Neural coding of ITD with bilateral cochlear implants: Effects of auditory experience

Authors

  • Kenneth E. Hancock Eaton-Peabody Laboratory, Massachusetts Eye & Ear Infirmary, Boston MA, USA; Department of Otology and Laryngology, Harvard Medical School, Boston MA, USA
  • Victor Noel Cochlear Implant Research Laboratory, Massachusetts Eye & Ear Infirmary, Boston MA, USA
  • Bertrand Delgutte Eaton-Peabody Laboratory, Massachusetts Eye & Ear Infirmary, Boston MA, USA; Department of Otology and Laryngology, Harvard Medical School, Boston MA, USA; Research Laboratory of Electronics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge MA, USA

Abstract

Human bilateral cochlear implant users do poorly on tasks involving interaural time differences (ITD), a cue which provides important bene ts to the normal hearing, especially in challenging acoustic environments. Yet the precision of neural ITD coding in acutely-deafened, bilaterally-implanted cats is essentially normal [Smith and Delgutte, J. Neurosci. 27, 6740-6750 (2007)]. One explanation for this discrepancy is that neural plasticity induced by the extended periods of binaural deprivation typically experienced by cochlear implant users degrades neural ITD sensitivity. To test this hypothesis, we recorded from single units in inferior colliculus (IC) of two groups of bilaterally-implanted, anesthetized cats: acutely-deafened cats, which had normal binaural hearing until experimentation, and congenitally deaf white cats, which received no auditory inputs until the experiment. Rate responses of only half as many neurons showed signi cant ITD sensitivity to low-rate pulse trains in congenitally deaf cats compared to acutely deafened cats. For neurons that were ITD sensitive, ITD tuning was broader and best ITDs were more variable in congenitally deaf cats. A signal detection model constrained by the observed physiology supports the idea that the degraded neural ITD coding resulting from deprivation of binaural experience contributes to poor ITD discrimination by human implantees.

References

Brand, A., Behrend, O., Marquardt, T., McAlpine, D., and Grothe, B. (2002). “Precise inhibition is essential for microsecond interaural time difference coding,” Nature 417, 543-547.

Grantham, D. W., Ashmead, D. H., Ricketts, T. A., Haynes, D. S., and Labadie, R. F. (2008). “Interaural time and level difference thresholds for acoustically presented signals in post-lingually deafened adults tted with bilateral cochlear implants using CIS+ processing”, Ear. Hear. 29, 33-44.

Green, D. M., and Swets, J. A. (1988). Signal Detection Theory and Psychophysics, (Los Altos, CA: Peninsula).

Hancock, K. E., and Delgutte, B. (2004). “A physiologically based model of interaural time difference discrimination,” J. Neurosci. 24, 7110-7117.

Hancock, K. E., and Noel, V. (2008). “A physiologically-based model of ITD discrimination in bilateral cochlear implant subjects,” Abstr. Assoc.
Res. Otolaryngol. 31, 301.

Heid, S., Hartmann, R., and Klinke, R. (1998). “A model for prelingual deafness, the congenitally deaf white cat--population statistics and degenerative changes,” Hear. Res. 115, 101-112.

Jean-Baptiste, M., and Morest, D. K. (1975). “Transneuronal changes of synaptic endings and nuclear chromatin in the trapezoid body following cochlear ablations in cats,” J. Comp. Neurol. 162, 111-134.

Joris, P. X., Van de Sande, B., Louage, D. H., and van der Heijden, M. (2006). “Binaural and cochlear disparities,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 103,12917-12922.

Kapfer, C., Seidl, A. H., Schweizer, H. and Grothe, B. (2002). “Experience-dependent re nement of inhibitory inputs to auditory coincidence-detector neurons,” Nat. Neurosci. 5, 247-253.

Kral, A., Tillein, J., Hubka, P., Syed, E., and Engel, A. K. (2009). “Cortical responses to bilateral cochlear implants in deaf cats,” in Conference on Implantable Auditory Prostheses, p 65. Lake Tahoe.

Kuwabara, N., and Zook, J. M. (1992). “Projections to the medial superior olive from the medial and lateral nuclei of the trapezoid body in rodents and bats,” J. Comp. Neurol. 324, 522-538.

Laback, B., Majdak, P., and Baumgartner, W. D. (2007). “Lateralization discrimination of interaural time delays in four-pulse sequences in electric and acoustic hearing,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 121, 2182-2191.

Laback, B., Pok, S. M., Baumgartner, W. D., Deutsch, W. A., and Schmid, K. (2004). “Sensitivity to interaural level and envelope time differences of two bilateral cochlear implant listeners using clinical sound processors,” Ear. Hear. 25, 488- 500.

Lawson, D. T., Wilson, B. S., Zerbi, M., van den Honert, C., Finley, C. C., Farmer, J. C., Jr., McElveen, J. T., Jr., and Roush, P. A. (1998). “Bilateral cochlear implants controlled by a single speech processor”, Am. J. Otol. 19, 758-761.

Lee, D. J., Cahill, H. B., and Ryugo, D. K. (2003). “Effects of congenital deafness in the cochlear nuclei of Shaker-2 mice: an ultrastructural analysis of synapse morphology in the endbulbs of Held,” J. Neurocytol. 32, 229-243.

Litovsky, R., Parkinson, A., Arcaroli, J., and Sammeth, C. (2006). “Simultaneous bilateral cochlear implantation in adults: a multicenter clinical study,” Ear. Hear. 27, 714-731.

McAlpine, D., Jiang, D., and Palmer, A. R. (2001). “A neural code for low-frequency sound localization in mammals,” Nat. Neurosci. 4, 396-401.

Mossop, J. E., and Culling, J. F. (1998). “Lateralization of large interaural delays,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 104, 1574-1579.

Ryugo, D. K., Pongstaporn, T., Huchton, D. M., and Niparko, J. K. (1997). “Ultrastructural analysis of primary endings in deaf white cats: morphologic alterations in endbulbs of Held,” J. Comp. Neurol. 385, 230-244.

Ryugo, D. K., Rosenbaum, B. T., Kim, P. J., Niparko, J. K., and Saada, A. A. (1998). “Single unit recordings in the auditory nerve of congenitally deaf white cats: morphological correlates in the cochlea and cochlear nucleus,” J. Comp. Neurol. 397, 532-548.

Smith, Z. M., and Delgutte, B. (2007). “Sensitivity to interaural time differences in the inferior colliculus with bilateral cochlear implants,” J. Neurosci. 27, 6740- 6750.

Tirko, N., Pongstaporn, T. and Ryugo, D. K. (2009). “Synaptic organization of MSO principal neurons in hearing, deaf, and cochlear-implanted cats,” Abstr. Assoc. Res. Otolaryngol. 32, 707.

van Hoesel, R. J. (2004). “Exploring the bene ts of bilateral cochlear implants,” Audiol. Neurootol. 9, 234-246.

van Hoesel, R. J. (2007). “Sensitivity to binaural timing in bilateral cochlear implant users,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 121, 2192-2206.

van Hoesel, R. J., and Tyler, R. S. (2003). “Speech perception, localization, and lateralization with bilateral cochlear implants,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 113, 1617- 1630.

West, C. D., and Harrison, J. M. (1973). “Transneuronal cell atrophy in the congenitally deaf white cat,” J. Comp. Neurol. 151, 377-398.

Xu, S. A., Shepherd, R. K., Chen, Y., and Clark, G. M. (1993). “Profound hearing loss in the cat following the single co-administration of kanamycin and ethacrynic acid,” Hear. Res. 70, 205-215.

Yin, T. C., Chan, J. C. and Irvine, D. R. (1986). “Effects of interaural time delays of noise stimuli on low-frequency cells in the cat’s inferior colliculus. I. Responses to wideband noise,” J. Neurophysiol. 55, 280-300.

Zurek, P. M. (1992). “Binaural advantages and directional effects in speech intelligibility,” in Acoustical factors affecting hearing aid performance, edited by G. A. Studebaker and I. Hochberg (Allyn and Bacon, Boston), pp. 255-276.

Additional Files

Published

2009-12-15

How to Cite

Hancock, K. E., Noel, V., & Delgutte, B. (2009). Neural coding of ITD with bilateral cochlear implants: Effects of auditory experience. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Auditory and Audiological Research, 2, 1–14. Retrieved from https://proceedings.isaar.eu/index.php/isaarproc/article/view/2009-01

Issue

Vol. 2 (2009): Binaural Processing and Spatial Hearing

Section

2009/1. Physiological measures and models of binaural hearing

License

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

a. Authors retain copyright* and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

b. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

c. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).

*From the 2017 issue onward. The Danavox Jubilee Foundation owns the copyright of all articles published in the 1969-2015 issues. However, authors are still allowed to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.