Talk:Neuromodulation

Tip: #section links are case-sensitive on most browsers

Links from this article with broken #section links :
[[Acetylcholine#in CNS]]

You can remove this template after fixing the problems | FAQ | Report a problem

This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Medicine: Neurology Start‑class Low‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Neurology task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Neuroscience Start‑class Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Neuroscience, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Neuroscience on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NeuroscienceWikipedia:WikiProject NeuroscienceTemplate:WikiProject Neuroscienceneuroscience articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Template:WikiProject Molecular and Cellular Biology

neuromuscular

The second paragraph was clearly based directly on the first paragraph in the reference cited. Unfortunately, it was rewritten in a way that lost a lot of the actual information from the source, to the point that I had little idea what it was actually talking about. For those curious: it's a paper on modeling neuromodulation at the neuromuscular junction of the heart of the blue crab. I'm going to give it some very quick editing, but it'd be better if someone else came along and did a real rewrite of it. This whole page, in fact, is a moderately important subject that has nearly nothing written about it. digfarenough (talk) 23:40, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

how great to see my concept!

I'm starting to believe in myself ;) Yes, I was already postulating that in my model of the brain some two years ago at least, tho of course not in professional press but in an article (because I am CS, no biologist). I'd say that, excuse me the simplification, to an extent we have different conscious brains in different moods (and the transitions are smooth). The premise was that depending on neurotransmitter configuration, various sides of personality are more or less active, and also open for shaping. Piotr Niżyński (talk) 02:21, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I really appreciate the input from anyone involved in computer science! There is much to be learned from comparisons between the brain and computers. (But, always remember that the brain can physically reorganize itself, whereas a computer cannot.)Fuzzform (talk) 05:42, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

No. Absolutely do not merge. This article needs to be separate. Unless there are objections within 6 months, I will remove the merger tag.Fuzzform (talk) 05:42, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree - no merge. See for example several independent journals for the area of "Neuromodulation". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.179.67.89 (talk) 16:42, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do not merge. Neuromodulation is distinct from neurotransmission. Anyone who actually reads both pages can tell why they should remain separate, —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.229.80.176 (talk) 18:27, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No do not merge. The 2 concepts are quite different. Roughly, neuromodulation is an important subclass of synaptic transmission.Neurobrit (talk) 01:33, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the merger tag, since it clearly wasn't getting any support. Looie496 (talk) 17:31, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Optogenetics

We need to include a section. There's a lot of emerging literature on the power of this novel neuromodulatory technique. For examples, see:

Henderson, Jaimie M. (1 May 2009). "OPTOGENETIC NEUROMODULATION". Neurosurgery. 64 (5): 796–804. doi:10.1227/01.NEU.0000339171.87593.6A. PMID 19404144. {{cite journal}}: |access-date= requires |url= (help); Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
Reichova, I (2004 Oct). "Somatosensory corticothalamic projections: distinguishing drivers from modulators". Journal of neurophysiology. 92 (4): 2185–97. doi:10.1152/jn.00322.2004. PMID 15140908. {{cite journal}}: |access-date= requires |url= (help); Check |doi= value (help); Check date values in: |date= (help); Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help); zero width space character in |doi= at position 4 (help)
Casasanto, Daniel. "Neuromodulation and Neural Plasticity". Retrieved 10 January 2013.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Rob Hurt (talk • contribs)

Hmm. I have always understood "neuromodulation" to mean changes in activity produced by diffuse systems such as the serotonin and norepinephrine systems -- the use of the term for optogenetic effects seems novel. Also, as far as I can see, only the first of your sources uses the term that way. Looie496 (talk) 00:27, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's very possible that I'm wrong. I just started reading about optogenetics, and the first connection that I drew was to neuromodulation. So I just Googled "optogenetics neuromodulation," and I found several articles comparing to two. Try that search, and let me know what you think of the idea.

I realize now that the other two links were to sources that I wanted to look into so that I could improve the neuromodulation article. I don't know why I included them in that post. Rob Hurt (talk) 23:08, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My take on this is very similar to Looie's. It seems to me that this kind of content actually fits best at Optogenetics. I think of neuromodulation as being something that neuromodulator molecules do. Nitric oxide would be a good example. Here, it's more about using optogenetics as an experimental tool, either to study neuromodulation, or to modulate neural systems, or both. --Tryptofish (talk) 01:24, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My point was that (I think) that neuromodulation is something that neuromodulators and now optogenetics do. I guess the crux of the issue is whether or not neuromodulation is, by definition, exclusively an endogenous process, or if it can be accomplished through artificial means. I would argue that neuromodulation is neuromodulation, however it is induced. Thoughts? Rob Hurt (talk) 01:51, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think that opens up a can of worms. It isn't just "now, optogenetics". How about drugs, transcranial magnetic stimulation, deep brain stimulation, life experiences, a bop on the head? I think it's pretty well established that neurotransmission is limited to endogenous processes, so probably neuromodulation would be too. In other words, we aren't using the word "transmission" in its general dictionary sense, so neither are we using the word "modulation" that way. Optogenetics is more like an experimental tool. --Tryptofish (talk) 02:24, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"See also" section

Synaptic plasticity, synaptic pruning, retrograde signalling and paracrine activity in the CNS (like this example) all are dependent on neuromodulation, directly or indirectly. There exists also concept of gliotransmission, a rather distinct form of neuromodulation. 80.240.162.190 (talk) 18:13, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]