Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2005 Feb;55(1):12-23.

Hearing in laboratory animals: strain differences and nonauditory effects of noise

Jeremy G Turner  1 , Jennifer L Parrish, Larry F Hughes, Linda A Toth, Donald M Caspary
Affiliations
Review

Hearing in laboratory animals: strain differences and nonauditory effects of noise

Jeremy G Turner et al. Comp Med. 2005 Feb.

Abstract

Hearing in laboratory animals is a topic that traditionally has been the domain of the auditory researcher. However, hearing loss and exposure to various environmental sounds can lead to changes in multiple organ systems, making what laboratory animals hear of consequence for researchers beyond those solely interested in hearing. For example, several inbred mouse strains commonly used in biomedical research (e.g., C57BL/6, DBA/2, and BALB/c) experience a genetically determined, progressive hearing loss that can lead to secondary changes in systems ranging from brain neurochemistry to social behavior. Both researchers and laboratory animal facility personnel should be aware of both strain and species differences in hearing in order to minimize potentially confounding variables in their research and to aid in the interpretation of data. Independent of genetic differences, acoustic noise levels in laboratory animal facilities can have considerable effects on the inhabitants. A large body of literature describes the nonauditory impact of noise on the biology and behavior of various strains and species of laboratory animals. The broad systemic effects of noise exposure include changes in endocrine and cardiovascular function, sleep-wake cycle disturbances, seizure susceptibility, and an array of behavioral changes. These changes are determined partly by species and strain; partly by noise intensity level, duration, predictability, and other characteristics of the sound; and partly by animal history and exposure context. This article reviews some of the basic strain and species differences in hearing and outlines how the acoustic environment affects different mammals.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Sample acoustic spectrum recorded from a representative animal housing unit in the Division of Laboratory Animal Medicine at Southern Illinois University School of Medicine. This recording was collected under normal quiet conditions with a Bruel and Kjaer Pulse System using a ½″ free-field microphone (Bruel and Kjaer model 4191-A). The microphone was attached to a model rat at head level in the middle of a plastic shoebox cage with a wire-top lid (A). Measures were also taken with a small particle filter attached to the top of the cage (B). The filter had no noticeable affect on the measurement. Approximately 30 other individually caged rats were present in the 2.5 × 2.5-m room. Baseline levels of noise across the spectrum appear to be around 42 dB SPL. Note the high level of low-frequency noise (≤ 1 kHz) and the harmonics of a 7-kHz signal (i.e., 7, 14, and 21 kHz). These peaks are presumably the result of inherent ventilation and building noise. Particularly interesting is the ultrasonic content ≥ 38 kHz, some of which might be due to rat vocalizations or other unidentified sources.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Noise spectrum resulting from the routine activity of attaching a wire-top lid to a typical shoebox-style plastic cage. Sound frequency is on the x-axis, time on the y-axis (response begins at about 1.3 sec), and intensity is color-coded on the z-axis (see legend at right). Measurements were collected as described in Fig. 1. This resulting spectrum produced an intense signal with intense low-frequency content (≤ 5 kHz) of nearly 100 dB SPL and pronounced intensity near 80 dB across the rest of the frequency range.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Comparative plot of auditory sensitivity in humans and some animal species commonly used in biomedical research. Adapted from Fay (54); other sources of data include those for human (169), rat (104). mouse (49). gerbil (156), rabbit (73), dog (72), cat (74), and rhesus monkey (149).
Figure 4
Figure 4
Two commonly used rat models. A. The pigmented FBN is the Fl hybrid cross between F344 females and Brown Norway males. B. F344 is an inbred albino rat. FBNs possess better high-frequency hearing, and F344s better low-frequency hearing.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Simplified model of how noise can affect multiple systems. Many additional structures, projections, hormones, and neurotransmitters actually are involved in the process of responding to noise. Ach, acetylcholine; ACTH, adrenocorticotropin hormone; CRF, corticotropin releasing factor; NE, norepinephrine.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Able SM. The extra-auditory effects of noise and annoyance: an overview of research. J Otolaryngol. 1990;19(1):1–13. - PubMed
    1. Aguas AP, Esguay N, Grande NR, Castro AP, Castclo Branco NAA. Acceleration of lupus erythematosus-like processes by low frequency noise in the hybrid NZB/VV mouse model. Aviat Space Environ Med. 1999;70(3 part 2):A132–A136. - PubMed
    1. Anders K. Subjective, behavorial and psychophysiological effects of noise. Scand J Work Environ Health. 1990;16(1):29–38. - PubMed
    1. Aston-Jones G, Bloom FE. Nonrepinephrine-containing locus coerulcus neurons in behaving rats exhibit pronounced responses to non-noxious environmental stimuli. J Neurosci. 1981;1(8):887–900. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Aston-Jones G, Bloom FE. Activity of norepinepherine-containing locus eoeruleus neurons in behaving rats anticipates fluctuations in the sleep-waking cycle. J Neurosci. 1981;1(8):876–886. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types