Subject: Re: Laws of physics and old history; BM stiffness. From: "reinifrosch@xxxxxxxx" <reinifrosch@xxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 12:53:44 +0000 List-Archive:<http://lists.mcgill.ca/scripts/wa.exe?LIST=AUDITORY>------=_Part_2097_32230498.1321361624402 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello Peter, Yes, the oscillating elastic beam is formed by the whole cochlear partition= (CP), not only by the BM (basilar membrane). There appears to be longitudi= nal coupling of CP elements. According to the first of the papers mentioned= yesterday by Prof. David Mountain, however, in gerbil the coupling range i= s only +-16.7 micro-m (1.6 mm from base) and +-34.5 micro-m (8.1 mm from ba= se). These coupling ranges are small compared to the wavelength of the coch= lear travelling wave (at least in most of the relevant cases), so it appear= s reasonable to treat the CP as a series of independent beams (oriented in = the sideways direction). Because of the organ-of-Corti cells, the oscillati= ons of the beams are expected to be strongly damped. This is confirmed to a= degree, e.g., by Fig. 1 of the paper "Reverse transduction measured in the= isolated cochlea by laser Michelson interferometry", by Mammano and Ashmor= e, Nature 365 (1993) 838-841. The oscillations at the beginning and at the = end of the rectangular current pulse sent through the CP are strongly dampe= d. The Q-value (resonance frequency divided by -3-dB resonance-peak width) = of the Claudius-cell oscillation is about 4. A part of that damping is due = to the generated oscillation of the liquid particles above and below the CP= , but damping caused by CP structures is probably significant, too. The dependance of the mammalian CP stiffness (at liquid-pressure difference= s across the CP so small that the CP centre-of-mass displacement is a few h= undred nm or less) on distance-from-base is still not definitely known, I b= elieve. In my contribution to the MoH-Workshop at Keele (2008), I tried to = derive the gerbil CP stiffness from CP oscillation mesurements of Ren et al= . I found: S(x) =3D S_0 * exp(-alfa*x); S_0 =3D 4.16*10^10 N/m^3; alfa =3D 1260 m^-1. = If that that formula (based on near-base data only) could be assumed to hol= d at larger distance-from-base x too, it would yield S(0) / S(10mm) =3D 3 *= 10^5.=20 Reinhart Frosch, CH-5200 Brugg. reinifrosch@xxxxxxxx . ----Urspr=C3=BCngliche Nachricht---- Von: pwj.vanhengel@xxxxxxxx Datum: 14.11.2011 10:21 An: <AUDITORY@xxxxxxxx> Betreff: Re: Laws of physics and old history; BM stiffness. Dear list, just a word of caution: the stiffness term used in cochlea models (transmission line models) should not be confused with the stiffness of the BM fibers. The stiffness term in these models represents an overall stiffness of the cochlear partition, and thus includes more than the stiffness of the BM fibers. Relating the two directly, or even asssuming they are the same, may lead to misinterpretation. I do, however support the remark by dr Frosch that depending on the way in which the beams are fixed at their ends, the stiffness of the BM may decrease by several orders of magnitude from base to apex. All the best, Peter van Hengel ------=_Part_2097_32230498.1321361624402 Content-Type: text/html;charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <html><head><style type=3D'text/css'> <!-- div.bwmail { background-color:#ffffff; font-family: Trebuchet MS,Arial,Helv= etica, sans-serif; font-size: small; margin:0; padding:0;} div.bwmail p { margin:0; padding:0; } div.bwmail table { font-family: Trebuchet MS,Arial,Helvetica, sans-serif; f= ont-size: small; } div.bwmail li { margin:0; padding:0; } --> </style> </head><body><div class=3D'bwmail'><P><FONT size=3D2>Hello Peter,</FONT></P= > <P><FONT size=3D2>Yes, the oscillating elastic beam is formed by the whole&= nbsp;cochlear partition (CP), not only by the BM (basilar membrane). There = appears to be longitudinal coupling of CP elements. According to the first = of the papers mentioned yesterday by Prof. David Mountain, however, in = ;gerbil the coupling range is only +-16.7 micro-m (1.6 mm from base) a= nd +-34.5 micro-m (8.1 mm from base). These coupling ranges are small = compared to the wavelength of the cochlear travelling wave (at least in mos= t of the relevant cases), so it appears reasonable to treat the CP as = a series of independent beams (oriented in the sideways direction).&nb= sp;</FONT><FONT size=3D2>Because of the organ-of-Corti cells, the oscillati= ons of the beams are expected to be strongly damped. This is confirmed= to a degree, e.g., by Fig. 1 of the paper "Reverse transduction measu= red in the isolated cochlea by laser Michelson interferometry", by Mammano = and Ashmore, Nature 365 (1993) 838-841. The oscillations at the beginning a= nd at the end of the rectangular current pulse sent through the CP are stro= ngly damped. The Q-value (resonance frequency divided by -3-dB resonance-pe= ak width) of the Claudius-cell oscillation is about 4. A part of that = damping is due to the generated oscillation of the liquid particles above a= nd below the CP, but damping caused by CP structures is probably significan= t, too.</FONT></P> <P><FONT size=3D2>The dependance of the mammalian CP stiffness (at liquid-p= ressure differences across the CP so small that the CP centre-of-mass displ= acement is a few hundred nm or less) on distance-from-base is still no= t definitely known, I believe. In my contribution to the MoH-Workshop at Ke= ele (2008), I tried to derive the gerbil CP stiffness from CP oscillation m= esurements of Ren et al. I found:</FONT></P> <P><FONT size=3D2>S(x) =3D S_0 * exp(-alfa*x); S_0 =3D 4.16*10^10 N/m^3; al= fa =3D 1260 m^-1. If that that formula (based on near-base data only) = could be assumed to hold at larger distance-from-base x too, it would = yield S(0) / S(10mm) =3D 3 * 10^5. <BR>Reinhart Frosch,<BR>CH-5200 Bru= gg.<BR>reinifrosch@xxxxxxxx .<BR><BR></P></FONT> <BLOCKQUOTE><FONT size=3D2>----Urspr=C3=BCngliche Nachricht----<BR>Von: pwj= .vanhengel@xxxxxxxx<BR>Datum: 14.11.2011 10:21<BR>An: <AUDITORY@xxxxxxxx= CGILL.CA><BR>Betreff: Re: Laws of physics and old history; BM stiffness.= <BR><BR>Dear list,<BR><BR>just a word of caution: the stiffness term used i= n cochlea models<BR>(transmission line models) should not be confused with = the stiffness of<BR>the BM fibers. The stiffness term in these models repre= sents an overall<BR>stiffness of the cochlear partition, and thus includes = more than the<BR>stiffness of the BM fibers. Relating the two directly, or = even asssuming<BR>they are the same, may lead to misinterpretation.<BR><BR>= I do, however support the remark by dr Frosch that depending on the way<BR>= in which the beams are fixed at their ends, the stiffness of the BM may<BR>= decrease by several orders of magnitude from base to apex.<BR><BR>All the b= est,<BR>Peter van Hengel</FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></div></body></html> ------=_Part_2097_32230498.1321361624402--