title: Stimulus Frequency Otoacoustic Emission Delays and Generating Mechanisms in Guinea Pigs, Chinchillas, and Simulations.
abstract: According to coherent reflection theory (CRT), stimulus frequency otoacoustic emissions (SFOAEs) arise from cochlear irregularities coherently reflecting energy from basilar membrane motion within the traveling-wave peak. This reflected energy arrives in the ear canal predominantly with a single delay at each frequency. However, data from humans and animals indicate that (1) SFOAEs can have multiple delay components, (2) low-frequency SFOAE delays are too short to be accounted for by CRT, and (3) "SFOAEs" obtained with a 2nd ("suppressor") tone ≥2 octaves above the probe tone have been interpreted as arising from the area basal to the region of cochlear amplification. To explore these issues, we collected SFOAEs by the suppression method in guinea pigs and time-frequency analyzed these data, simulated SFOAEs, and published chinchilla SFOAEs. Time-frequency analysis revealed that most frequencies showed only one SFOAE delay component while other frequencies had multiple components including some with short delays. We found no systematic patterns in the occurrence of multiple delay components. Using a cochlear model that had significant basilar membrane motion only in the peak region of the traveling wave, simulated SFOAEs had single and multiple delay components similar to the animal SFOAEs. This result indicates that multiple components (including ones with short delays) can originate from cochlear mechanical irregularities in the SFOAE peak region and are not necessarily indicative of SFOAE sources in regions ≥2 octaves basal of the SFOAE peak region. We conclude that SFOAEs obtained with suppressors close to the probe frequency provide information primarily about the mechanical response in the region that receives amplification, and we attribute the too-short SFOAE delays at low frequencies to distortion-source SFOAEs and coherent reflection from multiple cochlear motions. Our findings suggest that CRT needs revision to include reflections from multiple motions in the cochlear apex.
authors.affiliation: Eaton-Peabody Lab, Mass. Eye and Ear Infirmary, 243 Charles St, Boston, MA, 02114, USA. maria.berezina@gmail.com.|Harvard-MIT HST Speech and Hearing Bioscience and Technology Program, Cambridge, MA, USA. maria.berezina@gmail.com.
authors.forename: Maria A
authors.initials: MA
authors.lastname: Berezina-Greene
authors.affiliation: Eaton-Peabody Lab, Mass. Eye and Ear Infirmary, 243 Charles St, Boston, MA, 02114, USA. jjg@epl.meei.harvard.edu.|Harvard-MIT HST Speech and Hearing Bioscience and Technology Program, Cambridge, MA, USA. jjg@epl.meei.harvard.edu.|Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. jjg@epl.meei.harvard.edu.
authors.forename: John J
authors.initials: JJ
authors.lastname: Guinan
mesh_terms: D000161:Acoustic Stimulation; D000818:Animals; D002682:Chinchilla / Q000502:physiology*; D003198:Computer Simulation; D004423:Ear / Q000502:physiology*; D006168:Guinea Pigs / Q000502:physiology*; D008954:Models, Biological; D017084:Otoacoustic Emissions, Spontaneous
keywords: Cochlear mechanics; Coherent reflection; SFOAE; TEOAE