Show simple item record

Dose-response hearing loss for white noise in the Sprague-Dawley rat

dc.contributor.authorSullivan, Michael J.en_US
dc.contributor.authorConolly, Rory B.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2006-04-07T20:28:32Z
dc.date.available2006-04-07T20:28:32Z
dc.date.issued1988-01en_US
dc.identifier.citationSullivan, Michael J., Conolly, Rory B. (1988/01)."Dose-response hearing loss for white noise in the Sprague-Dawley rat." Fundamental and Applied Toxicology 10(1): 109-113. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/27482>en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6WFT-4DDNR0F-2P/2/e791aa77ff1bc9ff1369a77f08d1de26en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/27482
dc.identifier.urihttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=retrieve&db=pubmed&list_uids=3350222&dopt=citationen_US
dc.description.abstractThe effect of noise exposure on the inner ear is well documented. However, the sensitivity to noise-induced damage varies with animal species. The purpose of this investigation was to generate a hearing loss dose-response curve for a 20-day white noise exposure in the Sprague-Dawley rat. Eight male rats were exposed to 110, 100, 95 or 85 dB sound pressure level (SPL) for 6 hr/day, 5 days/week for 4 weeks in a sound-attenuated chamber fitted with a bank of overhead speakers. Controls were placed in an identical chamber without speakers. Four weeks after the exposure period ended, brainstem auditory evoked response (BAER) thresholds were recorded in all rats at 32, 16, 8, 4, 2, 1, and 0.5 kHz. Rats were then killed and cochlear tissues were processed for surface preparation. Hair cells were counted. Outer hair cell loss in the organ of Corti was observed in rats exposed to 95, 100, and 110 dB. Summary cytocochleograms were prepared for each rat by graphing the percentage of all hair cells remaining vs the percentage of distance along the basilar membrane as measured from the apex. The summary cytocochleograms were averaged and the area above this curve, corresponding to hair cell loss, was calculated. BAER threshold elevations (dB) were converted into percentage loss overall hearing function. Noise exposure level (dB) and (1) percentage area above the group average summary cytocochleogram and (2) percentage hearing loss were plotted as dose-response curves. Log-probit analysis was used to calculate ED50 noise exposure levels of 117 and 104 dB (SPL), (1), and (2), respectively. No observable effect level, lowest observable adverse effect level, and frank effect levels are identified.en_US
dc.format.extent451687 bytes
dc.format.extent3118 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.format.mimetypetext/plain
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.publisherElsevieren_US
dc.titleDose-response hearing loss for white noise in the Sprague-Dawley raten_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollowen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelPublic Healthen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelPharmacy and Pharmacologyen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciencesen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumToxicology Program, School of Public Health, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109, USA; Kresge Hearing Research Institute, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109, USA.en_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumToxicology Program, School of Public Health, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109, USAen_US
dc.identifier.pmid3350222en_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/27482/1/0000525.pdfen_US
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0272-0590(88)90256-4en_US
dc.identifier.sourceFundamental and Applied Toxicologyen_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.