Distinct cortical encoding of acoustic and electrical cochlear stimulation

Abstract Cochlear implants are neuroprosthetic devices that restore hearing and speech comprehension to profoundly deaf humans, and represent an exemplar application of biomedical engineering and research to clinical conditions. However, the utility of these devices in many subjects is limited, largely due to lack of information about how neural circuits respond to implant stimulation. Recently we showed that deafened rats can use cochlear implants to recognize sounds, and that this training refined the responses of single neurons in the primary auditory cortex. Here we asked how local populations of cortical neurons represent acute implant stimuli, using electrode arrays we developed for cortical surface recordings for micro-electrocorticography (µECoG), a form of intracranial electroencephalography (iEEG). We found that there was a limited tonotopic organization across recording sites, relative to a clearer tonotopic spatial representation in normal-hearing rats. Single-trial iEEG responses to acoustic inputs were more reliable than responses to cochlear implant stimulation, although stimulus identity could be successfully decoded in both cases. However, the spatio-temporal response profiles to acoustic vs cochlear implant stimulation were substantially different. Decoders trained on acoustic responses showed essentially zero information transfer when tested on electrical stimulation responses in the same animals after deafening and cochlear implant stimulation. Thus while acute cochlear implant stimulation might activate the auditory cortex in a cochleotopic manner, the dynamics of network activity are quite distinct, suggesting that pitch percepts from acoustic and electrical stimulation are fundamentally different.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
eLife
Published
2025-10-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.7554/elife.108550.1
Primary Topic
Hearing Loss and Rehabilitation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Distinct cortical encoding of acoustic and electrical cochlear stimulation

Robert C. Froemke, Michele N. Insanally, Michael Trumpis, Yew-Song Cheng et al.
eLife
Hearing Loss and Rehabilitation
article

Distinct cortical encoding of acoustic and electrical cochlear stimulation

Robert C. Froemke, Michele N. Insanally, Michael Trumpis, Yew-Song Cheng, Mario A. Svirsky, Jonathan Viventi, Julia Scarpa, Ariel Edward Hight
article en

Abstract

Abstract Cochlear implants are neuroprosthetic devices that restore hearing and speech comprehension to profoundly deaf humans, and represent an exemplar application of biomedical engineering and research to clinical conditions. However, the utility of these devices in many subjects is limited, largely due to lack of information about how neural circuits respond to implant stimulation. Recently we showed that deafened rats can use cochlear implants to recognize sounds, and that this training refined the responses of single neurons in the primary auditory cortex. Here we asked how local populations of cortical neurons represent acute implant stimuli, using electrode arrays we developed for cortical surface recordings for micro-electrocorticography (µECoG), a form of intracranial electroencephalography (iEEG). We found that there was a limited tonotopic organization across recording sites, relative to a clearer tonotopic spatial representation in normal-hearing rats. Single-trial iEEG responses to acoustic inputs were more reliable than responses to cochlear implant stimulation, although stimulus identity could be successfully decoded in both cases. However, the spatio-temporal response profiles to acoustic vs cochlear implant stimulation were substantially different. Decoders trained on acoustic responses showed essentially zero information transfer when tested on electrical stimulation responses in the same animals after deafening and cochlear implant stimulation. Thus while acute cochlear implant stimulation might activate the auditory cortex in a cochleotopic manner, the dynamics of network activity are quite distinct, suggesting that pitch percepts from acoustic and electrical stimulation are fundamentally different.

eLife
University of Pittsburgh (US), Duke University (US), New York University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 71%
Hearing Loss and Rehabilitation
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.