Comment on "Mutual suppression in the 6 kHz region of sensitive chinchilla cochleae" [J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 121, 2805-2818 (2007)].

M. A. Cheatham*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalComment/debate

2 Scopus citations

Abstract

Rhode [J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 121, 2805-2818 (2007)] acknowledges that two-tone neural rate responses for low-side suppression differ from those measured in basilar membrane mechanics, making one question whether this aspect of suppression has a mechanical correlate. It is suggested here that signal coding between mechanical and neural processing stages may be responsible for the fact that the total rate response (but not the basilar membrane response) for low-frequency suppressors is smaller than that for the probe-alone condition. For example, the velocity dependence of inner hair cell (IHC) transduction, membrane/synaptic filtering and the sensitivity difference between ac and dc components of the IHC receptor potential all serve to reduce excitability for low-side suppressors at the single-unit level. Hence, basilar membrane mechanics may well be the source of low-side suppression measured in the auditory nerve.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)602-605
Number of pages4
JournalThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America
Volume123
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 2008

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)
  • Acoustics and Ultrasonics

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Comment on "Mutual suppression in the 6 kHz region of sensitive chinchilla cochleae" [J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 121, 2805-2818 (2007)].'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this