Temporal processing from the auditory nerve to the medial nucleus of the trapezoid body in the rat
Introduction
Temporal coding of sound may be manifested by the intervals between neural responses being multiples of the period of the sound wave (Kiang et al., 1965, Rose et al., 1959). The occurrence of action potentials in this manner has been termed phase-locking (Rose et al., 1967). Phase-locking has been investigated extensively in mammals such as the cat (Kiang et al., 1965, Johnson, 1980, Joris et al., 1994a, Joris et al., 1994b), squirrel monkey (Rose et al., 1967, Geisler et al., 1974), chinchilla (Woolf et al., 1981) and guinea-pig (Tasaki, 1954, Harrison and Evans, 1979). However little is known of phase-locking ability of the rat.
Investigations of temporal coding in small mammals, such as the guinea-pig and chinchilla, indicate that phase-locking is detectable up to 3500 Hz (Harrison and Evans, 1979, Woolf et al., 1981, Palmer and Russell, 1986). This phase-locking limit is less than the 5000–6000 Hz limit seen in cats (Rose et al., 1959, Kiang et al., 1965). Palmer and Russell (1986) have shown that a limiting factor for phase-locking ability in guinea-pigs is the hair-cell membrane time constant, although variation in the transmission time (presumably due to synaptic processes) has also been suggested to affect the high-frequency limit of phase-locking (Anderson et al., 1971). In addition, Møller, 1972, Møller, 1976a, Møller, 1976b investigated the temporal responses of auditory nerve (AN) and cochlear nucleus units in rats to amplitude-modulated sounds. These studies indicated that AN fibres have a higher cut-off frequency than cochlear nucleus units for the coding of the amplitude modulation. Møller attributed this degradation in coding to an increase in temporal spread in the cochlear nucleus. The ability to phase-lock may be compromised further as we move up the auditory pathway due to the additive effect of jitter from one stage of processing to the next (Köppl, 1997).
Although variation in transmission time and membrane time constants play a role in limiting phase-locking, other mechanisms also exist to enhance phase-locking, particularly at low frequencies. Recent evidence has shown that bushy cell types in the anteroventral cochlear nucleus (AVCN) of the cat are able to phase-lock in a more precise manner and show higher entrainment capabilities than AN fibres for frequencies below 1000 Hz (Joris et al., 1994a, Joris et al., 1994b). This improved ability to process temporal information may be related to convergence and coincidence detection of AN input to the AVCN (Carney, 1990, Joris et al., 1998). This increase in phase-locking ability is seen in bushy cell types of the AVCN, in particular globular bushy cells (Joris et al., 1994a, Joris et al., 1994b). Globular bushy cells send excitatory input via the trapezoid body to cells in the contralateral medial nucleus of the trapezoid body (MNTB; Banks and Smith, 1992).
Anatomically and physiologically, the principal cells of the MNTB closely resemble the bushy cells of the AVCN (Morest, 1968, Smith et al., 1998). Calyces of Held are present on the soma of both cell types (Cant and Morest, 1979, Lorente de Nò, 1933, Lorente de Nò, 1981, Banks and Smith, 1992, Lenn and Reese, 1966, Smith et al., 1998). In response to tones, AVCN bushy and MNTB principal cells bear the hallmarks of the primary-like (PL) and primary-like with notch (PLN) unit types (Smith et al., 1998, Wu and Kelly, 1993). Short time constants and highly non-linear current–voltage relationships are also features shared with the bushy cells (Banks and Smith, 1992, Wu and Kelly, 1991, Wu and Kelly, 1993, Manis and Marx, 1991, Paolini et al., 1997, Paolini and Clark, 1998, Oertel, 1999) which enable them to reproduce rapid trains of action potentials.
The similarities of the bushy cells and MNTB principal cells give the impression of a pathway for precise processing of the temporal code. In this investigation we will determine the limiting frequency for temporal coding in the rat assessed in this pathway. A fixed degree of temporal imprecision produces a wide variety of vector strengths, depending on the stimulus frequency. Köppl (1997) introduced ‘temporal dispersion’, a measure of the temporal spread of action potentials. The two critical advantages of using temporal dispersion rather than vector strength are that temporal dispersion can be compared across frequencies, and that the manner in which vector strength varies with frequency may be understood in terms of a fixed or frequency-independent degree of temporal imprecision. In this paper we introduce an improved measure of temporal dispersion.
Section snippets
Preparation
Data were recorded from 34 Long–Evans rats (most between 280 and 300 g). They were anaesthetised with an initial intraperitoneal injection of 20% urethane in water (1.3 g/kg). Supplemental doses were administered if, at any time during the experiment, a corneal or paw reflex was observed. In some cases, the rat’s breathing became laboured with accumulated secretions in the upper airway. In such situations, 0.05 ml doses of ‘Atrosite’ (0.65 mg/ml atropine sulphate solution) were given
Unit classification
Recordings were made from 321 units, of which 185 were recorded from dorsal to ventral tracks in the AVCN region, and 136 from the ventral brainstem. Of the units recorded from the anatomical AVCN region, it was necessary to distinguish between AN fibres and neurones of the cochlear nucleus. It was found that the distribution of click latencies at 100 dB SPL among these units was bimodal, with the value 2.5 ms dividing the two modes, as shown in Fig. 2. Units with latencies less than 2.5 ms
Discussion
The results presented here indicate that regardless of anatomical location, two observations regarding temporal coding hold: (i) at sufficiently high intensities, cells of all CFs saturate around a common vector strength value, and (ii) this value represents a fairly constant degree of temporal imprecision. Together, these findings are in agreement with previous findings (Kiang et al., 1965, Rose et al., 1967, Johnson, 1980, Joris et al., 1994a, Joris et al., 1994b) and suggest that the
Acknowledgements
We thank J.C. Clarey and L. Kuhlmann for their comments and suggestions regarding this manuscript, R.E. Millard for engineering support and M.L.E. Sargeant for her help in identifying positions of recorded units. This work was funded by The Bionic Ear Institute and The National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC #990816) of Australia.
References (57)
- et al.
Temporal patterns of the responses of auditory-nerve fibers to low-frequency tones
Hear. Res.
(1996) - et al.
The bushy cells in the anteroventral cochlear nucleus of the cat: A study with electron microscope
Neuroscience
(1979) - et al.
Encoding of amplitude modulation in the gerbil cochlear nucleus: I. A hierarchy of enhancement
Hear. Res.
(1990) - et al.
Coincidence detection in the auditory system: 50 years after Jeffress
Neuron
(1998) The collateral system of the medial nucleus of the trapezoid body of the cat, its neuronal architecture and relation to the olivo-cochlear bundle
Brain Res.
(1968)- et al.
Phase-locking in the cochlear nerve of the guinea-pig and its relation to the receptor potential of inner hair cells
Hear. Res.
(1986) - et al.
Intracellular responses of the rat anteroventral cochlear nucleus to intracochlear electrical stimulation
Brain Res. Bull.
(1998) - et al.
Intracellular recording of magnocellular preoptic neurone responses to olfactory brain
Neuroscience
(1997) - et al.
Muscimol suppression of the dorsal cochlear nucleus modifies frequency tuning in rats
Brain Res.
(1998) - et al.
The neuronal architecture of the anteroventral cochlear nucleus of the cat in the region of the cochlear nerve root: Electron microscopy
Neuroscience
(1982)