4.5 Article

Prestin gene expression in the rat cochlea following intense noise exposure

Journal

HEARING RESEARCH
Volume 222, Issue 1-2, Pages 54-61

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.heares.2006.08.011

Keywords

prestin; OHC motor protein; cochlear amplification; noise-induced hearing loss; OHC cytoskeleton

Funding

  1. NIDCD NIH HHS [R03-DC04753] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Noise-induced permanent loss of cochlear amplification was observed previously with the majority of outer hair cells (OHCs) still surviving in the cochlea and even with a normal OHC receptor potential, indicated by CM (cochlear microphonics) recording [Chen, G.D., Fechter, L.D., 2003. The relationship between noise-induced hearing loss and hair cell loss in rats. Hear. Res. 177(1-2), 81-90 Chen, G.D., Liu, Y., 2005. Mechanisms of noise-induced hearing loss potentiation by hypoxia. Hear. Res. 200, 1-9]. This study focused on effects of an intense noise exposure (10-20 kHz at a level of 110 dB SPL for 4 It) on the OHC motor protein (prestin) and structural proteins in the OHC membrane skeleton. The noise exposure significantly disrupted CM and CAP (cochlear compound action potential). The injured CM recovered after]-week resting period. The impaired CAP at frequencies lower than the noise band also recovered. However, the CAP recovery at frequencies of the noise band stopped at a linear line one week after the noise exposure, indicating a permanent loss of cochlear amplification. Gene expression of prestin, beta-spectrin, and beta-actin was significantly up-regulated after the noise exposure. The elevated gene expression peaked at the 3rd post-exposure day and returned to baseline 4 weeks after the noise exposure. The up-regulated gene expression may be in response to injury of the proteins, which may be responsible for the loss of cochlear amplification. (c) 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available