4.5 Review

The interplay of organ-of-Corti vibrational modes, not tectorial-membrane resonance, sets outer-hair-cell stereocilia phase to produce cochlear amplification

期刊

HEARING RESEARCH
卷 395, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.heares.2020.108040

关键词

Cochlear amplification; Tectorial membrane; Reticular lamina; Organ of Corti

资金

  1. NIH NIDCD [R01 DC007910]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The mechanical motions that deflect outer-hair-cell (OHC) stereocilia and the resulting effects of OHC motility are reviewed, concentrating on high-frequency cochlear regions. It has been proposed that a tectorial-membrane (TM) resonance makes the phase of OHC stereocilia motion be appropriate to produce cochlear amplification, i.e. so that the OHC force that pushes the basilar membrane (BM) is in the same direction as BM velocity. Evidence for and against the TM-resonance hypothesis are considered, including new cochlear-motion measurements using optical coherence tomography, and it is concluded that there is no such TM resonance. The evidence points to there being an advance in the phase of reticular lamina (RL) radial motion at a frequency approximately 1/2 octave below the BM characteristic frequency, and that this is the main source of the phase difference between the TM and RL radial motions that produces cochlear amplification. It appears that the change in phase of RL radial motion comes about because of a transition between different organ-of-Corti (OoC) vibrational modes that changes RL motion relative to BM and TM motion. The origins and consequences of the large phase change of RL radial motion relative to BM motion are considered; differences in the reported patterns of these changes may be due to different viewing angles. Detailed motion data and new models are needed to better specify the vibrational patterns of the OoC modes and the role of the various OoC structures in producing the modes and the mode transition. (C) 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据