Cited by 181Hearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, GeneticsNeuroscience and Music PerceptionHearing Loss and Rehabilitation

Plasticity of auditory cortex associated with sensorineural hearing loss in adult C57BL/6J mice

Willott, James F., Aitkin, Lindsay M., McFadden, Sandra L.·1993·Journal of Comparative Neurology

Abstract

The representation of frequency was mapped in the primary auditory cortex (AI) of C57BL/6J (C57) mice during young adulthood (1.5-2 months) when hearing is optimal, and at 3, 6, and 12 months of age, a period during which progressive, high frequency, sensorineural hearing loss occurs in this strain. Maps were also obtained from CBA/CaJ mice which retain good hearing as they age. In AI of young adult C57 mice and CBA mice, characteristic frequencies (CFs) of multiple-unit clusters were easily identified with extracellular recordings, and a general tonotopic organization was observed from dorsal (high frequency) to ventral and caudal (low frequency). In individual cases there appeared to be deviations from the above tonotopic organization, despite the fact that inbred mice are genetically invariant. As progressive loss of high frequency sensitivity ensued peripherally, a substantially increased representation of middle frequencies was observed in AI. There was no apparent change in the surface area of the auditory cortex despite the elimination of high frequencies, and virtually the entire auditory cortex became devoted to the middle frequencies (especially 10-13 kHz) for which sensitivity remained high. Similar age-related changes were not observed in normal-hearing CBA mice. These findings indicate that plasticity in the representation of frequency in AI is associated with high frequency hearing loss in C57 mice.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/cne.903290310

Cites

26 of 26 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Willott, J. F., Aitkin, L. M., & McFadden, S. L.
Affiliations
  • Northern Illinois University (US)
  • Monash University (AU)
Venue
Journal of Comparative Neurology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1993-03-15
Volume
329
Issue
3
Pages
402-411
ISSN
  • 0021-9967 (ISSN-L)
  • 1096-9861
OpenAlex
W2053858196
Cited by
181
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 7
FWCI
2.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Journal of Comparative Neurology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute on Aging (1R37 AG07554, R37AG007554)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Sensory Systems › Hearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, Genetics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Music Perception
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Hearing Loss and Rehabilitation
Keywords
auditory cortex, sensorineural hearing loss, tonotopic organization, cortical plasticity, C57BL/6J mice, CBA/CaJ mice, age-related hearing loss, characteristic frequency, spectral representation, high-frequency sensitivity
MeSH terms
Acoustic Stimulation, Aging, Animals, Auditory Cortex, Brain Mapping, Female, Hearing Loss, Sensorineural, Male, Mice, Inbred CBA, Mice, Inbred C57BL, Neuronal Plasticity, Evoked Potentials, Auditory, Brain Stem, Mice

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review