Talk:Peripheral nervous system/Archive 1

Archive 1

Hm

I'm not sure if the whole classification in this article is some student's erroneous assignment, or if it's a deliberate attempt to introduce an unconventional view. Almost all scientific sources agree on the same structural hierarchy of the NS that goes like this:

The NS comprises the Peripheral and the Central nervous systems.

The Peripheral then comprises the Motor (efferent) and the Sensory (afferent) divisions.

The Motor is further divided into Autonomic and Somatic nervous systems.

The Autonomic consists of the Parasympathetic, the Sympathetic and the Enteric nervous systems (some leave this last out, but that's not much of an issue).

Besides, all other wikipedia articles about the NS agree on this classification. Why introduce an alternative view here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.48.222.178 (talk) 14:45, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

About the article

This article is to cover the overview of peripheral nervous system. This was a class assignment. Still, there are few parts that need to be added and modified such as development of PNS and somatic nervous system.

Biol 3501 Primary Review: Netta

Peripheral Nervous System

Overall Comments:

When introducing the cranial nerves and discussing how the PNS differs from the CNS, this should probably be a separate paragraph. It’ll make the delivery of the information flow much smoother. Also what did you mean by “however the remaining twelve cranial nerve axons”? This isn't possible when there are 12 cranial nerves, so you mean the remaining 11 cranial nerve axons? maybe. The structure section was written really well!

A good article is:

Well written: This article contains great information as well as an easy to read format.

Verifiable with no original research: This article doesn't use many sources, which is irregular for the topic they have, but the ones presented are secondary resources. However the links on the provided page, don’t link to the actual pages, this needs to be fixed.

Broad in it’s coverage: as mentioned earlier, this article is well written. The authors make sure to not spend too much time on trivial ideas or the small irrelevant parts.

Neutral: The writing is only informational, there were;t any instances of biased.

Stable: Not needed

Illustrated: There was a picture presented, however I have another suggestion. It would highlight their section on the cranial nerves if they found an image showing the exit of each cranial nerve. a picture similar to: http://ip144.qb.fcen.uba.ar/libroslfp/deThierryMora/Principles%20of%20Neural%20Science/gateway.ut.ovid.com/gw2/ovidweb.cgisidnjhkoalgmeho00dbookimagebookdb_7c_2fc~52.htm the one presented here

Verified Article: Potential Use of Interleukin-10 blockade as a therapeutic strategy in human cutaneous leishmaniasis

This article was the only one from this group that worked enough to bring up the pdf file. However although they reference this article for their disease section, the original research presented in the review is not explained in this section. As well as the presence of peripheral neuropathy isnt’ presented, this article entails a particular case that deals with Leishmania. So some clarity between the source and this article is needed

Reply

The part about cranial axon was from the previous writer so we had little information about it. However, it seems like it should be ten instead of twelve, based on what it is written on the later section of the article. Also, the overall picture that we have right now seems suitable for the summary of our article. Considering that this article is focused on overview of peripheral nervous system, detailed pictures seem unnecessary since each section of our article has its own Wikipedia page. They should have those images. About resource, even though you cannot access from direct link since those articles are from marquette library, enough details about resource is present, such as ISSN. Therefore, it should not be a problem, in terms of plagiarism. --Jungi0714 (talk) 19:34, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Untitled

A picture of the human peripheral nervous system minus the central part would be an excellent addition to this article, it would also complement nicely the central nervous system article picture. Nastajus 10:05, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

---

What do you folks think? My plan for this article was to list the entire peripheral nervous system, that's right, every nerve, in order as it exits the central nervous system. There is one page out there for the cranial nerves. Should I reincorporate that into this page, or should I make many pages, one for the cranial nerves, one for the nerves of the neck and arm, etc.?

There are two pages which discuss the brachial plexus; this one and one entitled brachial plexus. Should both stay or one be edited?

I think you should consider moving all of this to a separate article--"Peripheral nervous system (human)" or "Peripheral nervous system (primate)", say--because there are lot of neuroanatomies besides the human and the primate, and I presume they're very different. Also, having the PNS article mostly (in terms of word count) about humans encourages a common bias, which is a handicap to people learning about biology (i.e. either they assume all animals are the same or when they learn something general to all life they don't appreciate that fact). 168... 17:15, 11 Aug 2003 (UTC)

• I think that when someone writes up a more general article that includes all animals, then we move this to a new topic. Until then, I think the only onus is to make it clear that this page refers to humans. -- Alex.tan 00:48, 12 Aug 2003 (UTC)

---

arghh... just noticed that there's nothing on the nerves that lie below the belt, so to speak. All the nerves in the leg and pelvis and so on aren't named whereas those above are. Needs work. Alex.tan 08:52, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I really need to know more about peripheral neuropathy of the legs. Doctors gave a poor prognosis, advised that no improvement was likely, and that physiotherapy or exercise would make no difference. Two years later wheelchair-bound patient embarked on an exercise programme and it is indeed making a considerable difference, he is standing (using a frame) independently for 15-second periods, swimming backstroke in a therapy pool, and more. Please, if anyone can add information I would appreciate it. Shelagh, in South Africa - 30 Jan 2005

Spinal and Cranial nerves

I am currently listening to psyc podcast and they the lecturer is describing the Somatic System to include the spinal and cranial nerves. should the explanation be moved to the somatic page or explanation given given in by the division of Somatic and Autonomic distinctions under Peripheral NS.

Confusing Wiki Article

Compare:

"The peripheral nervous system is divided into the somatic nervous system, the autonomic nervous system, and the sensory system.[2]"

and

"By function, the peripheral nervous system is divided into the somatic nervous system, autonomic nervous system and the enteric nervous system".

So the sensory and enteric nervous systems are the same?

The reference (http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Dorland%27s_Medical_Dictionary_) quoted for the definition of the peripheral nervous system says something very different:

"peripheral nervous system the parts of the nervous system consisting of nerves and ganglia outside the brain and spinal cord; it has two divisions, the autonomic nervous system and the somatic nervous system."

I think the article should be deleted and replaced by the Dorland definition. RayJohnstoneRayJohnstone (talk) 02:42, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

I've tried to fix it. Enteric is included in autonomic, as the remainder of the paragraph made clear. Looie496 (talk) 13:17, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Added a link out in see also section

I added a link out to an article that details about how the PNS nerves are able to reinnervate and what preferential motor reinnervation is. This is specific to the peripheral nervous system, which is why I put it in the see also section. Kaitlyncottrell (talk) 22:40, 23 November 2013 (UTC)Katie

Hi Kaitlyncottrell! Good job. Like Lova Falk talk 11:07, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Secondary ReviewChkollath (talk) 00:37, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Very well done article. I like the breakdown of the individual nervous groups and what they innervate. The pathology section was also a good call. The brachial plexus may be a good image to incorporate into your article.

Reply

Thank you. We are not trying to add detailed image which will make this article to lose its purpose. The link to Branchial plexus has its own images and detailed information about it. This page should be the overview of peripheral nervous system. --Jungi0714 (talk) 19:37, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Daniel Peters' Secondary Review (BIOL 3501 Marquette)

Overall: Some very well written sections flanked by some not-so-well written sections. There's a lot of good info here, but I feel like more could be added than just the anatomical breakdown and pathology section.

Intro: Fantastic. Great writing and use of links and citations. Last sentence is a little random- good info to have but could you infuse it somewhere else to make it a littler more natural?

C1-C4 Cervical Spinal nerves section: Instead of saying "see myelopathy" or "see _______", actually write a sentence about that topic and link the word in that sentence. The other option seems to much like a cop-out.

Lumbosacral section: -Give a brief description of the 3 parts of the plexus instead of just linking them. Try making it like "lumbar (link), the nerves stemming from the lower back region blah blah blah". Just one short sentence to give the reader an idea of what they're clicking on.

The SNS section: -Noradrenaline and norepinephrine are the same thing, no need to list them separately. I'd delete one of them but I don't know which you'd rather keep. Just eliminate one of them or put the second in parentheses. -Second sentence: do ALL of those NT's have that effect of increasing HR and blood flow? Seems like a topical addition of information, maybe it'd be better to keep it out OR preferably to keep it in and just put it in a second following sentence with a little more detail. Also watch for grammar in that NT sentence just mentioned.

The Pathology section: -Holy wall of text. Break it up into some paragraphs! -Lots of good info here -Don't link PNS...this is the page you are writing and the reader is reading, after all. -Don't link the same article so frequently, especially within the same paragraph and section. Link an article only once in such a confined area.

Good luck!Danielggpeters (talk) 02:54, 18 April 2016 (UTC)Dan Peters, BIOL 3501

Thanks very much for your thoughtful review, Dan Peters. Good pickup on NA and NE! I've had a look at the article following your comments and tried to expand it and copyedit it. All these articles are made by numerous volunteers over time, so I hope you take the time to review more articles or even join us editing yourself! (it is a very rewarding experience!). --Tom (LT) (talk) 06:16, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Reply

The introduction was modified since I also believed that the last part was quite vague. I added more information so that it actually introduce subtopics mentioned later. SNS part, we could not touch since the work is not from us. (some unfortunate incidents happened, which left that part untouched) --Jungi0714 (talk) 19:55, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Secondary Review

Great article. I like the choice to focus specifically on nerve groups for the somatosensory system section, and to focus more broadly on the function of the autonomic nervous system for that section. I would recommend adding diagrams for the brachial plexus and the lumbrosacral plexus to make these easier to visualize. Also, the article could use more images in general.

AleksNemo (talk) 04:12, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Reply

Thank you for your comment. About more images, I believe that further links to those subtopics have sufficient amount of images for us to not have images for every sections of our article. --Jungi0714 (talk) 19:57, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Secondary Review

The article is done very well, I really appreciated how you guys divided the PNS into anatomically and explained it. The disease section gives a good general overview, consider adding a list of specific a few PNS diseases, but a just a few things to make sure to include. Add more internal citations, and also look to expand on what the PNS does other than anatomical structure and diseases. Perhaps you can add a section on important discoveries/history that lead to the founding of specific parts of the PNS. The sensor-somatic section has many good points which add to the article, but check the grammar in this section I found just a few errors. Other than these few things, good job on writing a concise, and informative article. Sand774823 (talk) 00:44, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Reply

Thank you for your comment. About adding more section about peripheral nervous system, one of our group member did not post his "Development" part. As long as he put source on his part of the article, we are willing to add in between autonomic nervous system and diseases. --Jungi0714 (talk) 19:59, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Secondary Review

As was said above, images would help the article become more clear by showing the different structures mentioned. I agree that more citations should be included and that a history section would be worth adding. It might be helpful to show a sample pathway within the PNS to demonstrate how it communicates with the CNS to cause responses in the body. KCole0034 (talk) 00:30, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Reply

Like mentioned before, no further images are needed and other section might be added depends on what our last group member do. In addition, I am not sure what you are asking on the last sentence but one of the pathway is autonomic nervous system, since it is directly linked between CNS and smooth muscle organs. --Jungi0714 (talk) 20:04, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Secondary Review

I love how the article is set up. The different sections really help to understand the breakdown of the structure of the nervous system and how the divisions help/effect different areas and needs of the body. I do think more in- line citations would be helpful along with diagrams or charts due to the mass amount of information given. Also make sure you make note in your talk page that this is a class assignment and let us know the goals of this page for you personally. RReilles24 (talk) 01:48, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Reply

Thank you for your comment. As mentioned, no more images will be added. Also, I have added short message about this page on the top of talk page. Also, each sentence contains in text citation. --Jungi0714 (talk) 20:10, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Primary Review BIOL 3501

Here are some possible suggestions for your article, hope they are helpful!

Intro

• Possibly go into more detail in the introduction. You introduce, the somatic and autonomic systems (and sensory system), but then it seems like it skips around a bit. For example, you mention and explain the autonomic system with your last sentence of the introduction.
• Possible suggestions for intro: You have the intro sentence explaining PNS and then it goes to the main function, which is fine. After the main function, maybe include your sentence about the somatic and autonomic systems and also maybe include a sentence generally explaining each (similar to what your last sentence does for the autonomic system). Then, maybe include your sentence about how the PNS is exposed unlike the CNS, and then end with a sentence or two about diseases. I think by doing this, you can give a brief overview of all your sections with a nice introduction structure and flow. If the reader wants to find out more, they can reference your specific sections.
• You include a very nice picture to give an overview of the PNS.

Structure

• The first sentence kind of throws me off. Here is a suggestion for a possible fix: The peripheral nervous system is divided into the somatic and sensory nervous system and the autonomic nervous system.

Sensory-Somatic Nervous System

• I think it would be a good idea to introduce the term “somatosensory” earlier on (in the introduction). Up until this point, you separately refer to the somatic and sensory systems. If you are going to group them, group them throughout the article to reduce confusion.
• Check the second full paragraph, there are some grammatical/ structuring errors that make it confusing to read (ex: use lower case for “spinal cord”, “These arise the spinal cord”- I’m not sure what this means)
• There should be citations in this section.

Autonomic Nervous System

• The section on the autonomic nervous system was very good; however, I was not able to access sources 5-7. I read the abstract for each and they looked like great sources for the topics that were talked about, but I wasn’t able to read the full article without creating an account for each site.

Diseases

• This section gave a nice sample of possible diseases that affect the peripheral nervous system. It may be a bit much for this group to do now, but maybe other users can eventually split this topic into subsections giving a small summary and links of the major diseases that affect the PNS.

Overall, I think this was a nicely written article with some suggested corrections I mentioned above. All of the sources fit the topics you talk about, but I would include more in general (specifically in the Sensory-Somatic Nervous System section). The introductory picture used gives a very nice overview of the PNS. The main point of the topic was focused and the whole article was structured very well.

Chinski72 (talk) 03:08, 20 April 2016 (UTC)chinski72

Reply

The introduction was modified since it was not as clear before. The introduction should now be clear to understand what each system does briefly. Also, Sensory-somatic nervous system part was not modified by one of our group member since she dropped out after the break. About the resource, one cannot access to the resource directly since the website is only authorized to some people. (it is marquette library website) However, with ISSN, finding an article would not be an issue and there should not be any problem regarding plagarism. --Jungi0714 (talk) 20:17, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Secondary Review

I thought this was a very well written article. It was detailed but easy to follow. They used links well which enhanced the article. In general there was good use of in text citations, but could use some more in the sensory somatic nervous system section. I thought that the authors could use a treatment section since they brought up disease. Overall I thought it was well done! Emmasarah95 (talk) 03:47, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Reply

Again, the somatic nervous system section had problem of modifying due to an absence of one of our group member. Also, we were going to have a development part for more detailed information about PNS; however, another group member dropped out from the project which made this article lack a little bit of information. --Jungi0714 (talk) 20:19, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Primary Review (Marquette BIOL 3501)

Introduction The introduction was well written and was able to convey the information in a broad yet fairly detailed manner. With that being said, there are a few grammatical errors in which the syntax of the paragraph was off and it gave a feeling of being choppy. For example, the flow of the sentences into the introduction of the somatic nervous system and the autonomic nervous system seemed a bit choppy. One way to improve this might be by separating the two sections of ideas so that there isn't a complete halt in sentence flow. Also, the inclusion of the cranial nerves didn't really seem to fit in the introduction and could be placed in another section. Finally, the mentioning of the autonomic nervous system seemed to be a bit short and could be extended slightly. Besides these points, it was well written.

Sensory-Somatic Nervous System The separation of the specific groupings of nerves was a fantastic idea: the cervical spinal nerves, brachial plexus, lumbosacral plexus. The highlighting of the different sections of nerves and the functions of these sections was a great addition. The phrasing of the sentence "it is important to note that this method creates a problem when naming the spinal nerve root between C7 and T1" is a bit strange and doesn't really say why it is important to note that besides mentioning that it is called C8 instead. This sentence seems like it could provide great information if it was rephrased. Another thing is that the lumbosacral plexus subsection could be extended a bit more as it seems to be skipped over. Again, well written section regardless of minor issues.

Autonomic Nervous System Besides the phrasing in the second sentence, there wasn't really an issue with this section. It was able convey information efficiently. The inclusion of the enteric nervous system was great as it reduced possible confusion by the informed reader.

Diseases The disease section was well written as it provided multiple diseases due to an ailment within the peripheral nervous system. One possible suggestion is to separate the diseases into subsections and highlight on each one a bit more, but besides that, well written.

Sources Provided secondary sources, even though a few of the sources (6 and 7) were not accessible. Connor.archer (talk) 06:26, 20 April 2016 (UTC)connor.archer

Reply

The choppy part of introduction has been modified so that it contains brief, yet, enough information about both somatic and autonomic nervous system and the sentences flow. For somatic part, we could not modify due to one group member dropping out at the last moment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jungi0714 (talk • contribs) 20:29, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Secondary Review

I feel that this article was well written for such a large topic. The layout of the article was nice and concise and was an easy read for those who do not have previous knowledge of this topic. The usage of hyperlinks was great as it allows for the subtopics to be explained by another page instead of this article going into great detail. However, since this is a large topic I feel that there is more information to be covered (i.e. chemical signaling). You mention NTs but not necessarily how they travel from the CNS to the PNS. That could be hyperlinked but I think if mentioned would allow for a bit more clarity. Last but not least pictures are always a plus but all in all this was a great article; great job! SSCHMIDT1127 (talk) 19:55, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Reply

None of our secondary source explained detail mechanism of how NTs travel from CNS to PNS. However, I do not think such a detailed information is necessary for our article. Various links such as neurotransmitter contains more information about NT traveling so, it would be best for people who are interested to go to those specific wiki page for more information. --Jungi0714 (talk) 20:25, 27 April 2016 (UTC)