Do Plants Respond to Pain?

[Xamonas Chegwé]

I'm fairly certain we can say that mammals and birds can experience a sensation we can legitimately call pain. I'm less certain that a nematode can experience pain, and convinced that it is not an appropriate label to apply to plants.

...or women. ...or darkies. Obviously...

[pErvinalia]

Pain is a central Nervous System phenomenon - and plants don't have ANY nervous system - central or otherwise.

I think this is just speculation, unless you have something specific to back it up. You might very well be right, but what is your reasoning for saying it is a "central" nervous system phenomenon as opposed to one that might be distributed?

Regarding plants not having any nervous system, this is just definitional semantics at this point. As I said, there is serious research (as opposed to speculation ) being done in this field, and there is some evidence to suggest that some cells might act like neurons. This is the first google link that came up: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2884105/

Here's the abstract, not that I understand a word of it:

Plant cells and neurons share several similarities, including non-centrosomal microtubules, motile post-Golgi organelles, separated both spatially/structurally and functionally from the Golgi apparatus and involved in vesicular endocytic recycling, as well as cell-cell adhesion domains based on the actin/myosin cytoskeleton which serve for cell-cell communication. Tip-growing plant cells such as root hairs and pollen tubes also resemble neurons extending their axons. Recently, surprising discoveries have been made with respect to the molecular basis of neurodegenerative disorders known as Hereditary Spastic Paraplegias and tip-growth of root hairs. All these advances are briefly discussed in the context of other similarities between plant cells and neurons.

[JimC]

A structural resemblance between cells does not imply a functional resemblance, the function in question being the ability to distribute electrically-based signals in a highly organised manner.

[pErvinalia]

Well I'm not going to do all your work for you. That was just the first google hit. Like I said earlier there is a serious area of research concerning the functional similarity between certain plant cells and neurons.

[JimC]

Well I'm not going to do all your work for you. That was just the first google hit. Like I said earlier there is a serious area of research concerning the functional similarity between certain plant cells and neurons.

Electrical signals in nervous systems are not hard to detect. If there were similar signals travelling around plants, I'm sure they would have been detected by now.

[pErvinalia]

They have. I imagine the OP article probably mentions that (I didn't read it). I saw an article on this very thing about a week ago.

[Xamonas Chegwé]

Pain is a central Nervous System phenomenon - and plants don't have ANY nervous system - central or otherwise.

I think this is just speculation, unless you have something specific to back it up. You might very well be right, but what is your reasoning for saying it is a "central" nervous system phenomenon as opposed to one that might be distributed?

Could you point me in the direction of an example of a "distributed" nervous system? Or even define how such a thing would function?

Regarding plants not having any nervous system, this is just definitional semantics at this point.

No it isn't. It's the current biological standpoint. Plants have nothing that biologists recognise as nerves.

As I said, there is serious research (as opposed to speculation ) being done in this field, and there is some evidence to suggest that some cells might act like neurons. This is the first google link that came up: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2884105/

Here's the abstract, not that I understand a word of it:

Plant cells and neurons share several similarities, including non-centrosomal microtubules, motile post-Golgi organelles, separated both spatially/structurally and functionally from the Golgi apparatus and involved in vesicular endocytic recycling, as well as cell-cell adhesion domains based on the actin/myosin cytoskeleton which serve for cell-cell communication. Tip-growing plant cells such as root hairs and pollen tubes also resemble neurons extending their axons. Recently, surprising discoveries have been made with respect to the molecular basis of neurodegenerative disorders known as Hereditary Spastic Paraplegias and tip-growth of root hairs. All these advances are briefly discussed in the context of other similarities between plant cells and neurons.

Quoting something that you "don't understand a word of" is not an argument! It is unsurprising that nerve cells resemble tip-growing plant cells in some respects, given that both propagate through a substrate in a similar manner. It has also been known for a long while that there is chemical transfer of information between plant cells - however, it is more akin to a hormonal response than a neuronal one in terms of speed. The quoted article, while making physiological comparisons, makes no claims of functional equivalence. You are rather clutching at straws by quoting it IMO.

While I would be excited to hear any genuine evidence for intelligent vegetables, I have yet to encounter any. Although there are said to be a few cabbages in the Houses of Parliament which are almost coherent.

[pErvinalia]

I explained all that to Jim. Do I have to do it again? Do your own homework. You are the one who is making absolutist statement short of evidence and reasoning.

[Xamonas Chegwé]

I explained all that to Jim. Do I have to do it again? Do your own homework. You are the one who is making absolutist statement short of evidence and reasoning.

"Explained"? You just quoted something that makes no sense to you that you claim backs up your argument and hinted at "serious research".

And I made no absolutist statements. I said, "Plants have nothing that biologists recognise as nerves." I am sure that, should the serious research bear (intelligent) fruit, then botanists will amend their thinking. Until then, the consensus is that plants do not have nerves. That's how science works. A few guys testing an hypothesis doesn't overwrite the accepted model until it is proven.

[pErvinalia]

I explained all that to Jim. Do I have to do it again? Do your own homework. You are the one who is making absolutist statement short of evidence and reasoning.

"Explained"? You just quoted something that makes no sense to you that you claim backs up your argument and hinted at "serious research".

Perhaps you ought to reread the thread. I explained that that was just the first hit on google. There's fucking tonnes more of this stuff. I'm not the one making absolutist statements. That's you. YOu need to back them up with either evidence and/or reasoning.

And I made no absolutist statements.

Bullshit. Reread what you wrote. You made a number of absolutist statements.

I said, "Plants have nothing that biologists recognise as nerves." I am sure that, should the serious research bear (intelligent) fruit, then botanists will amend their thinking. Until then, the consensus is that plants do not have nerves. That's how science works. A few guys testing an hypothesis doesn't overwrite the accepted model until it is proven.

All I'm saying is that the speculation of a couple of armchair experts is not an appropriate level of discourse to prove the view you hold. I'm trying to tell you that there is serious research in this area, and opposition to it is often, as displayed by you two, based on folk-notions of classification (i.e. semantics).

Here's some links to broaden your view. Enjoy:

Plant neurobiology is a newly focused field of plant
biology research that aims to understand how plants
process the information they obtain from their environ-
ment to develop, prosper and reproduce optimally. The
behavior plants exhibit is coordinated across the whole
organism by some form of integrated signaling, com-
munication and response system. This system includes
long-distance electrical signals, vesicle-mediated trans-
port of auxin in specialized vascular tissues, and produc-
tion of chemicals known to be neuronal in animals. Here
we review how plant neurobiology is being directed
toward discovering the mechanisms of signaling in
whole plants, as well as among plants and their
neighbors.
....
In animal cell biology, neurons are excitable animal cells that
propagate electrical action potentials. Neurons are polarized and
equipped with voltage-gated channels and a vesicular trafficking
apparatus that is sensitive to calcium signals, mediated via
synaptotagmins, induced by electrical signals.
This transfer of
signals occurs at electro-chemical synapses, allowing direct cellcell
coupling. At the molecular level, plants have many, if not all the
components found in the animal neuronal system. There are action
potentials (see Box 2), voltage-gated channels, a vesicular trafficking
apparatus sensitive to calcium signals, including synaptotagmins
and other components of the neuronal cell infrastructure. Plants use
plasmodesmata for direct cell-cell transport; these cytoplasmic
connections have a poorly described role in electrical coupling
between adjacent polarized plant cells [112]. It is also hypothesized
that plant cells can become specialized for vesicle trafficking mediated,
polarized hormonal transport.

Plant neurobiology: an integrated view of plant signaling - http://download.bioon.com.cn/view/uploa ... attach.pdf

The review tracks the history of electrical long-distance signals from the first recordings of action potentials (APs) in sensitive Dionea and Mimosa plants at the end of the 19th century to their re-discovery in common plants in the 1950's, from the first intracellular recordings of APs in giant algal cells to the identification of the ionic mechanisms by voltage-clamp experiments. An important aspect is the comparison of plant and animal signals and the resulting theoretical implications that accompany the field from the first assignment of the term “action potential” to plants to recent discussions of terms like plant neurobiology.

Historical Overview on Plant Neurobiology - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2633693/

[pErvinalia]

Here's a good article on a wide range of plant "intelligence" topics, although it is only a 'popular science' article. Essentially what's going on at the moment is a semantic rethink of what intelligence and awareness mean exactly. It's a new field. Will be interesting to follow what it comes up with over time.

New research on plant intelligence may forever change how you think about plants

[rainbow]

I'm fairly certain we can say that mammals and birds can experience a sensation we can legitimately call pain. I'm less certain that a nematode can experience pain, and convinced that it is not an appropriate label to apply to plants.

...or women. ...or darkies. Obviously...

You come visit us in our village.
We have you for dinner.

[Xamonas Chegwé]

Rev, there is nothing like consensus in the biological community for Plant Neurobiology. It is a fringe study that has thrown up some interesting parallels but it is NOT accepted science and definitely has NOT even come close to proving neural networks in plants, let alone anything analogous to intelligence. Even the name "Plant Neurobiology" is shunned by the mainstream community.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plant_neur ... urobiology

Like many things in science, you can always find a crackpot making outlandish claims based on limited research. But it is not accepted science.

[HomerJay]

Does anyone remember this rubbish?

[Svartalf]

I don't remember if that's the rubbish I read by that author... I liked it at the time, but I was a kid and tended to believe everything I read.