Objective Threshold Estimation and Measurement of the Residual Background Noise in Auditory Evoked Potentials of Goldfish

Overview

Journal J Acoust Soc Am

Publisher American Institute of Physics

Specialty Otorhinolaryngology

Date 2008 Dec 3

PMID 19045791

Citations 4

Authors

Jianqiang Xiao

Christopher B Braun

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

A survey of papers using auditory evoked potentials (AEPs) published over the last 10 years (Table I) demonstrates that most AEP studies in animals have used subjective methods for auditory threshold determination. Subjective methods greatly reduce the value of statistical hypothesis testing and jeopardize tests of hypothetical experimental group differences in hearing sensitivity. Correspondingly, many attempts have been made to develop objective threshold determination methods, but these have not been used widely. Further, they seldom include an appreciation of the effects of residual noise in the AEP. In this study, AEPs evoked by tonal and noise stimuli in goldfish (Carassius auratus) were recorded and the residual background noise was measured and analyzed in detail. High variability was found in residual noise, but can be effectively controlled with a simple modification of averaging routines. Considerable interobserver disagreements were found using subjective threshold estimation. An objective method of threshold determination was developed based on comparison between AEP amplitude and controlled residual noise, using a signal detection theory approach to set specific threshold criteria. The usefulness of AEP in hypothesis testing for auditory function requires more control over residual background noise amplitudes and the use of objective threshold determination techniques.

Citing Articles

Non-stimulus-evoked activity as a measure of neural noise in the frequency-following response.

Krizman J, Bonacina S, Otto-Meyer R, Kraus N J Neurosci Methods. 2021; 362:109290.

PMID: 34273451 PMC: 8403647. DOI: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2021.109290.

Acoustic particle motion detection in the snapping shrimp (Alpheus richardsoni).

Dinh J, Radford C J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol. 2021; 207(5):641-655.

PMID: 34241712 DOI: 10.1007/s00359-021-01503-4.

Examining the hearing abilities of fishes.

Popper A, Hawkins A, Sand O, Sisneros J J Acoust Soc Am. 2019; 146(2):948.

PMID: 31472537 PMC: 7051002. DOI: 10.1121/1.5120185.

Auditory evoked potential audiometry in fish.

Ladich F, Fay R Rev Fish Biol Fish. 2015; 23(3):317-364.

PMID: 26366046 PMC: 4560088. DOI: 10.1007/s11160-012-9297-z.

References

Wolski L, Anderson R, Bowles A, Yochem P . Measuring hearing in the harbor seal (Phoca vitulina): comparison of behavioral and auditory brainstem response techniques. J Acoust Soc Am. 2003; 113(1):629-37. DOI: 10.1121/1.1527961. View

Don M, Elberling C . Evaluating residual background noise in human auditory brain-stem responses. J Acoust Soc Am. 1994; 96(5 Pt 1):2746-57. DOI: 10.1121/1.411281. View

May B, Prosen C, Weiss D, Vetter D . Behavioral investigation of some possible effects of the central olivocochlear pathways in transgenic mice. Hear Res. 2002; 171(1-2):142-157. DOI: 10.1016/s0378-5955(02)00495-1. View

Popper A, Smith M, Cott P, Hanna B, MacGillivray A, Austin M . Effects of exposure to seismic airgun use on hearing of three fish species. J Acoust Soc Am. 2005; 117(6):3958-71. DOI: 10.1121/1.1904386. View

Song L, McGee J, Walsh E . Frequency- and level-dependent changes in auditory brainstem responses (ABRS) in developing mice. J Acoust Soc Am. 2006; 119(4):2242-57. DOI: 10.1121/1.2180533. View

Yan H . Auditory role of the suprabranchial chamber in gourami fish. J Comp Physiol A. 1998; 183(3):325-33. DOI: 10.1007/s003590050259. View

Katbamna B, Brown J, Collard M, Ide C . Auditory brainstem responses to airborne sounds in the aquatic frog Xenopus laevis: correlation with middle ear characteristics. J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol. 2005; 192(4):381-7. DOI: 10.1007/s00359-005-0076-3. View

Cebulla M, Sturzebecher E, Wernecke K . Objective detection of auditory brainstem potentials: comparison of statistical tests in the time and frequency domains. Scand Audiol. 2000; 29(1):44-51. DOI: 10.1080/010503900424598. View

Elberling C, Wahlgreen O . Estimation of auditory brainstem response, ABR, by means of Bayesian inference. Scand Audiol. 1985; 14(2):89-96. DOI: 10.3109/01050398509045928. View

10.

Porter C, Martin G, Stagner B, Lonsbury-Martin B . Distortion-product otoacoustic emission suppression growth in normal and noise-exposed rabbits. J Acoust Soc Am. 2006; 120(2):884-900. DOI: 10.1121/1.2211407. View

11.

Akamatsu T, Okumura T, Novarini N, Yan H . Empirical refinements applicable to the recording of fish sounds in small tanks. J Acoust Soc Am. 2003; 112(6):3073-82. DOI: 10.1121/1.1515799. View

12.

Mann D, Higgs D, TAVOLGA W, Souza M, Popper A . Ultrasound detection by clupeiform fishes. J Acoust Soc Am. 2001; 109(6):3048-54. DOI: 10.1121/1.1368406. View

13.

Elberling C, Don M . Quality estimation of averaged auditory brainstem responses. Scand Audiol. 1984; 13(3):187-97. DOI: 10.3109/01050398409043059. View

14.

Schimmel H . The (+) reference: accuracy of estimated mean components in average response studies. Science. 1967; 157(3784):92-4. DOI: 10.1126/science.157.3784.92. View

15.

Elberling C, Don M . Threshold characteristics of the human auditory brain stem response. J Acoust Soc Am. 1987; 81(1):115-21. DOI: 10.1121/1.395019. View

16.

Ozdamar O, Delgado R, Eilers R, Urbano R . Automated electrophysiologic hearing testing using a threshold-seeking algorithm. J Am Acad Audiol. 1994; 5(2):77-88. View

17.

Ramcharitar J, Higgs D, Popper A . Audition in sciaenid fishes with different swim bladder-inner ear configurations. J Acoust Soc Am. 2006; 119(1):439-43. DOI: 10.1121/1.2139068. View

18.

Boettcher F . Susceptibility to acoustic trauma in young and aged gerbils. J Acoust Soc Am. 2003; 112(6):2948-55. DOI: 10.1121/1.1513364. View

19.

Arnold S . Objective versus visual detection of the auditory brain stem response. Ear Hear. 1985; 6(3):144-50. DOI: 10.1097/00003446-198505000-00004. View

20.

Lu Z, Tomchik S . Effects of a red-tide toxin on fish hearing. J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol. 2002; 188(10):807-13. DOI: 10.1007/s00359-002-0369-8. View