CBA/CaJ and CBA/J inbred mouse strains appear relatively resistant to age- and noise-related cochlear pathology, and constitute the predominant ‘good hearing’ control strains in mouse studies of hearing and deafness. These strains have often been treated as nearly equivalent in their hearing characteristics, and have even been mixed in some studies. Nevertheless, we recently showed that their trajectories with regard to age-associated cochlear pathology diverge after one year of age (Ohlemiller et al., 2010 J. Assoc. Res. Otolaryngol. in press). We also recently reported that they show quite different susceptibility to cochlear noise injury during the ‘sensitive period’ of heightened vulnerability to noise common to many models, CBA/J being far more vulnerable than CBA/CaJ (Fernandez et al., 2010 J. Assoc. Res. Otolaryngol. 11:235–244). Here we explore this relation in a side-by-side comparison of the effect of varying noise exposure duration in young (6 week) and older (6 month) CBA/J and CBA/CaJ mice, and in F1 hybrids formed from these. Both the extent of permanent noise-induced threshold shifts (NIPTS) and the probability of a defined NIPTS were determined as exposure to intense broadband noise (4–45 kHz, 110 dB SPL) increased by factors of two from 7 seconds to 4 hours. At 6 months of age the two strains appeared very similar by both measures. At 6 weeks of age, however, both the extent and probability of NIPTS grew much more rapidly with noise duration in CBA/J than in CBA/CaJ. The ‘threshold’ exposure duration for NIPTS was <1.0 minute in CBA/J versus >4.0 minutes in CBA/CaJ. F1 hybrid mice showed both NIPTS and hair cell loss similar to that in CBA/J. This suggests that dominant-acting alleles at unknown loci distinguish CBA/J from CBA/CaJ. These loci have novel effects on hearing phenotype, as they come into play only during the sensitive period, and may encode factors that demarcate this period. Since the cochlear cells whose fragility defines the early window appear to be hair cells, these loci may principally impact the mechanical or metabolic resiliency of hair cells or the organ of Corti.

The acute and permanent effects of noise exposure on the endocochlear potential (EP) and cochlear lateral wall were evaluated in BALB/cJ (BALB) inbred mice, and compared with CBA/J (CBA) and C57BL/6 (B6) mice. Two-hour exposure to broadband noise (4-45 kHz) at 110 dB SPL leads to a~50 mV reduction in the EP in BALB and CBA, but not B6. EP reduction in BALB and CBA is reliably associated with characteristic acute cellular pathology in stria vascularis and spiral ligament. By 8 weeks after exposure, the EP in CBA mice has returned to normal. In BALBs, however, the EP remains depressed by an average~10 mV, so that permanent EP reduction contributes to permanent threshold shifts in these mice. We recently showed that the CBA noise phenotype in part reflects the influence of a large effect quantitative trait locus on Chr. 18, termed Nirep (Ohlemiller et al., Hear Res 260:47-53, 2010b). While CBA "EP susceptibility" alleles are dominant to those in B6, examination of (B6×BALB) F1 hybrid mice and (F1×BALB) N2 backcross mice revealed that noise-related EP reduction and associated cell pathology in BALBs are inherited in an autosomal recessive manner, and are dependent on multiple genes. Moreover, while N2 mice formed from B6 and CBA retain strong correspondence between acute EP reduction, ligament pathology, and strial pathology, N2s formed from B6 and BALB include subsets that dissociate pathology of ligament and stria. We conclude that the genes and cascades that govern the very similar EP susceptibility phenotypes in BALB and CBA mice need not be the same. BALBs appear to carry alleles that promote more pronounced long term effects of noise on the lateral wall. Separate loci in BALBs may preferentially impact stria versus ligament.

Our data support the hypothesis that young CBA/J and B6 mice carry different alleles that underlie their divergent responses to KM and sensitivities to noise exposure. While the number and type of genes remain unknown, they are worth pursuing because they establish completely novel hearing phenotypes with potential relevance to humans. Our results lay the foundation for mapping of the underlying genes, and ultimately gene identification.