Talk:Cochlear nucleus

Untitled

I added a flag proposing a merger of the pages "dorsal cochlear nucleus" and "cochlear nuclei". The former was originally a section of the latter. It was extracted without explanation at one point and I fail to see what the merits of this edit were, especially as the original article was not then edited to reflect its exclusive focus on the ventral cochlear nucleus (e.g., the title is still "cochlear nuclei"). Apart from the failure to separate the content of the original article into two complementary and unitary articles, a primary motivation for the separation is not obvious. The dCN article is neither voluminous nor is it sufficiently distinct from the CN article to warrant the current separation. I think this material will be better communicated to the reader if these sections are reintegrated.

I oppose the merge, but if you are confident that the majority of the material in cochlear nuclei pertains to ventral cochlear nucleus, then I would support moving the bulk of the content to that page. --Arcadian 23:55, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

I also oppose the merge... while the material currently present in the articles may not adequately describe the differences in the two regions, the anatomical and physiological differences should justify their separation. I would recommend adding material to each page instead. Wittnate 22:42, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree that the VCN/DCN articles should be merged back into the CN article. However I do see a number of options:

• A CN article with separate articles for each cell type, and no VCN or DCN articles.
• A CN article that pretty much lists the VCN, DCN articles. And ends it there.Mjspe1 (talk) 01:41, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Remove section "Structures"

I think the section "Structures" should be removed. It is rather generic, and more concerned with an overview of the auditory system in general, not the CN. What do you think? --Morton Shumway (talk) 16:26, 7 June 2010 (UTC).

I agree. It was a strange section. I have moved into into a 'projections from the CN' section.Mjspe1 (talk) 01:41, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Confusion on projections from CN

Alright, ill admit im no expert on the cochlear nucleus, just a lowly undergrad, however i think i have found a mistake in the VAS and DAS pathways.

" Through the medulla, one projection goes to the contralateral superior olivary complex (SOC) via the trapezoid body, whilst the other half shoots to the ipsilateral SOC. This pathway is called the ventral acoustic stria"

as i read that input goes from CN -> Contralat SOC via trapezoid body and ipsilat SOC

but in the picture https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cochlear_nucleus#/media/File:Gray760.png

it shows "6: Efferent fibers of tuberculum acusticum [DCN], forming the striae medullares, with 6’, their direct bundle going to the superior olivary nucleus of the same side; 6’’, their decussating bundles going to the superior olivary nucleus of the opposite side"

this shows the pathway decussating to the contralateral SOC from the DCN, but it doesn't travel through the Trapezoid body as the paragraph states.

is this merely an antiquated drawing? does decussating imply crossing though TB? am i misinterpreting it?

thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.68.4.138 (talk) 04:34, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cochlear nucleus. 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:

• Added archive http://webarchive.loc.gov/all/20011127072638/http://serous.med.buffalo.edu/hearing/cochlear_nuclei.html to http://serous.med.buffalo.edu/hearing/cochlear_nuclei.html

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) 02:40, 10 August 2017 (UTC)