Reader Comments
Post a new comment on this article
Post Your Discussion Comment
Please follow our guidelines for comments and review our competing interests policy. Comments that do not conform to our guidelines will be promptly removed and the user account disabled. The following must be avoided:
- Remarks that could be interpreted as allegations of misconduct
- Unsupported assertions or statements
- Inflammatory or insulting language
Thank You!
Thank you for taking the time to flag this posting; we review flagged postings on a regular basis.
closeThe stiffness of the TM
Posted by irousso on 19 Mar 2009 at 20:18 GMT
I would like to draw the attention to the results reported by Ghaffari et al. PNAS 104:16510-16515 (2007) (reference 18 in this manuscript). In this report the stiffness of the TM was shown to be ~141 and 51 kPA for basal and apical TM segments, which is simillar to the stiffness we have detected (Gueta et al. PNAS 103:4790–14795, 2006) (reference 13 in this manuscript).
I therefore assert that the statement: "Gueta et al. reported graded stiffness along the cochlea, but the observed magnitudes were at least an order of magnitude greater than all published data" is inaccurate.
RE: The stiffness of the TM
chadwick replied to irousso on 20 Mar 2009 at 15:43 GMT
Ghaffari et al. report values of 47+ -12 KPa and 17+ - 5 KPa for base and apical segments of TM. These values were inferred from an isotropic wave speed model and not direct measurements. Ghaffari et al. also state that Gueta et al. reported significantly higher values at the base than all other measurements. We don't understand where irousso obtained the values from Ghaffari et al., but nevertheless irousso has a point that the apical value from Gueta et al is similar to Ghaffari et al.
RE: RE: The stiffness of the TM
irousso replied to chadwick on 22 Mar 2009 at 08:22 GMT
I think it is important (again) to be accurate when providing information. Note that Ghaffari et al. reported shear moduli which can be roughly estimated to be 1/3 of Young’s moduli, which we reported.
In addition, I fail to understand the distinction between model based vs. direct measurements. To the best of my knowledge all published values are model based