Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38547565›Full record

ArticleHearing research2024

Noise-induced synaptic loss and its post-exposure recovery in CBA/CaJ vs. C57BL/6J mice.

Pei-Zhe Wu, Leslie D Liberman, M Charles Liberman

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Hearing research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
5.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Phenotypic changes of auditory nerve fibers after excitotoxicity.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Pei-Zhe WuEaton-Peabody Laboratories, Massachusetts Eye and Ear, Boston, MA 02114, USA; Department of Otolaryngology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA.
Leslie D LibermanEaton-Peabody Laboratories, Massachusetts Eye and Ear, Boston, MA 02114, USA.
M Charles LibermanEaton-Peabody Laboratories, Massachusetts Eye and Ear, Boston, MA 02114, USA; Department of Otolaryngology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA. Electronic address: Charles_Liberman@meei.harvard.edu.
Eaton (United States) · USHarvard University · USMassachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary · US

Funding

SINGLE-NEURON MARKING IN THE STUDY OF ABNORMAL COCHLEASR01DC000188 · NIDCD · MASSACHUSETTS EYE AND EAR INFIRMARY · PI Gabriel Corfas, M. Charles Liberman · 1989 to 2026
$15.1M
NATURE AND MECHANISMS OF ODORANT RECEPTOR GENE CHOICEF32DC000188 · NIDCD · HARVARD UNIVERSITY (MEDICAL SCHOOL) · PI SULLIVAN, SUSAN L · 1994 to 1994
–
NIDCD NIH HHS F32 DC000188NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC000188
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Acute noise-induced loss of synapses between inner hair cells (IHCs) and auditory nerve fibers (ANFs) has been documented in several strains of mice, but the extent of post-exposure recovery reportedly varies dramatically. If such inter-strain heterogeneity is real, it could be exploited to probe molecular pathways mediating neural remodeling in the adult cochlea. Here, we compared synaptopathy repair in CBA/CaJ vs. C57BL/6J, which are at opposite ends of the reported recovery spectrum. We evaluated C57BL/6J mice 0 h, 24 h, 2 wks or 8 wks after exposure for 2 h to octave-band noise (8-16 kHz) at either 90, 94 or 98 dB SPL, to compare with analogous post-exposure results in CBA/CaJ at 98 or 101 dB. We counted pre- and post-synaptic puncta in immunostained cochleas, using machine learning to classify paired (GluA2 and CtBP2) vs. orphan (CtBP2 only) puncta, and batch-processing to quantify immunostaining intensity. At 98 dB, both strains show ongoing loss of ribbons and synapses between 0 and 24 h, followed by partial recovery, however the extent and degree of these changes were greater in C57BL/6J. Much of the synaptic recovery is due to transient reduction in GluA2 intensity in synaptopathic regions. In contrast, CtBP2 intensity showed only transient increases (at 2 wks). Neurofilament staining revealed transient extension of ANF terminals in C57BL/6J, but not in CBA/CaJ, peaking at 24 h and reverting by 2 wks. Thus, although interstrain differences in synapse recovery are dominated by reversible changes in GluA2 receptor levels, the neurite extension seen in C57BL/6J suggests a qualitative difference in regenerative capacity.

Indexed as

Hearing Loss, Noise-InducedAnimalsAuditory ThresholdCochleaEvoked Potentials, Auditory, Brain StemMiceMice, Inbred C57BLMice, Inbred CBASynapsesAuditory nerveRegenerationSynaptopathy

Identifiers

PMID38547565
PMCPMC11024800
OpenAlexW4393115084

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.