We would like to share our suggestions for the new nomenclature. Because of our research interests, we are particularly focused on the pallium. Basically, our main position is summarized in three points:
1. If we decide to change names, we should change as few as possible. Too many changes will cause more confusion in the literature and would be not only difficult for established avian scientists, but a nightmare for non-avian researchers, new students, and others who tend to forget new information.
2. We should change only the names of structures for which we can all agree. During the forum, we should not fight over whose data are better. If we need to fight over a new name, why not leave it as it is now until we have more information / consensus?
3. If we need to change a term, the change should be as simple as possible. But at the same time, it should have some logic to it, or characteristics that make the term easier to remember.
Of all the proposals, we are in agreement more with Reiner-Csillag (and portions of Striedter-Perkel), mostly for conserving abbreviations and fewer drastic changes. We believe the original impetus for nomenclature revision was the cringe we all felt when hearing the "-striatum" suffix for avian telencephalic structures, along with having to include in all our articles that we really didn't mean "striatum", that it was a holdover from earlier times. With this in mind, nomenclature change has as its primary goal the removal of this source of comparative errors. Outside this consideration, there should be few other changes needed at this time. Based on these points, our basic proposal is to replace the suffix -"sriatum" with "-pallium" for most telencephalic structures, leaving the term archistriatum as it is now.
Thus, our suggestions would follow along the lines of: Neostriatum --> Neopallium, Ectostriatum --> Ectopallium, Hyperstriatum --> Hyperpallium, Lamina Hyperstriatica --> Lamina Hyperpallium (?), and Archistriatum --> No change.
We have attached a table (adapted from Reiner-Csillag's) that summarizes our position. A few brief comments are given below to explain our rationale.
We do not have a strong opinion about most other subpallial structures. We believe that the same principles should be maintained. We do, however, offer the following in this regard:
Finally, we would like to reiterate our sincere gratitude to Erich and people in his lab for working on this difficult task. Looking forward to seeing everyone at the conference!
Toru Shimizu & Scott Husband