Plant cognition

Last updated

Plant cognition or plant gnosophysiology [1] is the study of the learning and memory of plants, exploring the idea it is not only animals that are capable of detecting, responding to and learning from internal and external stimuli in order to choose and make decisions that are most appropriate to ensure survival. Over recent years, experimental evidence for the cognitive nature of plants has grown rapidly and has revealed the extent to which plants can use senses and cognition to respond to their environments. [2] Some researchers claim that plants process information in similar ways as animal nervous systems. [3] [4] The implications are contested; whether plants have cognition or are simply animated objects.

Contents

History

The idea of cognition in plants was first explored by Charles Darwin in the late 1800s in the book The Power of Movement in Plants , co-authored with his son Francis. Using a neurological metaphor, he described the sensitivity of plant roots in proposing that the tip of roots acts like the brain of some lower animals. This involves reacting to sensation in order to determine their next movement [5] even though plants possess neither brains nor nerves. 

Irrespective of whether this neurological metaphor is correct or, more generally, the modern application of neuroscience terminology and concepts to plants is appropriate, the Darwinian idea of the root tip of plants functioning as a "brain-like" organ (together with the so-called "root-brain hypothesis") has experienced an ongoing revival in plant physiology. [6]

While plant "neurobiology" focuses on the physiological study of plants, modern plant cognition primarily applies a behavioural/ecological approach. Today, plant cognition is emerging as a field of research directed at experimentally testing the cognitive abilities of plants, including perception, learning processes, memory and consciousness. [7] This framework holds considerable implications for the way we perceive plants as it redefines the traditionally held boundary between animals and plants. [8]

Types

The study of plant cognition stems from the idea that plants are able to learn and adapt to their environment with only a stimulus, integration, and response system. While proven that plants do indeed lack a brain and the function of a conscious working nervous system, plants are still somehow capable of adapting to their environment and changing the integration pathway that would ultimately lead to how a plant “decides” to take response to a presented stimulus. [9] This raises issues of plant intelligence which is defined to be able to actively adapt to any stimulus presented to the species from the environment. [10] Plants are therefore clever in sensing the environmental stimulus e.g young sunflowers that face the sun for their growth.

Plant memory

In a study done by Monica Gagliano from the University of Western Australia’s Centre for Evolutionary Biology, Mimosa pudica (sensitive plant) was tested for habituation to repeatedly being dropped. After multiple drops, it was found that the plants eventually became habituated, opening their leaves more quickly compared to the first time they were dropped. [11] While the mechanism of this plant behavior is still not fully understood, it is strongly linked to changes in the flux within calcium channels. [12]

Another example of short term "memory" of a plant is found in the Venus flytrap, whose rapid closure is only triggered when at least two trap hairs are contacted within twenty seconds of one another. One hypothesis that explains how this occurs is by electrical signalling in plants. When one trap hair (mechanoreceptor) is triggered, a sub-threshold potential is reached. When two trap hairs are triggered, a threshold is reached, generating an action potential that closes the trap.[ citation needed ]

Associative learning

In 2016, a research team led by Monica Gagliano set out to test whether plants learn to respond to predicted events in their environment. The research demonstrated that plants were capable of learning the association between the occurrence of one event and the anticipation of another event (i.e. Pavlovian learning). [13] By experimentally demonstrating associative learning in plants, this finding qualified plants as proper subjects of cognitive research. [13] In this study, it was hypothesized that plants have the capability to associate one type of stimulus with another. To test this hypothesis, pea plants were exposed to two different stimuli. For the training phase, one group of pea plants was exposed to both wind and light, and the other group of plants was exposed to wind without light as a control. In the experimental phase, the plants were exposed only to the wind stimulus. The pea plants that were only ever exposed to wind without light grew away from the wind in both the training and experimental phases. In contrast, the pea plants exposed to both wind and light in the training phase exhibited growth toward a wind stimulus without the presence of light, demonstrating an apparent learned association between wind and light. The mechanism for this response is not entirely understood, though it is hypothesized that sensory inputs from mechanoreceptors and photoreceptors were somehow integrated within the plants. This explains why a non-light stimulus would trigger a growth response in the trained pea plant that is typically only triggered by the activation of photoreceptors. [14]

A replication study with a larger sample size, published in 2020, found no evidence of associative learning in pea plants. [15] However, it also failed to replicate the finding that light functioned effectively as an unconditioned stimulus. Pea plants in this study displayed only a slight trend rather than a reliable directional growth response towards previously presented light. The replicated experimental setup differed from the original in the presence of higher levels of ambient and reflected light, which may have randomised directional growth somewhat and prevented replication. [16]

Further research

In 2003, Anthony Trewavas led a study to see how the roots interact with one another and study their signal transduction methods. He was able to draw similarities between water stress signals in plants affecting developmental changes and signal transductions in neural networks causing responses in muscle. [17] Particularly, when plants are under water stress, there are abscisic acid dependent and independent effects on development. [18] This brings to light further possibilities of plant decision-making based on its environmental stresses. The integration of multiple chemical interactions show evidence of the complexity in these root systems. [19]

In 2012, Paco Calvo Garzón and Fred Keijzer speculated that plants exhibited structures equivalent to (1) action potentials (2) neurotransmitters and (3) synapses. Also, they stated that a large part of plant activity takes place underground, and that the notion of a 'root brain' was first mooted by Charles Darwin in 1880. Free movement was not necessarily a criterion of cognition, they held. The authors gave five conditions of minimal cognition in living beings, and concluded that 'plants are cognitive in a minimal, embodied sense that also applies to many animals and even bacteria.' [3] In 2017 biologists from University of Birmingham announced that they found a "decision-making center" in the root tip of dormant Arabidopsis seeds. [20]

In 2014, Anthony Trewavas released a book called Plant Behavior and Intelligence that highlighted a plant's cognition through its colonial-organization skills reflecting insect swarm behaviors. [21] This organizational skill reflects the plant's ability to interact with its surroundings to improve its survivability, and a plant's ability to identify exterior factors. Evidence of the plant's minimal cognition of spatial awareness can be seen in their root allocation relative to neighboring plants. [22] The organization of these roots have been found to originate from the root tip of plants. [23]

On the other hand, Dr. Crisp and his colleagues proposed a different view on plant memory in their review: plant memory could be advantageous under recurring and predictable stress; however, resetting or forgetting about the brief period of stress may be more beneficial for plants to grow as soon as the desirable condition returns. [24]

Affifi (2018) proposed an empirical approach to examining the ways plants model coordinate goal-based behaviour to environmental contingency as a way of understanding plant learning. [25] According to this author, associative learning will only demonstrate intelligence if it is seen as part of teleologically integrated activity. Otherwise, it can be reduced to mechanistic explanation.

Raja et al (2020) found that potted French bean plants, when planted 30 centimetres from a garden cane, would adjust their growth patterns to enable themselves to use the cane as a support in the future. Raja later stated that "If the movement of plants is controlled and affected by objects in their vicinity, then we are talking about more complex behaviours (rather than simple) reactions". Raja proposed that researchers should look for corresponding cognitive signatures. [26] [27]

In 2017 Yokawa, K. et al. found that, when exposed to anesthetics, a number of plants lost both their autonomous and touch-induced movements. Venus flytraps no longer generate electrical signals and their traps remain open when trigger hairs were touched, and growing pea tendrils stopped their autonomous movements and were immobilized in a curled shape. [28]

Criticism

The idea of plant cognition is a source of controversy.

Amadeo Alpi and 35 other scientists published an article in 2007 titled “Plant Neurobiology: No brain, No gain?” in Trends in Plant Science . [29] In this article, they argue that since there is no evidence for the presence of neurons in plants, the idea of plant neurobiology and cognition is unfounded and needs to be redefined. In response to this article, Francisco Calvo Garzón published an article in Plant Signaling and Behavior. [9] He states that, while plants do not have "neurons" as animals do, they do possess an information-processing system composed of cells. He argues that this system can be used as a basis for discussing the cognitive abilities of plants.

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Fear</span> Basic emotion induced by a perceived threat

Fear is an intensely unpleasant emotion in response to perceiving or recognizing a danger or threat. Fear causes psychological changes that may produce behavioral reactions such as mounting an aggressive response or fleeing the threat. Fear in human beings may occur in response to a certain stimulus occurring in the present, or in anticipation or expectation of a future threat perceived as a risk to oneself. The fear response arises from the perception of danger leading to confrontation with or escape from/avoiding the threat, which in extreme cases of fear can be a freeze response.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Learning</span> Process of acquiring new knowledge

Learning is the process of acquiring new understanding, knowledge, behaviors, skills, values, attitudes, and preferences. The ability to learn is possessed by humans, non-human animals, and some machines; there is also evidence for some kind of learning in certain plants. Some learning is immediate, induced by a single event, but much skill and knowledge accumulate from repeated experiences. The changes induced by learning often last a lifetime, and it is hard to distinguish learned material that seems to be "lost" from that which cannot be retrieved.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Animal cognition</span> Intelligence of non-human animals

Animal cognition encompasses the mental capacities of non-human animals including insect cognition. The study of animal conditioning and learning used in this field was developed from comparative psychology. It has also been strongly influenced by research in ethology, behavioral ecology, and evolutionary psychology; the alternative name cognitive ethology is sometimes used. Many behaviors associated with the term animal intelligence are also subsumed within animal cognition.

Social cognition is a topic within psychology that focuses on how people process, store, and apply information about other people and social situations. It focuses on the role that cognitive processes play in social interactions.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Fear conditioning</span> Behavioral paradigm in which organisms learn to predict aversive events

Pavlovian fear conditioning is a behavioral paradigm in which organisms learn to predict aversive events. It is a form of learning in which an aversive stimulus is associated with a particular neutral context or neutral stimulus, resulting in the expression of fear responses to the originally neutral stimulus or context. This can be done by pairing the neutral stimulus with an aversive stimulus. Eventually, the neutral stimulus alone can elicit the state of fear. In the vocabulary of classical conditioning, the neutral stimulus or context is the "conditional stimulus" (CS), the aversive stimulus is the "unconditional stimulus" (US), and the fear is the "conditional response" (CR).

Habituation is a form of non-associative learning in which a non-reinforced response to a stimulus decreases after repeated or prolonged presentations of that stimulus. For example, organisms may habituate to repeated sudden loud noises when they learn these have no consequences.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Hydrotropism</span>

Hydrotropism is a plant's growth response in which the direction of growth is determined by a stimulus or gradient in water concentration. A common example is a plant root growing in humid air bending toward a higher relative humidity level.

Sensitization is a non-associative learning process in which repeated administration of a stimulus results in the progressive amplification of a response. Sensitization often is characterized by an enhancement of response to a whole class of stimuli in addition to the one that is repeated. For example, repetition of a painful stimulus may make one more responsive to a loud noise.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Bird intelligence</span> Study of intelligence in birds

The difficulty of defining or measuring intelligence in non-human animals makes the subject difficult to study scientifically in birds. In general, birds have relatively large brains compared to their head size. Furthermore, bird brains have twice the neuron packing density of mammal brains, for higher overall efficiency. The visual and auditory senses are well developed in most species, though the tactile and olfactory senses are well realized only in a few groups. Birds communicate using visual signals as well as through the use of calls and song. The testing of intelligence in birds is therefore usually based on studying responses to sensory stimuli.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Executive functions</span> Cognitive processes necessary for control of behavior

In cognitive science and neuropsychology, executive functions are a set of cognitive processes that are necessary for the cognitive control of behavior: selecting and successfully monitoring behaviors that facilitate the attainment of chosen goals. Executive functions include basic cognitive processes such as attentional control, cognitive inhibition, inhibitory control, working memory, and cognitive flexibility. Higher-order executive functions require the simultaneous use of multiple basic executive functions and include planning and fluid intelligence.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Escape response</span>

Escape response, escape reaction, or escape behavior is a mechanism by which animals avoid potential predation. It consists of a rapid sequence of movements, or lack of movement, that position the animal in such a way that allows it to hide, freeze, or flee from the supposed predator. Often, an animal's escape response is representative of an instinctual defensive mechanism, though there is evidence that these escape responses may be learned or influenced by experience.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Emotion in animals</span> Research into similarities between non-human and human emotions

Emotion is defined as any mental experience with high intensity and high hedonic content. The existence and nature of emotions in non-human animals are believed to be correlated with those of humans and to have evolved from the same mechanisms. Charles Darwin was one of the first scientists to write about the subject, and his observational approach has since developed into a more robust, hypothesis-driven, scientific approach. Cognitive bias tests and learned helplessness models have shown feelings of optimism and pessimism in a wide range of species, including rats, dogs, cats, rhesus macaques, sheep, chicks, starlings, pigs, and honeybees. Jaak Panksepp played a large role in the study of animal emotion, basing his research on the neurological aspect. Mentioning seven core emotional feelings reflected through a variety of neuro-dynamic limbic emotional action systems, including seeking, fear, rage, lust, care, panic and play. Through brain stimulation and pharmacological challenges, such emotional responses can be effectively monitored.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Plant perception (physiology)</span> Plants interaction to environment

Plant perception is the ability of plants to sense and respond to the environment by adjusting their morphology and physiology. Botanical research has revealed that plants are capable of reacting to a broad range of stimuli, including chemicals, gravity, light, moisture, infections, temperature, oxygen and carbon dioxide concentrations, parasite infestation, disease, physical disruption, sound, and touch. The scientific study of plant perception is informed by numerous disciplines, such as plant physiology, ecology, and molecular biology.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Pain in crustaceans</span> Ethical debate

There is a scientific debate which questions whether crustaceans experience pain. It is a complex mental state, with a distinct perceptual quality but also associated with suffering, which is an emotional state. Because of this complexity, the presence of pain in an animal, or another human for that matter, cannot be determined unambiguously using observational methods, but the conclusion that animals experience pain is often inferred on the basis of likely presence of phenomenal consciousness which is deduced from comparative brain physiology as well as physical and behavioural reactions.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Effects of stress on memory</span> Overview of the effects of stress on memory

The effects of stress on memory include interference with a person's capacity to encode memory and the ability to retrieve information. Stimuli, like stress, improved memory when it was related to learning the subject. During times of stress, the body reacts by secreting stress hormones into the bloodstream. Stress can cause acute and chronic changes in certain brain areas which can cause long-term damage. Over-secretion of stress hormones most frequently impairs long-term delayed recall memory, but can enhance short-term, immediate recall memory. This enhancement is particularly relative in emotional memory. In particular, the hippocampus, prefrontal cortex and the amygdala are affected. One class of stress hormone responsible for negatively affecting long-term, delayed recall memory is the glucocorticoids (GCs), the most notable of which is cortisol. Glucocorticoids facilitate and impair the actions of stress in the brain memory process. Cortisol is a known biomarker for stress. Under normal circumstances, the hippocampus regulates the production of cortisol through negative feedback because it has many receptors that are sensitive to these stress hormones. However, an excess of cortisol can impair the ability of the hippocampus to both encode and recall memories. These stress hormones are also hindering the hippocampus from receiving enough energy by diverting glucose levels to surrounding muscles.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Memory</span> Faculty of mind to store and retrieve data

Memory is the faculty of the mind by which data or information is encoded, stored, and retrieved when needed. It is the retention of information over time for the purpose of influencing future action. If past events could not be remembered, it would be impossible for language, relationships, or personal identity to develop. Memory loss is usually described as forgetfulness or amnesia.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Pain in invertebrates</span> Contentious issue

Pain in invertebrates is a contentious issue. Although there are numerous definitions of pain, almost all involve two key components. First, nociception is required. This is the ability to detect noxious stimuli which evokes a reflex response that moves the entire animal, or the affected part of its body, away from the source of the stimulus. The concept of nociception does not necessarily imply any adverse, subjective feeling; it is a reflex action. The second component is the experience of "pain" itself, or suffering—i.e., the internal, emotional interpretation of the nociceptive experience. Pain is therefore a private, emotional experience. Pain cannot be directly measured in other animals, including other humans; responses to putatively painful stimuli can be measured, but not the experience itself. To address this problem when assessing the capacity of other species to experience pain, argument-by-analogy is used. This is based on the principle that if a non-human animal's responses to stimuli are similar to those of humans, it is likely to have had an analogous experience. It has been argued that if a pin is stuck in a chimpanzee's finger and they rapidly withdraw their hand, then argument-by-analogy implies that like humans, they felt pain. It has been questioned why the inference does not then follow that a cockroach experiences pain when it writhes after being stuck with a pin. This argument-by-analogy approach to the concept of pain in invertebrates has been followed by others.

Stefano Mancuso is an Italian botanist, professor of the Agriculture, Food, Environment and Forestry department at his alma mater, the University of Florence. He is the director of the International Laboratory of Plant Neurobiology, steering committee member of the Society of Plant Signaling and Behavior, editor-in-chief of the Plant Signaling & Behavior journal and a member of the Accademia dei Georgofili.

In plant biology, plant memory describes the ability of a plant to retain information from experienced stimuli and respond at a later time. For example, some plants have been observed to raise their leaves synchronously with the rising of the sun. Other plants produce new leaves in the spring after overwintering. Many experiments have been conducted into a plant's capacity for memory, including sensory, short-term, and long-term. The most basic learning and memory functions in animals have been observed in some plant species, and it has been proposed that the development of these basic memory mechanisms may have developed in an early organismal ancestor.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Monica Gagliano</span> Italian ecologist (born 1976)

Monica Gagliano is an ecologist known for expanding the field of biological research into the intelligence of plants.

References

  1. Michmizos, Dimitrios; Hilioti, Zoe (January 2019). "A roadmap towards a functional paradigm for learning & memory in plants". Journal of Plant Physiology. 232: 209–215. doi:10.1016/j.jplph.2018.11.002. PMID   30537608. S2CID   56178258.
  2. Gagliano M (November 2014). "In a green frame of mind: perspectives on the behavioural ecology and cognitive nature of plants". AoB Plants. 7. doi:10.1093/aobpla/plu075. PMC   4287690 . PMID   25416727.
  3. 1 2 Garzon P, Keijzer F (2011). "Plants: Adaptive behavior, root-brains, and minimal cognition" (PDF). Adaptive Behavior. 19 (3): 155–171. doi:10.1177/1059712311409446. S2CID   5060470.
  4. Karban R (July 2008). "Plant behaviour and communication". Ecology Letters. 11 (7): 727–39. Bibcode:2008EcolL..11..727K. doi: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2008.01183.x . PMID   18400016.
  5. Darwin, C. (1880). The Power of Movement in Plants. London: John Murray. Darwin Online  : "The course pursued by the radicle in penetrating the ground must be determined by the tip; hence it has acquired such diverse kinds of sensitiveness. It is hardly an exaggeration to say that the tip of the radicle thus endowed, and having the power of directing the movements of the adjoining parts, acts like the brain of one of the lower animals; the brain being seated within the anterior end of the body, receiving impressions from the sense-organs, and directing the several movements."
  6. "ABOUT US - Plant Signaling and Behavior". Plant Signaling and Behavior. Retrieved 2017-03-25.
  7. Pollan M (23 December 2013). "The Intelligent Plant". michaelpollan.com. The New Yorker. Retrieved 2019-03-08.
  8. "Monica Gagliano - the science of plant behaviour and consciousness". Monica Gagliano - the science of plant behaviour and consciousness. Retrieved 2017-03-25.
  9. 1 2 Garzón FC (July 2007). "The quest for cognition in plant neurobiology". Plant Signaling & Behavior. 2 (4): 208–11. Bibcode:2007PlSiB...2..208C. doi:10.4161/psb.2.4.4470. PMC   2634130 . PMID   19516990.
  10. Stenhouse D (1974). "The Evolution of Intelligence".{{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  11. Gagliano M, Renton M, Depczynski M, Mancuso S (May 2014). "Experience teaches plants to learn faster and forget slower in environments where it matters". Oecologia. 175 (1): 63–72. Bibcode:2014Oecol.175...63G. doi:10.1007/s00442-013-2873-7. PMID   24390479. S2CID   5038227.
  12. Cahill J, Bao T, Maloney M, Kolenosky C (June 4, 2012). "Mechanical leaf damage causes localized, but not systemic, changes in leaf movement behavior of the Sensitive Plant, Mimosa pudica". Botany. doi:10.1139/cjb-2012-0131.
  13. 1 2 Gagliano M, Vyazovskiy VV, Borbély AA, Grimonprez M, Depczynski M (December 2016). "Learning by Association in Plants". Scientific Reports. 6 (1): 38427. Bibcode:2016NatSR...638427G. doi:10.1038/srep38427. PMC   5133544 . PMID   27910933.
  14. Mawphlang OI, Kharshiing EV (July 11, 2017). "Photoreceptor Mediated Plant Growth Responses: Implications for Photoreceptor Engineering toward Improved Performance in Crops". Frontiers in Plant Science. 8: 1181. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2017.01181 . PMC   5504655 . PMID   28744290.
  15. Markel K (June 2020). "Lack of evidence for associative learning in pea plants". eLife. 9: e57614. doi: 10.7554/eLife.57614 . PMC   7311169 . PMID   32573434.
  16. Gagliano, Monica; Vyazovskiy, Vladyslav V; Borbély, Alexander A; Depczynski, Martial; Radford, Ben (2020-09-10). Lee, Daeyeol; Hardtke, Christian S (eds.). "Comment on 'Lack of evidence for associative learning in pea plants'". eLife. 9: e61141. doi: 10.7554/eLife.61141 . ISSN   2050-084X. PMC   7556858 . PMID   32909941.
  17. Trewavas A (July 2003). "Aspects of plant intelligence". Annals of Botany. 92 (1): 1–20. doi: 10.1093/aob/mcg101 . PMC   4243628 . PMID   12740212.
  18. Shinozaki K (2000). "Molecular responses to dehydration and low temperature: differences and cross-talk between two stress signaling pathways". Current Opinion in Plant Biology. 3 (3): 217–223. doi:10.1016/s1369-5266(00)00067-4. PMID   10837265.
  19. McCully ME (June 1999). "ROOTS IN SOIL: Unearthing the Complexities of Roots and Their Rhizospheres". Annual Review of Plant Physiology and Plant Molecular Biology. 50: 695–718. doi:10.1146/annurev.arplant.50.1.695. PMID   15012224.
  20. Topham AT, Taylor RE, Yan D, Nambara E, Johnston IG, Bassel GW (June 2017). "Temperature variability is integrated by a spatially embedded decision-making center to break dormancy in Arabidopsis seeds". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 114 (25): 6629–6634. Bibcode:2017PNAS..114.6629T. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1704745114 . PMC   5488954 . PMID   28584126.
  21. Trewavas 2014, p. 95-96.
  22. Calvo Garzón P, Keijzer F (June 2011). "Plants: Adaptive behavior, root-brains, and minimal cognition" (PDF). Adaptive Behavior. 19 (3): 155–71. doi:10.1177/1059712311409446. S2CID   5060470.
  23. Trewavas 2014, p. 140.
  24. Crisp PA, Ganguly D, Eichten SR, Borevitz JO, Pogson BJ (February 2016). "Reconsidering plant memory: Intersections between stress recovery, RNA turnover, and epigenetics". Science Advances. 2 (2): e1501340. Bibcode:2016SciA....2E1340C. doi:10.1126/sciadv.1501340. PMC   4788475 . PMID   26989783.
  25. Affifi R (2018). "Deweyan Psychology in Plant Intelligence Research: Transforming Stimulus and Response". In Baluska F, Gagliano M, Witzany G (eds.). Memory and Learning in Plants. Signaling and Communication in Plants. Cham.: Springer. pp. 17–33. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-75596-0_2. ISBN   978-3-319-75595-3.
  26. "Plants: Are they conscious?". BBC Science Focus Magazine. 5 February 2021. Retrieved 6 February 2021.
  27. Raja, Vicente; Silva, Paula L.; Holghoomi, Roghaieh; Calvo, Paco (December 2020). "The dynamics of plant nutation". Scientific Reports. 10 (1): 19465. Bibcode:2020NatSR..1019465R. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-76588-z . PMC   7655864 . PMID   33173160.
  28. Yokawa, K; Kagenishi, T; Pavlovič, A; Gall, S; Weiland, M; Mancuso, S; Baluška, F (11 December 2017). "Anaesthetics stop diverse plant organ movements, affect endocytic vesicle recycling and ROS homeostasis, and block action potentials in Venus flytraps". Annals of Botany. 122 (5): 747–756. doi:10.1093/aob/mcx155. PMC   6215046 . PMID   29236942.
  29. Alpi A, Amrhein N, Bertl A, Blatt MR, Blumwald E, Cervone F, et al. (April 2007). "Plant neurobiology: no brain, no gain?". Trends in Plant Science. 12 (4): 135–6. doi:10.1016/j.tplants.2007.03.002. PMID   17368081.

Further reading