Talk:Vomeronasal organ

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

These two statements are quite contradictory:

Although some scientists believe the vomeronasal organ is specialized for detection of pheromones, some pheromones are detected by the regular olfactory organ, and the vomeronasal organ detects other compounds in addition to pheromones. Thus, its function is still somewhat mysterious.

In humans it is nonfunctional and regresses before birth, as is the case with some other animals, including cetaceans, some bats, and apes. In adult humans there is no neural connection between the organ and the brain.

-- EmperorBMA / ブリイアン 22:39, 29 Mar 2004 (UTC)

• They're not contradictory unless you assume the first applies to humans, cetaceans, some bats and apes. As opposed to, say, cats. - Nunh-huh 22:43, 29 Mar 2004 (UTC)

• Ah. Nevertheless, some scientists believe that it is functional in adult humans, so I reworded it to say such and to say it less ambiguously (in my eyes). -- EmperorBMA / ブリイアン 18:44, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I re-re-worded it so it includes a discussion of the VMO's role in organisms in which it's important. Humans are, in this case, a footnote, not the main story. - Nunh-huh 19:17, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Cool, I added a few more notes and it seems balanced. -- EmperorBMA / ブリイアン 20:22, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

According to my anatomy prof in med school, as well as my comparative anatomy textbook, humans have no vomeronasal organ, so the question of whether it's functional or not in adult humans is sort of moot according to those sources. I did dissect my cadaver carefully and checked about 15 others; no sign of anything that could be a vomeronasal organ. It might be worth citing the scientists who believe that adult humans have a functioning VO. -Ikkyu2 08:11, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] What is the origin?

What is the embryonic origin of this organ? Where does it come from? They eyes starts as some bulbs from the brain, but what about Vomeronasal organ?

A: It develops from the nasal (olfactory) placode. I added that to the article, which I also rearranged to improve flow. I also straightened out information at the end that erroneously implied that the potential existence of the organ in humans is a matter of "belief". It's a matter of data, and most (possibly all) of the peer-reviewed data say humans don't have one. Which makes sense, since the other apes don't have one either.