Elsevier

Hearing Research

Volume 422, 1 September 2022, 108566
Hearing Research

Short communication
Characterizing subcutaneous cortical auditory evoked potentials in mice

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2022.108566Get rights and content

Highlights

  • Robust auditory-related waves can be recorded non-invasively and subcutaneously in anaesthetised mice.

  • The generators of these waveforms have been localised to the contralateral auditory cortex.

Abstract

Auditory Brainstem Responses (ABRs) are a reliably robust measure of auditory thresholds in the mammalian hearing system and can be used to determine deficits in the auditory periphery. However, because these measures are limited to the lower stages of the auditory pathway, they are insensitive to changes or deficits that occur in the thalamic and cortical regions. Cortical Auditory Evoked Potentials (CAEPs), as longer latency responses, capture information from these regions. However they are less frequently used as a diagnostic tool, particularly in rodent models, due to their inherent variability and subsequent difficult interpretation.

The purpose of this study was to develop a consistent measure of subcutaneous CAEPs to auditory stimuli in mice and to determine their origin. To this end, we investigated the effect on the CAEPs recorded in response to different stimuli (noise, click, and tone (16 kHz) bursts), stimulus presentation rates (2/s, 6/s, 10/s) and electrode placements. Recordings were examined for robust CAEP components to determine the optimal experimental paradigm. We argue that CAEPs can measure robust and replicable cortical responses. Furthermore, by deactivating the auditory cortex with lidocaine we demonstrated that the contralateral cortex is the main contributor to the CAEP. Thus CAEP measurements could prove to be of value diagnostically in future for deficits in higher auditory areas.

Introduction

Auditory Brainstem Responses (ABRs) recorded near the ears are frequently used to measure auditory thresholds in mammals and can be used to identify peripheral hearing deficits. ABRs occur within the first 10 ms after sound presentation and are thought to emanate from successive activation of the ascending auditory pathway (Felix et al., 2018; Winkler et al., 2013). However, ABRs do not capture cortical activity. To circumvent this limitation, human studies have long made use of scalp electroencephalography (EEG) to focus on higher order auditory areas. In particular, click stimulation induces two main middle-latency waves in the EEG, Na/Pa (∼15–35 ms) and Nb/Pb (35–60 ms) the origins of which remain controversial with most likely generators being the auditory thalamus and primary auditory cortex, while the midbrain or secondary auditory cortex are less likely (Musiek and Nagle, 2018; Picton et al., 1974). So called longer latency waves N1/P2/N2 occur at around 100/180/300 ms, respectively, and are thought to reflect higher order processing involving primary, secondary and associative auditory cortices (Godey et al., 2001; Tremblay and Burkard, 2012). These Cortical Auditory Evoked Potentials (CAEPs) have already been widely used in human studies to assess pharmacodynamics, cortical lesions, sensory processing and deficits and clinical outcomes on auditory cortical function (Davies et al., 2010; Ibañez et al., 1989; Johnson, 2009; Litscher, 1995; Supp et al., 2018; Winkler et al., 2013).

In mice, an important genetic animal model, there have been only a few studies using middle or long latency CAEPs and the majority of these were obtained epidurally (Farley et al., 2019; Metzger et al., 2007; O'Reilly and Conway, 2021; Siegel et al., 2003). Subcutaneous CAEPs are surprisingly infrequently used diagnostically despite being less invasive and still providing relatively good spatial information.

To assess the usability of subcutaneous CAEP recordings in mice, and to determine which stimulation and recording parameters produce the most robust results, we recorded CAEPs using multiple stimulus types, presentation rates and electrode placements. We also investigated their generators using auditory cortical deactivation. Our findings suggest that CAEPs in the latency range of 14–80 ms provide robust, reliable and minimally invasive measures of the contralateral thalamo-cortical response, allowing for assessment of the cortical auditory function in mice under different conditions.

Section snippets

Methodology

In an acoustically and electromagnetically isolated chamber, sounds were presented by Tucker-Davis Technologies (TDT) RZ6 to either closed field in-ear (TDT EC1) or free-field (TDT ES1) transducers. Electrophysiological responses were recorded from subcutaneous electrodes (SC25, NeuroService) at a 24 kHz sampling rate (TDT RA4), subjected to a Butterworth filter between 3 Hz and 3 kHz and displayed by TDT Biosigz software.

We used 90 mice (age P28–81) from strains C57BL6/JRj (56 males, 11

Subcutaneous recordings of CAEPs

In response to 5-ms long noise bursts, the signals recorded from electrodes over the contralateral cortex (Fig. 1A) show early subcortical peaks, typically seen in ABRs, before 8 ms and two subsequent sequences of large positive (P) and negative (N) maxima (P14, N23, P35, N61, Fig. 1BC). The reproducibility of these waves at specific latencies ensures that peaks and troughs can be identified unambiguously in each animal (Fig. 1C).

Best parameters for subcutaneous CAEP recordings

To optimize reliable and repeatable CAEP waves, we first examined

Reliability of CAEP recordings

We found that CAEPs in response to noise bursts were robust. This reproducibility in amplitude and latency allows unambiguous identification of peaks and troughs across animals within [10–80]ms, latencies relevant to higher order processing (Fig. 1C). The pattern of four peaks P14, N23, P35 and N61 is maintained across all tested mouse strains (Fig. 2F) though latency and amplitude can vary between strains, corroborating previous observations in mouse epidural recordings (Siegel et al., 2003).

CRediT author statement

Olivier Postal: Investigation, Data Curation, Formal analysis, Writing; Warren Bakay : Investigation, Data Curation, Formal analysis, Writing, Methodology ; Typhaine Dupont : Investigation, Data Curation ; Alexa Buck : Investigation, Writing; Élodie Daoud: Investigation, Data Curation, Formal analysis, Methodology; Christine Petit: Resources, Funding acquisition; Nicolas Michalski : Resources, Funding acquisition, Writing – Review & Editing, Supervision; Boris Gourévitch : Conceptualization,

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank the Animalerie Centrale of the Institut Pasteur for assistance with the project.

Data Availability

The datasets generated for this study are available on request to the corresponding author.

Ethics Statement

Animal experiments were performed in accordance with French and European regulations for the care and protection of laboratory animals (EC Directive 2010/63, French Law 2013–118), with authorization from the Institut Pasteur Ethics Committee for animal experimentation.

Funding

BG was supported by grants from the ANR (French National Research Agency, ANR-15-CE37–0007–01; ANR-21-CE34–0012). OP was supported by the Fondation pour la Recherche Médicale (FDM201806005994). AB was supported by a FET Open European Grant (Hearlight, 964568). NM was supported by grants from the ANR as part of the second Investissements d'Avenir program LIGHT4DEAF (ANR-15-RHUS-0001) and LabEx LIFESENSES (ANR-10-LABX-65), LHW-376 Stiftung, and by the Fondation pour l'Audition (FPA-IDA03).

References (43)

  • T. Murofushi et al.

    Temporary latency shifts in auditory evoked potentials by injection of lidocaine in the rat

    Hear. Res.

    (1994)
  • Ö. Özdamar et al.

    Binaural interaction in the auditory middle latency response of the guinea pig

    Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol.

    (1986)
  • T.W. Picton et al.

    Human auditory evoked potentials. I: evaluation of components

    Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol.

    (1974)
  • T. Rosburg et al.

    The reduced auditory evoked potential component N1 after repeated stimulation: refractoriness hypothesis vs. habituation account

    Hear. Res.

    (2021)
  • M.R. Ruebhausen et al.

    A comparison of the effects of isoflurane and ketamine anesthesia on auditory brainstem response (ABR) thresholds in rats

    Hear. Res.

    (2012)
  • G.V. Simpson et al.

    Multiple brain systems generating the rat auditory evoked potential. II. Dissociation of auditory cortex and non-lemniscal generator systems

    Brain Res.

    (1993)
  • D.L. Woods et al.

    Generators of middle- and long-latency auditory evoked potentials: implications from studies of patients with bitemporal lesions

    Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol./Evoked Potentials Section

    (1987)
  • P. Davies et al.

    Middle and late latency ERP components discriminate between adults, typical children, and children with sensory processing disorders

    Front. Integr. Neurosci.

    (2010)
  • R.A. Felix et al.

    Subcortical pathways: towards a better understanding of auditory disorders

    Hear. Res.

    (2018)
  • B.H. Gaese et al.

    Anesthesia changes frequency tuning of neurons in the rat primary auditory cortex

    J. Neurophysiol.

    (2001)
  • V.S. Hambrecht-Wiedbusch et al.

    General anesthesia does not have persistent effects on attention in rodents

    Front. Behav. Neurosci.

    (2019)
  • #

    The authors contributed equally.

    View full text