Talk:Striatum

message: It's not the case that the list of things that activate the striatum is based on a single study.  Zink et al's contribution is only the suggestion, backed up with fMRI evidence, that the linking property is saliency.  The other activating stimuli come from a string of different researchers.  seglea 07:43, 24 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: "Corpus striatum" is the same as "striatum", right?  I just changed corpus striatum to redirect here instead of to basal ganglia, and just wanted to make sure this was correct. /skagedal[talk] 00:11, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The corpus striatum is actually the basal ganglia and internal capsule together. For now I just had it redirecting to the BG, but I'll make the corpus striatum page more clear. Semiconscious • talk 02:48, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

text: The neuroanatomy text book Neuroanatomy -an illustrated colour text 3rd edition by Crossman and Neary  states that the Corpus striatum includes the Neostriatum (which is the Caudate and Putamen) and the Paleostriatum (Globus pallidus).--89.168.28.19 (talk) 14:51, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Corpus striatum" and "striatum" 

message: The striatum is part of the basal ganglia, which functions as an integrated system.  The most useful way to handle this article would be to restrict it to a detailed examination of the anatomy and physiology of the striatum (which are very complex), but to point the reader to basal ganglia for explanations of function. Looie496 (talk) 03:25, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Adding to WikiProject Neuroscience

message: This section is extremely difficult to read and understand.  I was going to try and clean it up, but I can't understand from the text what the striatum projects to.  I need to do some research on all of this anyway, so if all goes well, I will update the section with clearer text.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Oznozz (talk • contribs) 23:47, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I agree. I was the one who tagged it, and I had a hard time making any sense of it at all (and I have done research in that field professionally!). I have a feeling this page may need quite a bit of rewriting from scratch. Thanks for working on it. --Tryptofish (talk) 00:00, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The basal ganglia article describes the connections a bit more clearly, I think, although it lacks references.  (Which is my fault!)  The bottom line is that the striatum projects exclusively to other parts of the basal ganglia:  the two parts of the pallidum, and the two parts of the substantia nigra.  The circuit diagram in the basal ganglia article might be helpful here. Looie496 (talk) 00:26, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Targets" section 

message: I deleted the phrase about to toric topology, as I was unable to find any evidence of the validity of the statement.  See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Primate_basal_ganglia_system#Striatum_Topology for more details.
Oznozz (talk) 23:24, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Fine, no problem. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:22, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Toric Topology? 

message: The divisions of the striatum into dorsal and ventral sections might be more clear cut in the primate (I'm studying rat neuroanatomy), but I was under the impression it isn't certain in rodents. Some of the text may be talking about primate anatomy, but as far as I understand it, the reference cited for "the dorsal striatum is closed and continuous" a) is rodents and b) is all about how there isn't a clear consistent boundary between the two, and different methods of classifying the striatum put the boundary in different places. I'd like to help out on this article (and probably WikiProjects Neuroscience) but as people were saying in the "Targets" section above, it might need a rewrite. Keepstherainoff (talk) 09:03, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Any help at all would be most welcome. Please don't worry about making it perfect, because the way things work here, whatever you get started will likely get picked up on by other editors (probably including me, in this case). --Tryptofish (talk) 18:17, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

text: IIRC, ventral striatum can be identified in rats as well, through innervation from orbitofrontal cortex. I can understand some debate (some people object to rat OFC in itself) but AFAIK the literature is moving towards an OFC-VS connection. In any case, I agree the section needs a rewrite and I would really like to do so, but maybe it makes sense to make it a collaborative effort, connecting those with knowledge on either anatomical, physiological or cognitive aspects. This could add to the piece being coherent - do contact me on my talk page in case you're interested in scheduling such an effort. --tijmz (talk) 22:25, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Please just jump in with whatever you can offer. It can't help but be an improvement. As for scheduling anything with me, it tends to be a losing battle. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:42, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Organisation" section 

message: I just realized that Corpus striatum is another page dealing with the same subject as this one (despite the hatnote here). I suggest that we merge the other page into this one. Thoughts? --Tryptofish (talk) 15:54, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal 

message: Does anyone have a reference for the assertion that 96% of neurons in the striatum are medium spiny neurons? (Medium spiny neurons so called due to the presence of spines on the dendrites, and making up 96% of the striatum.)? I've been trying to check this up for a couple of days. The numbers differ for different species - over 95% in rats and mice, and 75-80% in primates (e.g. Chapter 1, of Tepper J.M., Abercrombie E.D. and Bolam J.P. (eds), GABA and the Basal Ganglia: From Molecules to Systems, Progress in Brain Research Vol 160, Elsevier B.V., 2007. I've also seen "These GABAergic (GABA is γ-aminobutyric acid) cells are the most populous neuronal cell type of the striatum (90–95% in rats and over 85% in humans)" in Kelly C.M., Dunnett S.B. and Rosser A.E., Medium spiny neurons for transplantation in Huntington’s disease, Biochem. Soc. Trans. (2009) 37, 323–328; doi:10.1042/BST0370323. But nowhere have I seen a value of over 90% for humans. 
Perhaps it would be an idea to split off the values for different species and give citations for each? 
Baratron (talk) 06:19, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Makes sense.  I think there must be recent anatomy reviews that would be better sources than either of those, but if the literature backs up a major difference, our article should probably make it clear. Looie496 (talk) 18:01, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:31, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  96% of the neurons? 

message: I was thinking about how the opening paragraph describes: a division of the striatum by internal capsule into caudate nucleus and putamen.  This seems to ignore the globus pallidus (interna & externa).  So should it say something like, "striatum divided by white matter called internal capsule into two sectors called the Caudate Nucleus and Lentiform Body (putamen and globus palladus)"?  Savonnn (talk) 17:56, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: That's a tough question, as it gets into the byzantine complexities of nomenclature of this subject. Most sources agree that the globus pallidus is part of the basal ganglia, but it gets murkier as to whether it is part of the striatum. Of course this leaves us with a lentiform nucleus that is made up of the putamen (a part of the striatum) and the globus pallidus (which may or may not be). Some sources even treat the internal and external parts of the globus pallidus differently. --Tryptofish (talk) 18:25, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: You're totally right.  I was in a different part of my notes later that day and realized the GPi & GPe aren't considered part of the striatum.  Thanks for considering my question.  Savonnn (talk) 18:19, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: You are very welcome! --Tryptofish (talk) 20:51, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Division of Striatum by Internal Capsule

message: From pg. 743 of Neuroanatomy through Clinical Cases by Bluemenfeld, corpus striatum is not used to include the globus pallidus. Although closely related, the corpus striatum is used only to refer to the caudate and putamen. The way the last sentence of the first paragraph is phrased, makes it seem that the definition of corpus striatum includes the globus pallidus. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dl615 (talk • contribs) 21:52, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: This terminology is such a hash that even experts get confused.  I would not accept any single source as authoritative, even if it is a good medical textbook. Looie496 (talk) 22:35, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that the change from "sometimes" to "occasionally" in describing this use of the term is confusing, and doesn't really add any value. Are there any objections to changing it back? --Tryptofish (talk) 23:42, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Corpus Striatum" 

message: I have found an important copyright problem in the article. It has been there for almost two years. On March 2011 User talk:FrozenMan added 4000k  of text (the biggest addition up to date). In May 2012 some copyright problems were found as seen in his talk page. I do not know if they were solved. I have found further problems since lots of text have been copied from
"The Role of the Dorsal Striatum in Reward and Decision-Making--Bernard W. Balleine, Mauricio R. Delgado, Okihide Hikosaka". This probably indicates the full contribution by the user is tainted. Since the copyright problems have been here for so long not sure on how to act.
Bests.--Garrondo (talk) 11:35, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: After checking, I agree with you, and I've removed the chunk of material he added.  It was isolated from the rest of the article and has hardly been changed in the meantime, so not too difficult.  Thanks for pointing this out. Looie496 (talk) 14:40, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Great. --Garrondo (talk) 14:56, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyright problem

message: According to the ventral striatum article, the ventral striatum certainly is a part of the striatum, and consists of the nucleus accumbens and the olfactory tubercle. But I have not seen a source mention the nucleus accumbens defined directly as a part of the striatum. The striatum article does not mention the ventral striatum, nor the nucleus accumbens. I think that article should make the relationship between the two entities clear.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by James Gabriel II (talk • contribs) 19:08, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  No mention at all of ventral striatum 

message: The various terms used in this article for the striatum and associated structures provide a confusing mess of accurate information, outdated information, and wrong information. Correcting and adequately sourcing the corrections will be a significant undertaking.
Here are some things I notice:
1. The article gives "neostriatum" as a synonym for the striatum. This is incorrect and I am not aware of any authors who use the term "neostriatum" in this way.
:All searches show that the neostratium is often shortened to the striatum. --Iztwoz (talk) 15:49, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Can find no reference to these usages on the page. ?--Iztwoz (talk) 17:12, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

text: Thanks Geoff it's good to have these things pointed out for editors to look at.--Iztwoz (talk) 11:38, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah. Let me add that the goal should be to have a reasonably simple account that will put a modern-day moderately educated reader on the right track. Looie496 (talk) 17:10, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article has a mix of erroneous, obsolete, and obsolescent nomenclature 

message: Is the globus pallidus part of the striatum? It was my understanding it was not.
90.241.90.17 (talk) 13:45, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Globus Pallidus? 

message: Striated is apparently a word that is used thus known in English language, so that's why the authors didn't feel a need to explain the origin of the name. As a non-native yet fluent English speaker, I've never come across this word, so I think it would be good to follow the custom of adding a reference to the origine of the name?
* striatus = furrowed, grooved, fluted, striated 
* striated = having parallel lines or grooves on the surface 
Shall I be bold and weave it in the article? Wish me luck I won't get revoked by the guards. SvenAERTS (talk) 10:59, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Etymology (Latin) striatus = groove, striatum = having parallel lines or grooves on the surface