Talk:Sensory neuron

Redirect to sensory nerve?

Arcadian (talk · contribs) today redirected this article to sensory nerve, without explaining why, and then Stantia3 (talk · contribs) reverted the redirect, without any explanation. The redirect seems appropriate to me given the duplication of material and the lack of sources in this article, but let's discuss, please. Looie496 (talk) 18:35, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

I am actually updating this page, complete with references for a project for my neuroscience class. Though sensory nerve and sensory neuron seem to have a lot of duplicate material right now, they do have two different meanings, and by the end of today, I will have added more information to better highlight their differences. Thanks for starting this discussion. Stantia3 (talk) 19:11, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Okay, good, I agree that different articles are justified if they have different content; if anything "sensory neuron" is the more important concept. Thanks for explaining -- if you need to undo another editor's action in the future, unless it is clearly vandalism please at a minimum use an edit summary that explains why you are doing it. Regards, Looie496 (talk) 19:26, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

I think that "sensory neuron" is a much better name for the article (if merged) then afferent nerve because it's more understandable.

Merger proposal

I would like to mergeSensory nerve into this article, because there is a great overlap and Sensory nerve is not a very good article. No references at all, and the lead should be rewritten - with much more information on sensory neurons. So... what do you think? Lova Falk talk 17:55, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Hmm. In principle there might be reasons to have a separate article, focusing on things like condunction velocity and effects of nerve damage, but I agree with you that there is no useful distinctive information in the current sensory nerve article, so I wouldn't oppose a merger. I would like to leave the option open for somebody to create a separate article in the future though. Looie496 (talk) 18:09, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Absolutely. I mean, the future article. Lova Falk talk 07:55, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

EDIT: Yes there may be anoverlap of information etcetra, but if some highschool/GCSE student were to use the search and find them both on the same page, they may confuse themselves as to which is which. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.42.137.57 (talk) 16:33, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

I propose we reduce Sensory nerve to a little stub like

A sensory nerve is a nerve consisting of a bundle of sensory fibers.

Anthonyhcole (talk) 08:48, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Done.[1] --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 11:33, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Well done! Like Lova Falk talk 08:55, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

:-) --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 13:00, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Definition of sensory neuron and missing picture

Sensory neurons were defined as cells that transduce a non-synaptic stimulus ("other modality") into an electrical signal (action potential) that is sent to the central nervous system. According to this definition, I cannot see what is the sensory neuron in the visual and the auditory system. Is it retinal ganglion cells? But they do not receive a light stimulus. In auditory, is it inner hair cells? But they don't produce spikes that are sent to the brain. I was confused when reading the article.

Furthermore, it is written several times "as shown in the picture, ...". But there is no picture. Maybe somebody can fix this. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tilo1111 (talk • contribs) 06:43, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

I've removed mention of the pictures, which were deleted for copyright reasons. I've also reworded the first paragraph to fix the problem you identified (correctly I hope). Thanks for bringing up these issues. (By the way, some retinal ganglion cells actually are light-sensitive.) Looie496 (talk) 15:45, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

"Auditory" needs improvement

Hello,

I just read this page, and I think there is room for improvement on the description of the auditory system.

This is currently written about the hair cells:

There are two types of hair cells: inner and outer. The inner hair cells are the sensory receptors while the outer hair cells are usually from efferent axons originating from cells in the superior olivary complex[12]

The first statement is correct. Along the entire length of the cochlear duct, there is one row of inner hair cells and (usually) three rows of outer hair cells, in mammals. However, I think the second sentence could be phrased a little better. Whereas the inner hair cells are indeed the sensory receptors of the cochlea, the outer hair cells are definitely sensory receptors as well, although their exact function still remains unknown (e.g. attenuators or amplifiers). As the inner hair cell and its connections (the type I spiral ganglion neurons) together form the main pathway for hearing, it might be better to rephrase to something like "the main sensory receptors for hearing" or something like that.

I must confess that I do not fully understand the second part of the second sentence: while the outer hair cells are usually from efferent axons originating from cells in the superior olivary complex[12] Outer hair cells are indeed contacted by efferent axons from the olivary complex. Nevertheless, outer hair cells are also contacted by the type II spiral ganglion neurons in the spiral ganglion. Efferent fibers are not sensory neurons (are they?), so maybe it might be better to disregard the entire efferent system in this section? Even though they, and their typical pattern of connections, are very fascinating indeed. The sensory neurons in the auditory system are the type I and type II spiral ganglion neurons.

I also have some issues with the subsection Problems with sensory neurons associated with the auditory system leads to disorders such as Although this is very nice insightful information about some pathologies underlying auditory system disorders, I feel something very important has been left out completely. Please allow me to explain: There is sound (or vibration). Hair cells depolarize and release neurotransmitters. In response, the type I spiral ganglion neurons start to fire and the signal is transported to the brain(stem). Hurray, we can hear! So what happens when there is something wrong with the sensory neurons of the auditory system? Simply speaking: you become deaf! These processing disorders which are mentioned are related to pathologies in the brain, in the central nervous system, but not necessarily with the spiral ganglion cells themselves (which are part of the peripheral nervous system).

I hope this helps!

Heikolocher (talk) 16:10, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

We're very short on expertise on topics like this. If you can see any way to make improvements in the article yourself, it would be absolutely terrific if you would do that. Regards, Looie496 (talk) 17:40, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Merge Proposal - Sensory receptor

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result of this discussion was to merge Sensory receptor into Sensory neuron. VeniVidiVicipedia (talk) 20:21, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

---

Hi! I propose the merger of Sensory receptor into Sensory neuron. Both articles seem cover the same topic only under a different name. It seem to me that this direction of merging is best, since in both articles it is described as a neuron. --VeniVidiVicipedia (talk) 19:06, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

The Mesh database links to sensory receptor cell for both sensory neuron and sensory cell. VeniVidiVicipedia (talk) 18:56, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

• Support merge. --Tryptofish (talk) 00:26, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Re naming confusions

Hello VeniVidiVicipedia - imo it seems the use of sensory for the two terms - neuron and receptor makes for a lot of confusion. For example on one of the pages a sentence reads that a sensory receptor (newly linked to sensory neuron) sends signals to a sensory neuron.....I feel that if the page sensory neuron was changed to Afferent neuron -the Mesh entry - the use of receptor would be clearer. The first entry for sensory neuron before it was redirected is as follows: An afferent neuron is a neuron that carries information from sensory receptors at its peripheral endings to the central nervous system. An afferent neuron is also known as a sensory neuron. Which to me makes a lot more sense. --Iztwoz (talk) 13:18, 18 March 2017 (UTC) A move would also leave an unambiguous page for sensory nerve. --Iztwoz (talk) 13:23, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

@Iztwoz: The use of terms is indeed confusing. There is one Mesh page for 'sensory neuron', 'sensory receptor' and 'sensory receptor cell'. To make it more confusing, sometimes the term receptor is also used for the receptor protein (that can be found in the receptor cell). I don't think I fully understand what changes you are proposing. VENIVIDIVICIPEDIA^talk 09:03, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Sensory Receptor Cells - Specialized afferent neurons capable of transducing sensory stimuli into NERVE IMPULSES to be transmitted to the CENTRAL NERVOUS SYSTEM. Sometimes sensory receptors for external stimuli are called exteroceptors; for internal stimuli are called interoceptors and proprioceptors. Year introduced: 2009 (1963)

@VeniVidiVicipedia: The above is copied from Sensory Receptor Cell Mesh entry which clearly differentiates sensory neuron to afferent neuron. The entry itself is confusing as the entry heading is Sensory Receptor Cells but in next sentence refers to them as sensory receptors which was a previous indexing. Sensory neurons are classed as afferent neurons both in Mesh and in textbooks. I would propose a page move from sensory neuron to afferent neuron. Then the Mesh description of sensory receptor cells that also refers to them as sensory receptor would warrant a separate page - imo that page would be back to Sensory receptor and the different actual sensory receptor cells could be a subsection of that page. Cells described for example as Merkel cells and muscle spindles refer to cells not to a neuron. There is no such entity as a Merkel cell sensory neuron for example - the neuron is described by the receptor cell function in this case as a mechanoreceptor. Again as earlier this would make the use of sensory nerve clearer - nerve is often taken to mean neuron. Best --Iztwoz (talk) 17:32, 19 March 2017 (UTC) (just to note that a merge proposal needs to be left a clear month for discussion to take place) Best --Iztwoz (talk) 17:32, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

So your current proposal is to move 'sensory neuron' to 'afferent neuron'. Currently 'afferent neuron' is a redirect to 'afferent nerve fiber'. Do you want to merge the content with 'afferent nerve fiber' or replace the redirect with the content.

The mesh page 'Neurons, Afferent' says 'Neurons which conduct NERVE IMPULSES to the CENTRAL NERVOUS SYSTEM.' If this is correct I'm not yet entirely convinced the move from 'sensory neuron' to 'afferent neuron' is a good idea. For example a photoreceptor cell is a neuron that is capable of transducing light to an electrical potential (¿which makes it a sensory neuron?), but is does not conduct anything to the central nervous system. It seems that not all afferent neurons are sensory neurons and/or not all sensory neurons are afferent neurons.

The move of non-neural sensory receptors from a page with neuron in the title sounds like a good idea. I prefer the destination page 'sensory receptor cell' over 'sensory receptor' because it is clear that the article will be about cells and not about proteins or even something technological. VENIVIDIVICIPEDIA^talk 14:00, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Merger Proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result of this discussion was not to merge

---

Although it seems that there exist some previous merger proposal, I believe it's neccessary to talk about this once more.

I think a consensus that sensory neuron = afferent neuron (Afferent, or sensory, neurons) has already been established. Now it seems that the article sensory neuron is for the neuron and the article Afferent nerve fiber for the nerve fiber (of axon) of sensory (afferent) neuron. In my opnion, This is really confusing. Please note that most people reading these two articles are people without medicine/biology background or undergraduate students. I think for the understanding of most people, these two articles should be merged and the contents can be divided into different sections (like cell biology and anatomy or so on...)

Thanks for your attention guys.--クオン·翡翠·鵺鳥·十姉妹·夜啼鳥 04:27, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi Kuon.Haku, thanks for your proposal, it's great that you're out there thinking about these things. In my understanding you're right, these are roughly the same. However the context these are used in is usually quite different. "Afferent" (neuron towards) is usually used in reference to some sort of process and in relation to "Efferent" (neuron away from), whereas "Sensory neuron" is just a reference to the neuron itself (as opposed to say a motor neuron).

In my opinion a better merge would be from Afferent nerve fiber and Efferent nerve fiber to Afferent and efferent nerve fibers, following the same model as Sensitivity and specificity, to put two very similar concepts usually referred to together in the same article. This means that the way those terms are used can be more easily described together, which might make the articles easier to read. What do you think about this?--Tom (LT) (talk) 05:25, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Also, did you mean to say "sensory neuron = sensory neuron" (ie. the same on both sides?) - not sure what you mean there. --Tom (LT) (talk) 05:25, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

It's a good idea. I agree with you.--クオン·翡翠·鵺鳥·十姉妹·夜啼鳥 05:49, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

WikiProject Anatomy notified. --Tom (LT) (talk) 05:25, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, I mean sensory neuron = afferent neuron(it has been corrected now).--クオン·翡翠·鵺鳥·十姉妹·夜啼鳥 05:48, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

I also agree with Tom's suggestion.--Iztwoz (talk) 17:55, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This discussion was over long time ago, and there should be no merge. Somebody please closes this discussion. Sensory neuron and afferent nerve fiber are different concepts, and I oppose merge. 205.208.121.62 (talk) 21:56, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

The consensus is not to merge but instead for a new page Afferent and efferent nerve fibers to be made.--Iztwoz (talk) 17:55, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi

Hi all , I'm student at üsküdar university / türkiye , taking class Special Topics in Neuroscience. Under the view of my prof. I will try to contribute my best for topic. Yarkin.alan (talk) 11:04, 23 August 2023 (UTC)