have no natural scaling relationship, the CM was adjusted in amplitude and vertical offset to obtain the best match between the CM waveform and the modulation envelope of the emission waveform (Fig.
3). In addition, a phase realignment of
the CM was necessary to compensate for the lag between the CM, recorded
instantaneously, and the EEOAE which was delayed by propagation within
the cochlea, the middle ear and out to the recording microphone. The
delays required to align the CM with modulations in the EEOAE waveform
were 100-111 µsec in turn 1, 380-650 µsec in turn 2 and 620-820
µsec in turn 3. These values are comparable with our earlier
estimates of the propagation delay of EEOAEs in the guinea pig cochlea
(Kirk and Yates, 1996
). Only a single set of CM offset and scale
factors, determined at the lower stimulus levels, was used for an
entire modulation-intensity series

View larger version (57K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 3.
Amplitude modulation of EEOAE waveforms (2024 Hz,
10 mA electrical stimulus) with increasing levels of an 86 Hz tone as
indicated in dB SPL. The scala media CM is shown as recorded and as its inverted mirror image (bottom left panel).
Negative polarity of the scala media CM corresponds to basilar membrane
displacement to scala vestibuli (SV) and positive
polarity to scala tympani (ST). CM was shifted in
phase by 430 µsec to compensate for the travel time of EEOAE from
its generation site in the second turn to the recording microphone, and
scaled and offset to fit as closely as possible to the modulation
envelope of the EEOAE waveform. Scaling factors and offset were
constant over the intensity range.
|
|
 |
RESULTS |
EEOAE waveforms were amplitude modulated by low-frequency tones,
and the modulated waveforms contained spectral components at the
intermodulation frequencies fe ± mfa. As shown
in Figure 2, the two mathematical techniques (subtraction and
reconstruction) used to remove residual contamination by the
low-frequency tone and its harmonics from the recorded EEOAE waveforms
(see Materials and Methods) produced virtually identical results. In
subsequent figures only the reconstructed waveforms are shown.
EEOAE amplitude modulation proportional to CM
The modulation of the EEOAEs followed the OHC transducer
conductance, as inferred from the extracellular CM recorded in scala media. This is illustrated by the examples in Figure 3, in which the CM
waveforms evoked by the low-frequency tones have been drawn over the
EEOAE waveforms. The data are from the second cochlear turn. The 2024 Hz electrical stimulus at 10 µA AC was paired with 86 Hz tones that
were applied over the intensity range 64-100 dB SPL. The CM is drawn
with its polarity as recorded at the lower boundary of the EEOAE
modulation envelope and as an inverted mirror image (reversed polarity)
at the upper boundary. These two representations of the CM form a "CM
envelope" that expands as the CM goes negative and contracts when it
goes positive. The CM waveforms have been scaled in amplitude and
vertical offset and shifted in phase to fit the modulations of the
EEOAE (see Materials and Methods).
The amplitude of the emission waveform increased during the
negative-going phase of the CM and decreased during the positive-going phase; that is, it followed the transducer conductance. Negative CM
voltages in scala media reflect displacement of the basilar membrane
toward scala vestibuli and an increase in apical transducer conductance, while the positive phase indicates displacement to scala
tympani and decreased conductance (Konishi and Nielsen, 1978
; Ruggero
et al., 1986
).
The amplitude of the EEOAE waveform was modulated in close proportion
to the amplitude of the CM. At 94 dB SPL, in which the level-dependent
growth of the CM, and presumably the low-frequency modulations of the
transducer conductance, had saturated, the depth of modulation was
90.5% and the emission amplitude during the contraction phase (scala
tympani displacement) was 28% of the amplitude of the unmodulated
waveform. There are signs of overmodulation in the detail of the scala
tympani phase of the EEOAE waveform at high sound levels. The EEOAE
amplitude appears to reach a minimum just before the CM reaches its
maximum positive voltage, and then rebounds a small amount when the CM
is at its maximum. This overmodulation is not seen in the CM. Departure from simple amplitude modulation at the acoustical frequency and in
proportion to the CM potential often appeared at the higher sound
levels, but its characteristics were variable (see for example the 94 dB SPL waveform, bottom left panel of Fig.
4). We cannot be sure that these
variations are true reflections of changes in the transducer
conductance (see below).
Waveform modulation essentially proportional to the instantaneous value
of the locally recorded CM was observed over a range of emission
frequencies from 1076 to 16,756 Hz. Examples of modulated EEOAE
waveforms generated at higher electrical frequencies, 4091 Hz from turn
2 and at 12,015 Hz from turn 1, can be seen in Figure 4. The acoustical
stimulus in both cases was 86 Hz. These waveforms show the essential
features of the modulation of the lower frequency (2024 Hz) emission in
Figure 3. The modulation was proportional to the growth of the CM,
except that there was a disproportionate increase (relative to the
growth of the CM) in the amplitude of the 4091 Hz waveform at the
highest sound level, as well as a secondary modulation pattern at four
times the acoustical frequency. Disproportionate growth of the emission
at higher sound levels, that can also be seen to a lesser degree in the
data of Figure 3, may be related to the phenomenon of acoustical
enhancement of EEOAEs (Mountain and Hubbard, 1989
; Xue et al., 1993
;
Kirk and Yates, 1996
). More extensive data and discussion of this
high-level effect will be presented elsewhere. Note that, whereas the
2024 Hz emission in Figure 3 was modulated by 90% when the CM was
saturated, the maximum depth of modulation of the 12,015 Hz EEOAE in
Figure 4 was only 65%.
Distorted modulation patterns
In the apical turns, modulation at frequencies other than the
fundamental of the acoustical stimulus was rare, and was never more
pronounced than in the example in Figure 4. In the basal cochlear turn,
however, quite complicated modulation patterns were relatively common,
occurring in ~30-40% of basal turn EEOAEs and often showing
considerable variability depending on the parameters of the acoustical
and electrical stimuli. We did not examine this phenomenon in detail,
and it was not obvious which factors if any influenced its variability.
Data from stimulus combinations that produced grossly distorted
modulation patterns from the basal turn were excluded from further
analysis. However, to illustrate, Figure
5 shows a representative example. In this
case an EEOAE at 9216 Hz was measured over two cycles of a 173 Hz tone
at 88, 100, and 103 dB SPL. Whereas the modulation envelope of the
emission recorded during the 100 dB SPL tone can be fitted reasonably
well by the CM, an increase in sound level of only 3 dB produced a grossly distorted modulation pattern with multiple peaks. At 88 dB SPL
the emission was modulated at twice the acoustical frequency.

View larger version (63K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 5.
Example of the distorted modulation patterns
sometimes found in the basal turn. Whereas the EEOAE waveform envelope
at fa = 100 dB SPL follows the CM, the waveforms at 88 and
103 dB SPL show complex modulation at multiples of the acoustic
frequency.
|
|
Some envelope distortion in the modulation patterns might be expected.
The exact shapes of the recorded modulated waveforms would be sensitive
to small changes in the magnitude and phase of the intermodulation
components, and there are at least two reasons to suspect there would
be small errors in the measurement of the primary response components.
First, the emissions are recorded through a probe microphone that has
small inaccuracies associated with its calibration (especially with
respect to its phase response), and second, the emissions probably
undergo some frequency-response distortion during propagation from the
site of stimulation to the microphone. The more pronounced distortion
in the modulations observed in the basal turn (Fig. 5) may be a
consequence of the deep spectral amplitude notches, of unknown origin
but which are typical of EEOAEs from the basal turn (Kirk and Yates,
1996
), exaggerating the effects of phase interactions during
propagation of the emission. It should also be noted that, for
technical reasons, the CM waveforms were recorded without electrical
stimulation and may not have reflected precisely the low-frequency
changes in the apical conductance during electrical stimulation. We
cannot be certain that the electrical stimulus would not alter slightly the response of the forward-transduction mechanism to the low-frequency tone.
Depth of modulation varied with electrical stimulus frequency
The depth of modulation of the EEOAEs was reduced at higher
electrical stimulus frequencies. Figure 6
shows modulation amplitudes from turns 1, 2, and 3 pooled from nine
preparations, plotted against electrical frequency. All data were
obtained from waveforms modulated at sound levels that produced
saturation of the locally recorded CM, so each point can be assumed to
reflect a similar degree of modulation of the transducer conductance.
The range of emission frequencies examined was 1119-1621 Hz in turn 3;
1076-4091 in turn 2; and 1421-16,757 Hz in turn 1. The depth of
modulation decreased from 90-95% at the lowest emission frequencies
to <60% at the highest frequencies. The solid curve
(a) in Figure 6 shows the characteristics, derived by a
least squares fit to the data, of a simple low-pass filter. The 3 dB
corner frequency of the fitted curve is 13.6 kHz. Curve (b)
describes a low-pass filter with a corner frequency of 400 Hz (see
Discussion).

View larger version (15K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 6.
Modulation depth diminished with increasing
emission frequency. EEOAEs from three cochlear turns were modulated at
saturating sound levels. Curve (a) describes the
frequency response of a simple low-pass filter fitted to the data by
the least squares method. The 3 dB corner frequency is 13.6 kHz. Curve
(b) describes for comparison (see Discussion) a
filter with a corner frequency of 400 Hz.
|
|
Reduction of amplitude modulation with increasing emission frequency
was not unique to the louder bias tones, but was observed over the
entire range of sound intensities. Figure
7 illustrates this with examples from
turn 2 (top panels) and turn 1 (bottom panels).
In each turn EEOAEs at different frequencies were modulated by 86 Hz
tones at the same nonsaturating sound level. In both turns the
modulation depth was smaller at the higher emission frequency.

View larger version (87K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 7.
Modulation depth at nonsaturating sound levels was
also frequency dependent. The examples shown are from turn 2 (left) and turn 1 (right). Sound levels
were 10-15 dB below the levels that produced maximum CM
amplitude.
|
|
EEOAE generation site
For any given sound level the EEOAE modulation depth varied
systematically across different regions of the cochlea. This is shown
by the example in Figure 8 in which the
emissions were generated by electrical stimulation at 1421 Hz in turns
1, 2, and 3 of the same cochlea, and the 86 Hz biasing tone was at 80 dB SPL. The modulation depth was 31% in turn 1, 88% in turn 2, and
93% in turn 3, reflecting the excitation pattern along the cochlea for the low-frequency biasing tone (Honrubia and Ward, 1968
).

View larger version (40K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 8.
Depth of modulation varied with generation site.
EEOAEs were generated from three turns in the same cochlea, and
stimulus parameters were constant.
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
One interpretation of the modulation of EEOAEs by low-frequency
sound is that extrinsically applied current gains access to a
membrane-based source of motility through forward-transduction channels. Thus the current and hence the EEOAE would be modulated in
proportion to the mean conductance, and therefore to the CM, as was
observed. This interpretation is supported by our demonstration elsewhere (Kirk and Yates, 1998
) that EEOAE amplitude is reduced when
the K+ channel blocker 4-aminopyridine is
iontophoresed into scala media. Concurrent reductions in the CM and
elevation of the DC endocochlear potential were consistent with closed
blockade of OHC forward-transduction channels.
In the present study, EEOAEs were modulated by up to 75% at
frequencies above 10 kHz. This is surprising, and hard to reconcile with what we would expect to be the electrical characteristics of the
apical surface of the OHC. The mechanical-transduction channels are
thought to be located at the tips of the stereocilia (Jaramillo and
Hudspeth, 1991
) and are presumably embedded in a normal bilayer
membrane. If so, extrinsically applied currents have at least two,
parallel pathways by which they might enter the cell: through resistive
pathways offered by open channels, or through the capacitance of the
stereocilia membranes. Current passing through the channels would be
expected to be dependent on the state (whether open or closed) of the
channels but independent of frequency, whereas current through the
capacitance would be expected to be independent of the state of the
channels but to increase in direct proportion to frequency.
A recent study of the characteristics of OHC mechano-sensitive channels
(Géléoc et al., 1997
) reported a single-channel conductance
of 112 pS with one channel per stereocilium. Using typical parameters
for the shape of an OHC stereocilium (length 2.5 µm, diameter 0.25 µm; Lim, 1986
), and a membrane capacitance of 1 µF/cm2 (Cole, 1940
), we calculate a corner
frequency of ~400 Hz for a single stereocilium. This would be an
upper boundary for the whole cell because current could also go through
the membrane capacitance of any stereocilium that did not have channels
as well as through the capacitance of the apical surface of the cell.
Current through the capacitance should become progressively dominant,
increasing at the rate of 6 dB per octave above 400 Hz, even when all
transduction channels are fully opened. The membrane capacitance is, in
effect, a high-pass filter. The predicted consequence for the
modulation of EEOAEs (see curve (b) in Fig. 6) is that above
400 Hz changes in channel state should have progressively less effect
on the total current passing into the cell, and hence little effect on
the EEOAE, until at around 10 kHz we should see only a few percent of
modulation, not over 70% as was observed.
It is conceivable that low-frequency acoustic stimulation could
modulate transmission of the EEOAE through the middle ear, but this can
be rejected on three grounds. First, the observation that the
modulation depth was greater for the more apical electrode sites (Fig.
8) is evidence that the modulation depended on the local basilar
membrane displacement. Second, modulations of the EEOAE waveforms
followed the CM when the CM phase was delayed by amounts consistent
with the time taken for the EEOAEs to propagate from the generation
site, implying that modulation took place within the cochlea. Third,
there is no evidence in the literature that such modulation takes place
on the forward transmission through the middle ear at the intensities
used in the present study.
Another possibility, that mechanical propagation of electrically evoked
motility might be modulated by basilar membrane displacement, is
probably remote. To produce the pattern of modulation we observed, the
mechanical sensitivity of the basilar membrane would have to be
enhanced during scala vestibuli bias and reduced during scala tympani
bias. However, Patuzzi et al. (1984)
showed that the sensitivity is
reduced slightly during bias in either direction. Furthermore, Cheatham
and Dallos (1994)
found little difference between the CM responses to
high-frequency probe tones placed at either the scala vestibuli or
scala tympani phase of a low-frequency bias. If the mechanical coupling
of reverse transduction is equivalent to the coupling of forward
transduction, then this result also argues against the modulation of
EEOAEs being attributed to purely mechanical changes.
The intracellular receptor potentials evoked by the low-frequency sound
could modulate the electromotile sensitivity. The voltage and
displacement function of OHCs in vitro is sigmoidal and
asymmetrical about the resting membrane potential (Santos-Sacchi, 1989
). The asymmetry is such that the reverse-transduction gain, and
possibly the EEOAE amplitude, would increase when the cell is
depolarized and decrease with hyperpolarization. Although we cannot
rule out this interpretation entirely, we consider it unlikely. The
voltage and displacement curve as measured in vitro is
extremely broad, extending from
150 to +30 mV about a resting
intracellular potential of
70 mV (Santos-Sacchi, 1989
), but
intracellular receptor potentials are small, at most ±10 mV
(Dallos, 1986
; Russell et al., 1986
). The asymmetry would probably be
insignificant over the physiological range. Roddy et al. (1994)
estimated that a 10 mV hyperpolarization would reduce an EEOAE by only
~2 dB. We observed far greater reductions (up to 85% or ~16 dB)
with hyperpolarizing displacements.
The electromotile gain of OHCs in vitro is also sensitive to
the cell membrane tension (Kakehata and Santos-Sacchi, 1995
), but this
too may be an unlikely candidate. If the membrane tension, and hence
the electromotile feedback, were differentially influenced by different
directions of displacement in vivo, then the basilar membrane sensitivity should vary accordingly. As we noted above, this
does not occur (Patuzzi et al., 1984
).
We believe the most parsimonious interpretation is that the modulations
are related directly to changes in the apical transducer conductance,
although we cannot account for modulation of EEOAEs at emission
frequencies five octaves or more above the estimated upper-frequency
limit. We are not aware of evidence for specializations in the OHC
apical membrane that might reduce the electrical capacitance or
minimize its effects on the electrical stimulus. The situation parallels that in the cell's basolateral membrane, in which electrical capacitance should reduce the receptor current drive to the motility mechanism (Santos-Sacchi, 1992
) but, assuming basolateral motility is
part of the cochlear amplifier, does not appear to do so. A resolution
of this paradox, which might also be consistent with the present
results, is a motility mechanism in the transduction channel itself, or
close to it, rather than in the lateral cell wall (Hudspeth and
Gillespie, 1994
; Benser et al., 1996
; Manley and Gallo, 1997
).
Conceivably, the output of such a motor could depend directly on the
state of the transduction channels, and thus be modulated by
low-frequency sound even if the extrinsic current did gain access
through the membrane capacitance. However, evidence for such a motor,
present in mammalian hair cells and capable of functioning at
frequencies within the range of hearing, is virtually nonexistent.
Zhang et al. (1997)
described a voltage-dependent stereocilia stiffness
in isolated guinea pig OHCs, but this phenomenon appeared independent
of the transduction mechanism because it persisted in the presence of
streptomycin, a known blocker of transduction channels in hair cells.
In addition, evidence cited in preceding paragraphs, that neither
forward transduction (Cheatham and Dallos, 1994
) nor basilar membrane
sensitivity (Patuzzi et al., 1984
) appears to be differentially
sensitive to different directions of displacement, might also argue
against direct modulation of a motile element by low-frequency
bias.
Although the notion of a stereocilia motor is attractive, the cell body
motor has substantial experimental support and enjoys wide acceptance,
despite its basic problem. Recently, Dallos and Evans (1995)
proposed
that the low-pass filtering limitation of the basolateral membrane
could be circumvented if the apical and basolateral impedances divided
the extracellular receptor potential in scala media in the inverse
ratio of the two resistances at low frequencies, and the capacitances
at high frequencies. Provided the apical and basolateral time constants
were similar, this would apply a reduced, but frequency-independent,
sample of the receptor potential to a membrane-based motor by balancing
the low-pass filtering effect of the basolateral membrane with the
high-pass filtering effect of the apical membrane. Whereas this model
offers an elegant solution to the problem of the basolateral filter, it
would not predict our results. The resistive and capacitive pathways
are supposed to be independent at the extremes of frequency, so
modulation of the resistive pathway would affect only low stimulus frequencies whereas high-frequency currents would pass almost entirely
through the capacitive pathway. We estimate, using Equation 3 from
Dallos and Evans (1995)
, that the amplitude modulation of a
membrane-based motility, generated by modulation of the apical resistive component in this model, would fall off rapidly above a
frequency (a few hundred Hz) determined by the reciprocal of the apical
time constant. Our observation of 75% modulation above 10 kHz
indicates there can be little high-pass filtering at the apical
membrane and hence no compensation between the apical and basolateral
capacitances.
Our results are the strongest evidence yet that EEOAEs are generated
directly by mechanisms related to cochlear transduction. More certain
interpretation of their implication for the coupling between forward
and reverse transduction must await further elucidation of these
processes themselves.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
Received Sept. 30, 1997; revised Dec. 16, 1997; accepted Jan. 6, 1998.
This manuscript was supported by grants from the National Health and
Medical Research Council of Australia (Project Grant 960566) and from
the University of Western Australia. We are grateful to G. Nancarrow
and G. Bennet for technical support and to D. Robertson and two
anonymous reviewers for instructive criticism of earlier versions of
this manuscript.
Correspondence should be addressed to Dr. D. L. Kirk, Department
of Physiology, The University of Western Australia, Nedlands 6907, W.A.
Australia.
 |
REFERENCES |
-
Benser ME,
Marquis RE,
Hudspeth AJ
(1996)
Rapid, active hair bundle movements in hair cells from the bullfrog's sacculus.
J Neurosci
16:5629-5643[Abstract/Free Full Text].
-
Cheatham MA,
Dallos P
(1994)
Stimulus biasing
a comparison between cochlear hair cell and organ of corti response patterns.
Hear Res
75:103-113[ISI][Medline]. -
Cole KS
(1940)
Permeability and impermeability of cell membranes for ions.
Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol
8:110-122.
-
Dallos P
(1986)
Neurobiology of cochlear inner and outer hair cells: intracellular recordings.
Hear Res
22:185-198[ISI][Medline].
-
Dallos P
(1992)
The active cochlea.
J Neurosci
12:4575-4585[ISI][Medline].
-
Dallos P,
Evans BN
(1995)
High-frequency motility of outer hair cells and the cochlear amplifier.
Science
267:2006-2009[Abstract/Free Full Text].
-
Davis H
(1983)
An active process in cochlear mechanics.
Hear Res
9:79-90[ISI][Medline].
-
Géléoc GSG,
Lennan GWT,
Richardson GP,
Kross CJ
(1997)
A quantitative comparison of mechanoelectrical transduction in vestibular and auditory hair cells of neonatal mice.
Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci
264:611-621[Medline].
-
Hallworth R,
Evans BN,
Dallos P
(1993)
The location and mechanism of electromotility in guinea pig outer hair cells.
J Neurophysiol
70:549-558[Abstract/Free Full Text].
-
Holley MC,
Ashmore JF
(1990)
Spectrin, actin and the structure of the cortical lattice in mammalian cochlear outer hair cells.
J Cell Sci
96:283-291[Abstract/Free Full Text].
-
Honrubia V,
Ward PH
(1968)
Longitudinal distribution of the cochlear microphonics inside the cochlear duct (guinea pig).
J Acoust Soc Am
44:951-958[ISI][Medline].
-
Hudspeth AJ,
Gillespie PG
(1994)
Pulling strings to tune transduction: adaptation by hair cells.
Neuron
12:1-9[ISI][Medline].
-
Jaramillo F,
Hudspeth AJ
(1991)
Localization of the hair cell's transduction channels at the hair bundle's top by iontophoretic application of a channel blocker.
Neuron
7:409-420[ISI][Medline].
-
Kakehata S,
Santos-Sacchi J
(1995)
Membrane tension directly shifts voltage dependence of outer hair cell motility and associated gating charge.
Biophys J
68:2190-2197[Abstract/Free Full Text].
-
Kim DO
(1986)
Active and nonlinear cochlear biomechanics and the role of outer-hair-cell subsystem in the mammalian auditory system.
Hear Res
22:105-114[ISI][Medline].
-
Kim DO,
Neely ST,
Molnar CE,
Matthews DO
(1980)
An active cochlear model with negative damping in the partition: comparison with rhodes ante and post mortem observations.
In: Psychophysical, physiological and behavioural studies in hearing (van den Brink G,
Bilsen FA,
eds), pp 7-14. Delft, The Netherlands: Delft UP.
-
Kirk DL,
Yates GK
(1996)
Frequency tuning and acoustic enhancement of electrically evoked oto-acoustic emissions in the guinea pig cochlea.
J Acoust Soc Am
100:3714-3725[ISI][Medline].
-
Kirk DL,
Yates GK
(1998)
4-Aminopyridine in scala media reversibly alters the cochlear potentials and suppresses electrically evoked oto-acoustic emissions.
Audiol Neuro-Otol
3:21-39. [Medline]
-
Konishi T,
Nielsen DW
(1978)
The temporal relationship between basilar membrane motion and nerve impulse initiation in auditory nerve fibers of guinea pigs.
Jpn J Physiol
28:291-307[ISI][Medline].
-
Lim DJ
(1986)
Functional structure of the organ of Corti: a review.
Hear Res
22:117-146[ISI][Medline].
-
Manley GA,
Gallo L
(1997)
Otoacoustic emissions, hair cells and myosin motors.
J Acoust Soc Am
102:1049-1055[ISI][Medline].
-
Mountain DC,
Hubbard AE
(1989)
Rapid force production in the cochlea.
Hear Res
42:195-202[ISI][Medline].
-
Mountain DC,
Hubbard AE,
McMullen TA
(1983)
Electromechanical processes in the cochlea.
In: Mechanics of hearing (de Boer E,
Viergever MA,
eds), pp 119-126. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.
-
Murata K,
Moriyama T,
Hosokawa Y,
Minami S
(1991)
Alternating current induced otoacoustic emissions in the guinea pig.
Hear Res
55:201-214[ISI][Medline].
-
Nuttall AL,
Ren TY
(1995)
Electromotile hearing - evidence from basilar membrane motion and otoacoustic emissions.
Hear Res
92:170-177[ISI][Medline].
-
Ohmori H
(1988)
Mechanical stimulation and Fura-2 fluorescence in the hair bundle of dissociated hair cells of the chick.
J Physiol (Lond)
399:115-137[Abstract/Free Full Text].
-
Patuzzi R,
Sellick PM,
Johnstone BM
(1984)
The modulation of the sensitivity of the mammalian cochlea by low frequency tones. III. Basilar membrane motion.
Hear Res
13:19-28[ISI][Medline].
-
Patuzzi RB,
Robertson D
(1988)
Tuning in the mammalian cochlea.
Physiol Rev
68:1009-1082[Free Full Text].
-
Roddy J,
Hubbard AE,
Mountain DC,
Xue S
(1994)
Effects of electrical biasing on electrically-evoked otoacoustic emissions.
Hear Res
73:148-154[ISI][Medline].
-
Ruggero MA,
Robles L,
Rich NC
(1986)
Basilar membrane mechanics at the base of the chinchilla cochlea. II. Responses to low-frequency tones and relationship to microphonics and spike initiation in the VIII nerve.
J Acoust Soc Am
80:1375-1383[ISI][Medline].
-
Russell IJ,
Cody AR,
Richardson GP
(1986)
The response of inner and outer hair cells in the basal turn of the guinea pig cochlea and in the mouse cochlea grown in vitro.
Hear Res
22:199-216[ISI][Medline].
-
Santos-Sacchi J
(1989)
Asymmetry in voltage-dependent movements of isolated outer hair cells from the organ of Corti.
J Neurosci
9:2954-2962[Abstract].
-
Santos-Sacchi J
(1992)
On the frequency limit and phase of outer hair cell motility: effects of the membrane filter.
J Neurosci
12:1906-1916[Abstract].
-
Santos-Sacchi J,
Dilger JP
(1988)
Whole cell currents and mechanical responses of isolated outer hair cells.
Hear Res
35:143-150[ISI][Medline].
-
Xue SW,
Mountain DC,
Hubbard AE
(1993)
Acoustic enhancement of electrically-evoked otoacoustic emissions reflects basilar membrane tuning
experiment results.
Hear Res
70:121-126[ISI][Medline]. -
Yates GK,
Johnstone BM,
Patuzzi RB,
Robertson D
(1992)
Mechanical preprocessing in the mammalian cochlea.
Trends Neurosci
15:57-61[ISI][Medline].
-
Zhang M, Evans BN, Dallos P (1997) Voltage-dependent ciliary
stiffness in cochlear outer hair cells. Presented at the 20th Annual
Midwinter Meeting of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology,
St. Petersburg, Florida.
Copyright © 1998 Society for Neuroscience 0270-6474/98/1861996-08$05.00/0
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
R. Fettiplace
Active hair bundle movements in auditory hair cells
J. Physiol.,
October 1, 2006;
576(1):
29 - 36.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
D. Bozovic and A. J. Hudspeth
Hair-bundle movements elicited by transepithelial electrical stimulation of hair cells in the sacculus of the bullfrog
PNAS,
February 4, 2003;
100(3):
958 - 963.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
A. Ricci
Differences in Mechano-Transducer Channel Kinetics Underlie Tonotopic Distribution of Fast Adaptation in Auditory Hair Cells
J Neurophysiol,
April 1, 2002;
87(4):
1738 - 1748.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
G. A. Manley
Evidence for an Active Process and a Cochlear Amplifier in Nonmammals
J Neurophysiol,
August 1, 2001;
86(2):
541 - 549.
[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]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
G. A. Manley, D. L. Kirk, C. Köppl, and G. K. Yates
In vivo evidence for a cochlear amplifier in the hair-cell bundle of lizards
PNAS,
February 8, 2001;
(2001)
41604998.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
G. A. Manley
Cochlear mechanisms from a phylogenetic viewpoint
PNAS,
October 24, 2000;
97(22):
11736 - 11743.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
A. J. Hudspeth, Y. Choe, A. D. Mehta, and P. Martin
Putting ion channels to work: Mechanoelectrical transduction, adaptation, and amplification by hair cells
PNAS,
October 24, 2000;
97(22):
11765 - 11772.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
P. Martin, A. D. Mehta, and A. J. Hudspeth
Negative hair-bundle stiffness betrays a mechanism for mechanical amplification by the hair cell
PNAS,
October 4, 2000;
(2000)
210389497.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
C. E. Stewart and A. J. Hudspeth
Effects of salicylates and aminoglycosides on spontaneous otoacoustic emissions in the Tokay gecko
PNAS,
January 4, 2000;
97(1):
454 - 459.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
P. Martin and A. J. Hudspeth
Active hair-bundle movements can amplify a hair cell's response to oscillatory mechanical stimuli
PNAS,
December 7, 1999;
96(25):
14306 - 14311.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
G. A. Manley, D. L. Kirk, C. Koppl, and G. K. Yates
In vivo evidence for a cochlear amplifier in the hair-cell bundle of lizards
PNAS,
February 27, 2001;
98(5):
2826 - 2831.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
P. Martin, A. D. Mehta, and A. J. Hudspeth
Negative hair-bundle stiffness betrays a mechanism for mechanical amplification by the hair cell
PNAS,
October 24, 2000;
97(22):
12026 - 12031.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|