title: Envelope enhancement increases cortical sensitivity to interaural envelope delays with acoustic and electric hearing.
abstract: Evidence from human psychophysical and animal electrophysiological studies suggests that sensitivity to interaural time delay (ITD) in the modulating envelope of a high-frequency carrier can be enhanced using half-wave rectified stimuli. Recent evidence has shown potential benefits of equivalent electrical stimuli to deaf individuals with bilateral cochlear implants (CIs). In the current study we assessed the effects of envelope shape on ITD sensitivity in the primary auditory cortex of normal-hearing ferrets, and profoundly-deaf animals with bilateral CIs. In normal-hearing animals, cortical sensitivity to ITDs (±1 ms in 0.1-ms steps) was assessed in response to dichotically-presented i) sinusoidal amplitude-modulated (SAM) and ii) half-wave rectified (HWR) tones (100-ms duration; 70 dB SPL) presented at the best-frequency of the unit over a range of modulation frequencies. In separate experiments, adult ferrets were deafened with neomycin administration and bilaterally-implanted with intra-cochlear electrode arrays. Electrically-evoked auditory brainstem responses (EABRs) were recorded in response to bipolar electrical stimulation of the apical pair of electrodes with singe biphasic current pulses (40 µs per phase) over a range of current levels to measure hearing thresholds. Subsequently, we recorded cortical sensitivity to ITDs (±800 µs in 80-µs steps) within the envelope of SAM and HWR biphasic-pulse trains (40 µs per phase; 6000 pulses per second, 100-ms duration) over a range of modulation frequencies. In normal-hearing animals, nearly a third of cortical neurons were sensitive to envelope-ITDs in response to SAM tones. In deaf animals with bilateral CI, the proportion of ITD-sensitive cortical neurons was approximately a fifth in response to SAM pulse trains. In normal-hearing and deaf animals with bilateral CI the proportion of ITD sensitive units and neural sensitivity to ITDs increased in response to HWR, compared with SAM stimuli. Consequently, novel stimulation strategies based on envelope enhancement may prove beneficial to individuals with bilateral cochlear implants.
authors.affiliation: NIHR National Biomedical Research Unit in Hearing, Ropewalk House, Nottingham, United Kingdom; Department of Otolaryngology, School of Clinical Sciences, Nottingham University, Nottingham, United Kingdom; Medical Research Council Institute of Hearing Research, University Park, Nottingham, United Kingdom; Department of Physiology, Anatomy & Genetics, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
authors.forename: Douglas E H
authors.initials: DE
authors.lastname: Hartley
authors.affiliation: Department of Physiology, Anatomy & Genetics, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
authors.forename: Amal
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Isaiah
mesh_terms: D000161:Acoustic Stimulation; D000818:Animals; D001303:Auditory Cortex / Q000503:physiopathology*; D003054:Cochlear Implants; D003638:Deafness / Q000503:physiopathology; D004558:Electric Stimulation; D016057:Evoked Potentials, Auditory, Brain Stem / Q000502:physiology; D005289:Ferrets; D006309:Hearing; D006801:Humans; D013016:Sound; D013997:Time Factors
references.citation: J Neurophysiol. 1995 Mar;73(3):1043-62
references.pmid: 7608754
references.citation: J Acoust Soc Am. 2002 Sep;112(3 Pt 1):1026-36
references.pmid: 12243151
references.citation: J Neurophysiol. 2005 Jun;93(6):3463-78
references.pmid: 15703234
references.citation: Nat Neurosci. 2001 Apr;4(4):396-401
references.pmid: 11276230
references.citation: Hear Res. 1991 Sep;55(1):39-44
references.pmid: 1752792
references.citation: J Neurophysiol. 1996 Oct;76(4):2137-56
references.pmid: 8899590
references.citation: J Acoust Soc Am. 2003 Sep;114(3):1565-74
references.pmid: 14514210
references.citation: J Acoust Soc Am. 1997 Mar;101(3):1671-80
references.pmid: 9069634
references.citation: J Acoust Soc Am. 2011 Jun;129(6):3856-72
references.pmid: 21682409
references.citation: J Acoust Soc Am. 1971 Dec;50(6):1526-31
references.pmid: 5128780
references.citation: Trends Neurosci. 2007 Feb;30(2):70-8
references.pmid: 17188761
references.citation: J Neurosci. 2004 Aug 11;24(32):7110-7
references.pmid: 15306644
references.citation: J Neurophysiol. 1998 Jan;79(1):253-69
references.pmid: 9425196
references.citation: Hear Res. 1993 Mar;66(1):108-20
references.pmid: 8473242
references.citation: J Neurosci. 2003 Jul 16;23(15):6345-50
references.pmid: 12867519
references.citation: J Acoust Soc Am. 1998 Apr;103(4):2117-27
references.pmid: 9566333
references.citation: J Acoust Soc Am. 2013 Apr;133(4):2288-300
references.pmid: 23556596
references.citation: J Neurosci Methods. 2007 Sep 30;165(2):297-305
references.pmid: 17624443
references.citation: J Acoust Soc Am. 2003 Jul;114(1):522-8
references.pmid: 12880063
references.citation: J Acoust Soc Am. 2004 Oct;116(4 Pt 1):2298-310
references.pmid: 15532661
references.citation: J Acoust Soc Am. 1984 Nov;76(5):1401-10
references.pmid: 6512102
references.citation: J Neurosci. 2007 Jun 20;27(25):6740-50
references.pmid: 17581961
references.citation: J Neurophysiol. 1990 Oct;64(4):1247-60
references.pmid: 2258745
references.citation: J Acoust Soc Am. 2011 Sep;130(3):1515-29
references.pmid: 21895091
references.citation: J Acoust Soc Am. 2003 Mar;113(3):1617-30
references.pmid: 12656396
references.citation: Hear Res. 1995 May;85(1-2):127-41
references.pmid: 7559169
references.citation: J Acoust Soc Am. 2001 Jun;109(6):2880-7
references.pmid: 11425130
references.citation: Cereb Cortex. 2005 Oct;15(10):1637-53
references.pmid: 15703254
references.citation: J Neurophysiol. 2006 Nov;96(5):2327-41
references.pmid: 16807349
references.citation: J Neurosci Methods. 2010 Jul 15;190(2):214-28
references.pmid: 20576507
references.citation: J Acoust Soc Am. 1994 Jun;95(6):3561-7
references.pmid: 8046145
references.citation: J Neurophysiol. 2008 May;99(5):2390-407
references.pmid: 18287556
references.citation: Hear Res. 2006 Nov;221(1-2):1-16
references.pmid: 16978812
references.citation: J Neurophysiol. 1987 Jun;57(6):1746-66
references.pmid: 3598629
references.citation: J Acoust Soc Am. 1976 Mar;59(3):598-601
references.pmid: 1254788
references.citation: Ear Hear. 2004 Oct;25(5):488-500
references.pmid: 15599195
references.citation: J Neurophysiol. 1997 Sep;78(3):1237-47
references.pmid: 9310415
references.citation: J Assoc Res Otolaryngol. 2009 Dec;10(4):557-67
references.pmid: 19513792
references.citation: Nature. 2005 May 19;435(7040):341-6
references.pmid: 15902257
references.citation: J Neurophysiol. 1997 Sep;78(3):1222-36
references.pmid: 9310414
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001 Nov 20;98(24):14050-4
references.pmid: 11707595
references.citation: J Acoust Soc Am. 2009 Jun;125(6):3914-24
references.pmid: 19507974
references.citation: J Neurophysiol. 2011 Jul;106(1):30-43
references.pmid: 21562191
references.citation: J Acoust Soc Am. 2003 Apr;113(4 Pt 1):2021-30
references.pmid: 12703713
references.citation: Hear Res. 1996 Aug;97(1-2):136-52
references.pmid: 8844194
references.citation: J Neurosci. 2001 Jul 1;21(13):4844-51
references.pmid: 11425911
references.citation: Hear Res. 1990 Oct;48(3):287-90
references.pmid: 2272938
references.citation: J Assoc Res Otolaryngol. 2007 Mar;8(1):134-51
references.pmid: 17225976
references.citation: Cereb Cortex. 2010 Feb;20(2):492-506
references.pmid: 19906808