Acta Biotheoretica

, Volume 52, Issue 4, pp 401–414

The Survival Attractor in the Sensory Functions: The Example of Hearing



High noise levels may have an adverse effect on the normal cochlea function and lead to significant hearing loss. Clinically, exposure to high intensity impulse noise produces a wide range of audiometric effects which may result in long term or even irreversible symptoms. Nevertheless, there is sometimes a spontaneous rebound recovery of the auditory function. This phenomenon was previously studied in the vision, another sensory function. It was called the visual survival attractor.

In view of the importance that the sensory organs have for the brain, and in particular in its function of recognising and dealing with its environment, it was interesting to know whether this survival attractor concept already described for vision occurs more generally in all the sensory functions. With this in mind we present here the results of a new study, this time on hearing.

This study was carried out on guinea pigs subjected to a pulsed acoustic trauma simulating the sound of a gun going off. Auditory function was explored using electrocochleography and two types of investigation were carried out. At first the change in hearing loss was studied in relation to frequencies varying between 2 and 24 kHz by calculating the difference, at each frequency, between the compound action potential thresholds measured before and then 20 mn, 24 h and 7 days after the acoustic trauma. On the other hand, the change in compound action potential amplitude was determined by varying the stimulating sound level from the auditory threshold up to 90 dB. This change was also recorded at the same time intervals as the investigation of hearing loss.

In both the analysis of changes to hearing loss and in the investigation of variations in compound action potential, the results of the electrocochleographic investigations after acoustic trauma confirm the presence of a butterfly catastrophe type reaction process, that is positive evidence of a hearing survival attractor.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Dancer, A., P. Grateau, A. Cabanis, T. Vaillant and D. Lafont (1991). Delayed temporary threshold shift induced by impulse noises (weapon noises)in men. Audiology 30:345–346Google Scholar
  2. Hamernik, R. P., W. A. Ahroon, D. Hsues, S. F. Lei and R. Davis (1993). Audiometric and histological differences between the effects of continuous and impulsive noise exposures. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 93:2088–2095Google Scholar
  3. Homma, T., M. Hasegawa, K. Yokovama, and T. Tamura (1994). Temporary change of compound action potential amplitude after intense sound exposure. Otorhinolaryngology 56:19–23.Google Scholar
  4. Kuokkanen, J., J. Virkkala, S. Zhai and J. Ylikoski (1997). Effect of hyperbaric oxygen treatment on permanent threshold shift in acoustic trauma among rats. Acta Oto-laryngology 529:80–82.Google Scholar
  5. Labarère, J., P. Lemardeley, P. Vincey, G. Desjeux and B. Pascal (2000). Traumatismes sonores aigus en population militaire. La Presse Médicale 29:1341–1344.Google Scholar
  6. Luz, G. A. and D. C. Hodge (1971). Recovery from impulse noise induced TTS in monkeys and men:a descriptive model. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 49:1770–1777.Google Scholar
  7. Pekkarinen, J. (1995). Noise, impulse noise and other physical factors combined effects on hearing. Occupational Medicine 10:545–559.Google Scholar
  8. Sendowski, I., A. Braillon-Cros and C. Delaunay (2004). CAP amplitude after impulsive noise exposure in guinea pigs. European Archives of Otorhino Laryngology 261:77–81.Google Scholar
  9. Suc, B., M. Poulet, A. Asperge, J. Vix, J. P. Barberot and F. Doucet (1994). Clinical development of acute noise-induced acoustic trauma. An evaluation of a study of 250 cases. Annales d 'otorhinolaryngologie et de chirurgie cervicofaciale 111:319–324.Google Scholar
  10. Thom, R. (1980). Modèles mathématiques de la morphogénèse (2 nd ed. ). Ed Bourgeois, Paris.Google Scholar
  11. Viret, J. (1994). Reaction of the organism to stress:the survival attractor concept. Acta Biotheoretica 42:99–109.Google Scholar
  12. Viret, J. (1995). Apparent time in biology. Acta Biotheoretica 43:185–193.Google Scholar
  13. Viret, J. and C. Corbe (1996). Fonction visuelle et énergie de survie visuelle. Encyclopédie médico chirurgicale 21-850-E-30.Google Scholar
  14. Viret, J. and D. Daveloose (1989). Biophysical interpretation of membrane fluidity by catastrophe theory. Journal of Theoretical Biolology 140:51–82.Google Scholar
  15. Viret, J., L. Grimaud, and J. Jimenez (1999). Hydrodynamic modelling of stress. Acta Biotheoretica 47:173–190.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre de recherche du service de santé des arméesLa TroncheFrance

Personalised recommendations