Talk:Nerve

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Nerve - Peripheral nerve[edit]

I think Nerve should be the main article, and Peripheral nerve should refer to Nerve, because:

  1. Every nerve is a peripheral nerve, so the title Peripheral nerve is like saying Peripheral peripheral nerve;
  2. The title Peripheral nerve suggests that there are also other kinds of nerves than peripheral nerve, which is incorrect. (Compare peripheral nervous system - which is called just so because there also is a central nervous system);
  3. Nerve is very often used without the adjective peripheral.

Please discuss! Lova Falk talk 16:46, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not absolutely certain that every part of that argument is valid, but I definitely agree that Nerve should be the main article. Looie496 (talk) 16:54, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

-The spinal nerves create nervous plexus.Peripheral nerves are made from nervous plexus.A peripheral nerve(a nerve) contains bundles of nerve fibers.

-Please see in google search,peripheral nerve or nerve?-Barzkar (talk) 23:05, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barzkar, I don't understand what you want to say with your sentence starting "-The spinal nerves create nervous plexus." Also, of course google gives many more hits for "nerve" than for "peripheral nerve", because when googling "nerve" all hits for "peripheral nerve" are included. Lova Falk talk 08:35, 18 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Lova Falk,Google search results should not be ambiguous.-Barzkar (talk) 20:04, 18 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I might be wrong but I think that a peripheral nerve is a nerve in the extremities of the body. Examples: n. ulnaris and n. ischiadicus? 83.190.138.62 (talk) 12:15, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Etymology?[edit]

What's the etymology?--MathFacts (talk) 22:21, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Move?[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Move. Jafeluv (talk) 18:59, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Peripheral nerve → Nerve –

Could you please name a nerve in the central nervous system? --Anthonyhcole (talk) 15:14, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support move. Within the central nervous system, the "nerves" do not exist as distinct nerves, but rather are intermingled axon pathways (tracts) within the brain. Readers generally understand the word "nerve" to mean what are, more precisely, nerves in the peripheral nervous system. Thus, the proposed move is very helpful in terms of the principle of least surprise. On the other hand, we have a surprise-problem with the current naming and directing, which this proposal will solve. --Tryptofish (talk) 16:29, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. The facts are plain: tracts in CNS, nerves elsewhere (which is to say, in the peripheral nervous system). I can understand some psychological resistance to this; "nerve" seems so bare, and scarcely sufficient to convey the meaning. But it does, just as securely as "pedal" does not need to be "foot pedal" – pace the populace. Another disturbing aside: the CNS is the central nervous system, so it just seems that it has nerves in it by definition, right? Ah, but wrong. NoeticaTea? 12:10, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per comments above. Looie496 (talk) 17:27, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Nerves in other species[edit]

This article is good information about human nerves. But what about in other species of animals? Or information about the biological evolution of nerves? And which lifeforms have nerves, and which don't? That's what I was searching for, but I don't know where there's an article that explains that. - Gilgamesh (talk) 04:16, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That information is (or at least ought to be) in nervous system. Probably this article should make that clearer. Looie496 (talk) 05:17, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that's the page, and I've revised the hatnote at the top of this page accordingly. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:08, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nerve endings[edit]

'Nerve ending' currently redirects here. It's bad form to send people to a page about a broader idea if the specific idea they were looking for is not explicitly mentioned. Should there be a bit about nerve endings here as such, or should the redirect perhaps be changed to Sensory receptor? --Oolong (talk) 12:33, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Agree sensory receptor seems like a more specific target. Lesion (talk) 12:40, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed illustration[edit]

I'm thinking of commissioning a professional medical illustration of a nerve from Blausen Medical. I have something like this in mind. Could I have opinions on whether such an image might be useful in general, and useful for this article, please? (It's rather expensive, so I'd appreciate feedback before I proceed.)

Below right (muscle fiber) is the style of thing they do.

An excellent micrograph of cross-section of sural nerve here.
Another micrograph here.
And another
--Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 15:04, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Anthony, out of curiosity how much do they charge? Lesion 09:37, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed changes[edit]

Please feel free to add your thoughts. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 14:43, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

From WT:ANAT
Well there are these two:
So far I haven't gotten to organizing all the images I've uploaded perfectly, but I'm working on it.

-- CFCF (talk · contribs · email) 12:32, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

I see it's already in the article, and I don't think I have anything better. Will take a look. CFCF (talk · contribs · email) 12:35, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
-- CFCF (talk · contribs · email) 14:18, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm guessing this is the type of image you're after: [1]? -- CFCF (talk · contribs · email) 14:29, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • There is a proposal for commission such art at meta:Grants:IdeaLab/Medi-Graphics, but that proposal is stale. If it were at all possible to find something already made and secure it, then that would be best. Barring that it would be nice if a set of art could be commissioned at once as part of a grant and to set a precedent for soliciting various entities for future funding for educational media. I like the idea of getting better art but not of doing this without intent to set a precedent for a scaled-up operation funded by a foundation or institute. Blue Rasberry (talk) 14:41, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Are you sure there is nothing suitable in the vast recent release by the Wellcome Trust? Wiki at Royal Society John (talk) 15:12, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
At first glance that is an amazing source, and I found a number of excellent EM images, among others: [2], which was really good.
Also found some that may be closer to what we are after: [3][4][5]
Unfortunately none are spot on, even though they are excellent. I wasn't able to locate the search function on the webpage earlier, but now that I have I will definitely be using it more. CFCF (talk · contribs · email) 15:42, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
As I understand it, everything they own themselves is now open-licence, but the images marked "rights-managed" are owned by others, with the Wellcome managing the picture-rights, and are not open. Unfortunately the latter are the bulk of the contemporary stuff. It's not totally clear from their press release. Wiki at Royal Society John (talk) 16:00, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That's a shame, looking closer I see the page reads:

Copyrighted work available under Creative Commons by-nc-nd 4.0, see http://wellcomeimages.org/indexplus/page/Prices.html

, and both the nc and nd clauses are unfortunately also non-compliant. CFCF (talk · contribs · email) 17:41, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
As for commissioning images, maybe it would be a better idea as Bluerasberry says to commission a large number at once. I am partial to using Patrick Lynch seeing as a large part of his work is on Wikipedia already, but I don't know how much time he has.
I feel the Blausen medical images are slightly too idealized for me, they are a bit shiny, and I don't like the 3d effects so much. CFCF (talk · contribs · email) 15:42, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Art criticism aside, I could also mention that the Wikipedia community has not responded with equal enthusiasm to Blausen as that organization has to Wikipedia. Their art is at least contemporary and high quality, but after making the major art donation that they did, there was no system in place to manage the integration of this work else. Non-text media donations often get this response; hardly anyone curates these large collections on Commons. If one piece were commissioned then I know it would be used, but I worry about the other tens of thousands of illustrations that we need.
I know I just proposed a commission of many pieces, but actually, I am not sure the community would appreciate that because historically such donations have not been well acknowledged. Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:50, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
What I meant was to commission by making a list of individual requests, which could be submitted for creation in bulk, but I understand what you mean. CFCF (talk · contribs · email) 15:54, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Lesion, $1500 for something like the muscle fibre illustration. I haven't begun negotiating yet, and haven't put it to any other suppliers yet. CFCF, I will speak to Patrick Lynch and others before deciding.
For this job, I'll just write a cheque. What I do need before I take this further, though, is (1) a sense from med/neuro/anatomy editors as to whether they would support the inclusion of such an illustration in this article (I realise consensus can change but if the current community opposes its inclusion in this article now, I'll choose another topic area to commission an illustration in - maybe chromosome), and (2) your thoughts on accuracy and anything else. If the community is receptive to the idea of this illustration, I'll commission it and then get some named neuroanatomists to vet the completed work for accuracy before proposing it for inclusion here. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 18:50, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Anthony, this cost seems rather a lot for you to fork out just for an image. Suggest post on Wikipedia:Graphics Lab/Illustration workshop. Some of those "graphists" are very skilled and produce professional standard images. You may save some money by that path. Lesion 10:28, 13 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think that the cost is too much for one illustration, as well. I suggest that Wikipedians should have the first chance at it, which could also be good practice of illustrators on the Wiki or on Commons. Are you saying the named neuroanatomists (or anatomist) will have a look at it for free? Snowman (talk) 22:24, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

For those interested in these issues, there is likely to be a significant release of cancer-related images by a research organization later this year. Wiki at Royal Society John (talk) 19:36, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

John, if you're dealing with them, would you consider asking if they'd be prepared to pay for named expert-review of a handful of our best cancer articles? (Perhaps take this to my talk page if you might be interested in supporting something like this.) --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 19:47, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think the image would do very well here, as for Chromosome, genome.gov has excellent free sources that we could use, looking into it now. (Might take longer than usual, working in Spain two weeks now). CFCF (talk · contribs · email) 21:28, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you CFCF. (I haven't done a systematic search for a free comprehensive "anatomical" illustration of a chromosome yet, but I did a pretty thorough random search a year ago and found nothing.) --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 06:07, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • The proximal end of the blood vessel ends woolly. Show it in cross-section at the end. What about labeling some blood vessels as artery (or arteriole) and vein (or venule)? Snowman (talk) 22:12, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Show it to ultra-structural level, however I have not though this through yet. Snowman (talk) 22:24, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 14 January 2015[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Favonian (talk) 13:11, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nerve → Human nerve – Article is confined to the human nerve. It is not a general article about the nerve. Epipelagic (talk) 02:59, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose per WP:DISAMBIG. If you are unhappy with the lack of content about animals then create some. Renaming articles doesn't fix the lack of content, it just makes things more difficult for readers. --Tom (LT) (talk) 04:28, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I would add a lot of the content is general in nature and applies to humans and other animals. Suggest withdrawal of merge. --Tom (LT) (talk) 04:29, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, I'm happy to withdraw the requested name change (not a merge) and add balancing material if you think that is a better approach. The hat note to the article explicitly states it is about "the human nervous system... [for] nerves in other species, see Nervous system." But I'm not "unhappy with the lack of content about animals"... that's covered reasonably well in Nervous system. --Epipelagic (talk) 05:21, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That hatnote was the problem, I think. I replaced it by one that doesn't claim a human/animal distinction, since that's not what the article does. Dicklyon (talk) 05:43, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I haven't made major edits to this article, but it seems crazy that it should focus just on humans: "nerve" is a fundamental topic to biology in general so I 100% support removing the hatnote and adding more animal content. In addition, nervous system should be about the nervous system of both animals and humans.--Tom (LT) (talk) 21:09, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I couldn't see why anyone thought it was human focused. Dicklyon (talk) 21:13, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – the article does not seem to me to be focused on human nerves; it's pretty generic. Dicklyon (talk) 04:54, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per both Dicklyon and Tom (LT). Article's issues need to be fixed, not swept under the rug in a way that would leave a gaping hole in the encyclopedia and the creation of some wretched stub about nerves more generally that would largely be duplicative of the content of this article.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  09:19, 15 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. There are good reasons to have Human brain as well as Brain, but once you get outside the brain into the nerves, there just isn't an encyclopedic reason to make the distinction, nor is there a good reason for this one page to focus only on humans. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:51, 16 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified (February 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Nerve. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:04, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

non-wiki picture accurate? (Schwann cell wrapping a BUNDLE of axons!)[edit]

I find pictures very useful, but I wonder about an otherwise interesting picture of nerve anatomy I found which shows a BUNDLE of axons within a nerve being wrapped by a Schwann cell. https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Peripheral-nerve-anatomy-image-courtesy-of-Myoscience_fig1_304365497 So do Schwann cells wrap only one axon, or can they wrap a bundle of UNmyelinated axons as shown in this picture? And if so, why are there unmyelinated axons in a nerve? UnderEducatedGeezer (talk) 01:16, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That's a confusing image. The zoom-in at the lower left, showing a myelinated axon, is what one would expect. Schwann cells myelinating an individual axon is the way that saltatory conduction works. The zoom-in at the lower right is the one that you are questioning, and the explanation is that those are non-myelinating Schwann cells that bundle unmyelinated axons in structures such as Remak bundles. There can be peripheral nerves that are unmyelinated, when nerve conduction velocity is slow. For obvious reasons, most peripheral nerves benefit from a fast velocity, but some, notably group C nerve fibers, are unmyelinated because they mediate slow, prolonged sensory input (such as chronic pain), that fits better with slow, prolonged nerve conduction. --Tryptofish (talk) 16:57, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you @Tryptofish:! That's a very informative reply! I appreciate it! (I do have another question way below at end.) Following up on your reply I looked for some additional images which would show me how Schwann cells might surround & support a group of non-myelinated axons, and found this: https://www.nysora.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/f_4-8.png
(It comes from the following page, about halfway down the page, which is chock full of interesting information! https://www.nysora.com/foundations-of-regional-anesthesia/anatomy/histology-peripheral-nerves-light-microscopy/ )
And another image, which shows the longitudinalness of the mesaxons which allow the bundled unmyelinated axons to be exposed to the extracellular environment, thereby allowing their action potentials:
https://slideplayer.com/slide/10732994/37/images/13/Myelinated+and+Unmyelinated+Axons.jpg
And another one similar to above somewhat also showing the channels formed by the mesaxons:
https://slideplayer.com/slide/13929934/85/images/61/The+enclosing+of+a+group+of+unmyelinated+axons+by+a.jpg
And this webpage which further illustrates some of what you just told me:
https://www.getbodysmart.com/neuron-support-cells/unmyelinated-axons
It's too bad pictures like these can't be added to the article, I presume they're all copyrighted.
Question: I do wonder if I'm right that the only difference in the myelinating vs nonmyelinating of an axon is in the wrapping of the glial cell, not in its innate composition? That is, that myelin is present in the glia which surround both myelinated & nonmyelinated axons, but don't 'insulate' sufficiently if not wrapped multiple times around the axon (because the mesaxon channels in the nonmyelinated axon allow the axon access to the extracellular environment)? UnderEducatedGeezer (talk) 04:23, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'm glad that was helpful. Yes, I agree those are some very useful web pages. To answer your question at the end, I actually did not know the answer until I read the "nysora" web page, so I learned something from this myself. The answer is that Schwann cells can differentiate into different forms in response to chemical signals from other cells. In this case, the "other cells" are the axons of the neurons with which the Schwann cells associate. What I learned is that axons that are going to be myelinated secrete neuregulin 1, which is a signal to the Schwann cells to repeatedly wrap around the axon and form myelin. For a heavily myelinated axon, there is a lot of neuregulin 1, and for a thinly myelinated one, there is less NRG1. And axons that are going to be unmyelinated simply do not produce NRG1 at all. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:53, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nerves[edit]

What is a nervous system? 지국 (talk) 15:29, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nerve gas[edit]

Perhaps add Nerve gas to See Also. Jidanni (talk) 00:54, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Nerve&oldid=1195093527"