1 00:00:03,040 --> 00:00:05,360 Speaker 1: Welcome to Stuff to Blow Your Mind production of My 2 00:00:05,480 --> 00:00:15,280 Speaker 1: Heart Radio. Hey, welcome to Stuff to Blow Your Mind. 3 00:00:15,440 --> 00:00:18,119 Speaker 1: My name is Robert Lamb and I'm Joe McCormick, and 4 00:00:18,160 --> 00:00:20,920 Speaker 1: we're back for part two of our series on the 5 00:00:21,280 --> 00:00:25,880 Speaker 1: possible evidence for memory and learning in plants. Now, this 6 00:00:25,960 --> 00:00:27,520 Speaker 1: is one of our series where if you haven't listened 7 00:00:27,520 --> 00:00:29,320 Speaker 1: to part one yet, you really should go back and 8 00:00:29,320 --> 00:00:31,240 Speaker 1: do that one first, since we clear a lot of 9 00:00:31,240 --> 00:00:33,080 Speaker 1: the ground for what we're gonna be talking about today. 10 00:00:33,080 --> 00:00:34,080 Speaker 1: This is one that I think is going to be 11 00:00:34,159 --> 00:00:36,360 Speaker 1: kind of hard to jump in in the middle. But 12 00:00:37,000 --> 00:00:40,160 Speaker 1: in that past episode for a refresher, we talked about 13 00:00:40,200 --> 00:00:42,720 Speaker 1: a plant called known as the sensitive plant or the 14 00:00:42,800 --> 00:00:46,680 Speaker 1: humble plant, the shame plant that touched me, not scientific name, 15 00:00:46,720 --> 00:00:50,159 Speaker 1: Mimosa pudica, which is one of the few plants in 16 00:00:50,200 --> 00:00:53,559 Speaker 1: the world that displays rapid movement or movement on the 17 00:00:53,600 --> 00:00:57,960 Speaker 1: time scale usually associated with animal life. And we talked 18 00:00:57,960 --> 00:01:02,080 Speaker 1: about experiments from san that appeared to show a form 19 00:01:02,120 --> 00:01:06,600 Speaker 1: of rudimentary learning called habituation in these plants, where, for example, 20 00:01:06,640 --> 00:01:10,000 Speaker 1: if you take a potted Mimosa putica and you drop 21 00:01:10,080 --> 00:01:12,959 Speaker 1: it the exact same way over many training sessions, it 22 00:01:13,000 --> 00:01:16,200 Speaker 1: will adapt so that it no longer closes its leaves 23 00:01:16,240 --> 00:01:19,600 Speaker 1: defensively in response to a drop, but it will still 24 00:01:19,640 --> 00:01:22,600 Speaker 1: close its leaves in response to other types of disturbance. 25 00:01:23,160 --> 00:01:25,800 Speaker 1: So if this type of finding holds up to scrutiny 26 00:01:25,800 --> 00:01:28,560 Speaker 1: and replication, it would be evidence that even though this 27 00:01:28,600 --> 00:01:32,680 Speaker 1: plant has no brain, it has some kind of internal 28 00:01:32,720 --> 00:01:36,880 Speaker 1: mechanism for learning from experience in order to maximize its fitness. 29 00:01:37,520 --> 00:01:40,600 Speaker 1: And of course, at some level learning requires a form 30 00:01:40,640 --> 00:01:42,920 Speaker 1: of what we would think of as memory. In order 31 00:01:42,959 --> 00:01:45,320 Speaker 1: to learn from the past, you have to have some 32 00:01:45,400 --> 00:01:48,640 Speaker 1: way of being changed by the past, to store the 33 00:01:48,720 --> 00:01:52,840 Speaker 1: past within you in an organized way that can influence 34 00:01:52,880 --> 00:01:56,240 Speaker 1: future behavior, which of course we do with our brains. 35 00:01:56,880 --> 00:02:00,920 Speaker 1: But if plants in some cases also do this, uh, 36 00:02:01,000 --> 00:02:03,960 Speaker 1: it's a great question what is the mechanism? They obviously 37 00:02:03,960 --> 00:02:07,360 Speaker 1: don't have brains and h Finally, in the last episode, 38 00:02:08,200 --> 00:02:12,519 Speaker 1: we tried to disentangle different claims about so called plant cognition, 39 00:02:12,560 --> 00:02:16,400 Speaker 1: which is a controversial concept. We noted that memory is 40 00:02:16,480 --> 00:02:18,600 Speaker 1: not the same thing as reasoning, which is not the 41 00:02:18,639 --> 00:02:21,160 Speaker 1: same as consciousness, which is not the same as emotion 42 00:02:21,320 --> 00:02:25,800 Speaker 1: or communication, or or or or or plant uh. Like 43 00:02:25,880 --> 00:02:29,600 Speaker 1: psychic plant mind reading, which some people have also claimed 44 00:02:29,600 --> 00:02:34,200 Speaker 1: evidence of without without much justification, and with the final 45 00:02:34,240 --> 00:02:36,520 Speaker 1: point being that evidence for one of these traits is 46 00:02:36,560 --> 00:02:39,880 Speaker 1: not necessarily evidence for others. But today we're gonna look 47 00:02:39,919 --> 00:02:43,160 Speaker 1: at some more research that has been interpreted as showing 48 00:02:43,200 --> 00:02:46,400 Speaker 1: plant memory or plant cognition in the past decade, as 49 00:02:46,440 --> 00:02:49,799 Speaker 1: well as some reaction and criticism to that. Yeah. Now, 50 00:02:49,840 --> 00:02:53,080 Speaker 1: in the last episode I mentioned some music. I mentioned 51 00:02:53,080 --> 00:02:57,960 Speaker 1: both Celtic Frost's metal album to Megatherian uh and mort 52 00:02:57,960 --> 00:03:01,560 Speaker 1: Garson's plant Asia, and but both were kind of off 53 00:03:01,600 --> 00:03:04,440 Speaker 1: hand references, uh. And afterwards I was looking into it 54 00:03:04,480 --> 00:03:05,840 Speaker 1: a little bit more and I was the first of 55 00:03:05,840 --> 00:03:09,800 Speaker 1: all delighted to see that Plantasia is more widely regarded 56 00:03:09,840 --> 00:03:13,240 Speaker 1: as a classic than I thought it was. Um. I 57 00:03:13,280 --> 00:03:16,000 Speaker 1: was familiar with more Garson's work, and UM, you know, 58 00:03:16,040 --> 00:03:19,600 Speaker 1: I was delighted that his work had recently been reissued 59 00:03:19,639 --> 00:03:22,200 Speaker 1: by Sacred Bones Records. I think I had to make 60 00:03:22,240 --> 00:03:26,320 Speaker 1: do with some some uh, some some bad copies back 61 00:03:26,360 --> 00:03:28,720 Speaker 1: in the day. Sorry, we refresh on the more on 62 00:03:28,720 --> 00:03:31,800 Speaker 1: the more Garson album, It was so more Garson. It 63 00:03:31,880 --> 00:03:36,280 Speaker 1: was a pioneer of electronic music and synth work, and 64 00:03:36,760 --> 00:03:39,560 Speaker 1: he had a few different monikers that he used. He 65 00:03:39,640 --> 00:03:42,960 Speaker 1: did some like some cult sounding sounds and so forth. 66 00:03:43,000 --> 00:03:45,760 Speaker 1: But he also put out this album Plantasia, which was 67 00:03:45,920 --> 00:03:49,400 Speaker 1: music to be played for your plants very much. Jumping 68 00:03:49,400 --> 00:03:54,360 Speaker 1: in on this, uh the Secret Lives of Plants um. Uh, well, 69 00:03:54,400 --> 00:03:57,200 Speaker 1: I don't want to say hysteria, will say um popularity 70 00:03:57,280 --> 00:04:02,200 Speaker 1: during the nineties seventies and uh as as we discussed 71 00:04:02,240 --> 00:04:04,320 Speaker 1: in that episode, and we'll discuss a little bit here. Yeah, 72 00:04:04,600 --> 00:04:06,800 Speaker 1: this this album is not actually going to help your 73 00:04:06,800 --> 00:04:08,800 Speaker 1: plants out any of your plants. Do not care about 74 00:04:08,840 --> 00:04:11,920 Speaker 1: more Garson's discography as much as you do or I do. 75 00:04:13,280 --> 00:04:16,919 Speaker 1: But it is a very nice album for human listeners. Sure. 76 00:04:17,480 --> 00:04:19,240 Speaker 1: And hey, as I said in the last episode, even 77 00:04:19,279 --> 00:04:21,520 Speaker 1: if it doesn't actually do anything for your plans, which 78 00:04:21,560 --> 00:04:24,359 Speaker 1: it probably doesn't, no reason not to play it for 79 00:04:24,400 --> 00:04:26,880 Speaker 1: your plants. I mean that sounds fun. Yeah, So I 80 00:04:26,920 --> 00:04:28,360 Speaker 1: was delighted to see that, even if there was a 81 00:04:28,360 --> 00:04:32,240 Speaker 1: New York Times article about uh, this album's popularity and 82 00:04:32,279 --> 00:04:35,360 Speaker 1: it's increased popularity I think in part due to the reissue, 83 00:04:35,400 --> 00:04:37,560 Speaker 1: but also they were making the point due to the 84 00:04:37,880 --> 00:04:41,599 Speaker 1: resurgence and interest in house plants during the pandemic. You know, 85 00:04:42,600 --> 00:04:44,280 Speaker 1: I don't. I don't know about about you, but I 86 00:04:44,320 --> 00:04:46,080 Speaker 1: think I don't know if we actually picked up that. No, 87 00:04:46,240 --> 00:04:48,120 Speaker 1: we we did pick up more house plants. I think 88 00:04:48,120 --> 00:04:50,240 Speaker 1: some of them were gifted to us. But we have 89 00:04:50,320 --> 00:04:52,960 Speaker 1: all sorts of little succulents like hanging out all over 90 00:04:53,000 --> 00:04:55,520 Speaker 1: the house that we accumulated over the past couple of years. 91 00:04:55,600 --> 00:04:57,320 Speaker 1: I don't know the name for them. Rachel has some 92 00:04:57,400 --> 00:05:00,440 Speaker 1: kind of house plant that repeatedly produces. It's like, I 93 00:05:00,440 --> 00:05:02,000 Speaker 1: guess stalks will come off of it, and you can 94 00:05:02,080 --> 00:05:04,680 Speaker 1: separate them and turn them into their own new potted 95 00:05:04,760 --> 00:05:07,359 Speaker 1: version of that same plant, kind of like getting a 96 00:05:07,360 --> 00:05:11,960 Speaker 1: grimlin wet or something. Uh. Just you know, they repopulate 97 00:05:11,960 --> 00:05:13,919 Speaker 1: and go all over the place. So I think we 98 00:05:14,000 --> 00:05:19,240 Speaker 1: have had at least proliferation of existing plants. Yeah, and 99 00:05:19,240 --> 00:05:21,919 Speaker 1: and house plants are great, no doubt about it. But 100 00:05:22,040 --> 00:05:24,360 Speaker 1: at this on the other hand, I was looking around 101 00:05:24,400 --> 00:05:25,960 Speaker 1: for stuff on this, and I was kind of taken 102 00:05:26,000 --> 00:05:28,719 Speaker 1: aback and just how much content there is out there 103 00:05:29,080 --> 00:05:32,000 Speaker 1: on the Internet regarding playing music for plants. And while 104 00:05:32,040 --> 00:05:35,080 Speaker 1: I didn't find anyone actually exalting the benefits of playing 105 00:05:35,640 --> 00:05:40,160 Speaker 1: Celtic frost for your philodendrons. There are pages talking about 106 00:05:40,200 --> 00:05:44,360 Speaker 1: the merits of different musical genres, alleged merits, I should say, 107 00:05:45,000 --> 00:05:48,320 Speaker 1: for plant growth, including the idea that heavy metal can 108 00:05:48,360 --> 00:05:51,919 Speaker 1: improve plant mass and fruit taste, provided that it's not 109 00:05:52,040 --> 00:05:56,320 Speaker 1: too noisy or presumably too heavy beautiful. What is the 110 00:05:56,360 --> 00:06:01,039 Speaker 1: best thrash metal for your plants? I've to assume downstream 111 00:06:01,040 --> 00:06:03,000 Speaker 1: of this some people who believe in this really that 112 00:06:03,080 --> 00:06:05,800 Speaker 1: they think their plants have individual tastes, like my plants 113 00:06:05,839 --> 00:06:08,680 Speaker 1: really love motor Head. Yeah. I mean, I think we 114 00:06:08,760 --> 00:06:12,200 Speaker 1: said before death metal bands need to get in on 115 00:06:12,279 --> 00:06:16,279 Speaker 1: beans and realize that in the folklore a cannon being 116 00:06:16,400 --> 00:06:20,279 Speaker 1: plant plants are closely associated with the world of the dead, 117 00:06:20,600 --> 00:06:25,159 Speaker 1: and this should be embraced. Sure, now, all this being said, 118 00:06:25,360 --> 00:06:28,000 Speaker 1: uh yeah, not not every source popping up on the 119 00:06:28,040 --> 00:06:30,240 Speaker 1: subject is something that that I would take to the 120 00:06:30,279 --> 00:06:33,800 Speaker 1: bank at all. But plants do produce sound vibrations and 121 00:06:33,920 --> 00:06:37,880 Speaker 1: can respond to sound vibrations. Now I got interested in 122 00:06:37,920 --> 00:06:42,080 Speaker 1: this idea of thinking about plants responding to sound, and 123 00:06:42,320 --> 00:06:44,560 Speaker 1: I started wondering about a question. I think this is 124 00:06:44,560 --> 00:06:47,440 Speaker 1: always something good to wonder about when you hear a 125 00:06:47,560 --> 00:06:50,480 Speaker 1: claim about a life form. You think, what would be 126 00:06:50,520 --> 00:06:55,240 Speaker 1: the original ecological relevance of this, like in the actual environment, 127 00:06:55,320 --> 00:06:56,840 Speaker 1: not in a you know, in a house or a 128 00:06:56,920 --> 00:07:00,320 Speaker 1: lab or something. Why would this kind of stim llist 129 00:07:00,360 --> 00:07:02,800 Speaker 1: be relevant? So I looked it up in the scientific 130 00:07:02,800 --> 00:07:05,360 Speaker 1: literature and I did find some interesting examples. One of 131 00:07:05,400 --> 00:07:10,160 Speaker 1: them was a paper published in ecologiaen by Heidi M 132 00:07:10,200 --> 00:07:14,080 Speaker 1: Apple and Reginald B. Cocroft called Plants respond to leaf 133 00:07:14,200 --> 00:07:19,360 Speaker 1: vibrations caused by insect herbivore chewing. And this study found 134 00:07:19,480 --> 00:07:23,200 Speaker 1: that if you reproduce the sounds made by a caterpillar 135 00:07:23,360 --> 00:07:26,680 Speaker 1: feeding on a leaf and then expose those sounds to 136 00:07:26,880 --> 00:07:30,360 Speaker 1: what's known as a thail cress plant, the plant will 137 00:07:30,480 --> 00:07:35,960 Speaker 1: respond by producing higher levels of glucosinolate and anthocyanin, which 138 00:07:36,000 --> 00:07:39,440 Speaker 1: are defensive chemicals. So if this finding is sound, then 139 00:07:39,560 --> 00:07:43,720 Speaker 1: the plant does actually detect sound, and it is ecologically relevant. 140 00:07:43,760 --> 00:07:48,040 Speaker 1: Sound is an indicator of nearby predation the plant is 141 00:07:48,080 --> 00:07:51,920 Speaker 1: it is being threatened by what is producing this, uh, 142 00:07:52,000 --> 00:07:55,600 Speaker 1: this caterpillar eating sound. Yeah, and there's another study that 143 00:07:55,640 --> 00:07:58,240 Speaker 1: I believe came out the same year conducted by Italian 144 00:07:58,280 --> 00:08:04,000 Speaker 1: botanist Stefano um Mancuso, who found that roots could seek 145 00:08:04,000 --> 00:08:08,320 Speaker 1: out buried um pipes of running water seemingly attracted to 146 00:08:08,360 --> 00:08:12,040 Speaker 1: the sound. So um, again, if this if, if these 147 00:08:12,280 --> 00:08:16,160 Speaker 1: results hold up? Basically, the idea here is you have 148 00:08:16,240 --> 00:08:18,840 Speaker 1: water running through a pipe that is otherwise you know, 149 00:08:18,880 --> 00:08:22,200 Speaker 1: completely set apart from the dirt, from the dirt from 150 00:08:22,240 --> 00:08:26,200 Speaker 1: the soil. Uh. And yet the roots are are moving 151 00:08:26,200 --> 00:08:29,480 Speaker 1: towards the water anyway, how would they know the water 152 00:08:29,680 --> 00:08:32,160 Speaker 1: is there? The ideas that they're picking up on the sound, 153 00:08:32,200 --> 00:08:34,680 Speaker 1: they're picking up on the vibrations, right, and so again 154 00:08:34,720 --> 00:08:37,199 Speaker 1: you could wonder how would that be ecologically relevant? It 155 00:08:37,240 --> 00:08:39,040 Speaker 1: seems plausible to me. I mean, they're all kinds of 156 00:08:39,080 --> 00:08:41,920 Speaker 1: like underground water flows and so and those would of 157 00:08:41,960 --> 00:08:46,920 Speaker 1: course produce vibrations right now. And you might then wonder, well, okay, 158 00:08:46,960 --> 00:08:49,160 Speaker 1: if there's a sound of running water and my ambient music, 159 00:08:49,200 --> 00:08:52,200 Speaker 1: does that mean my plant wants it? Um? I think 160 00:08:52,200 --> 00:08:55,040 Speaker 1: that's a more maybe that's a kind of a simple, 161 00:08:55,320 --> 00:08:58,559 Speaker 1: um simplified argument to make. I think you get into 162 00:08:58,559 --> 00:09:02,240 Speaker 1: a lot of discussions about like the differences between how 163 00:09:02,320 --> 00:09:05,320 Speaker 1: the plant is quote unquote hearing and how we are 164 00:09:05,400 --> 00:09:08,520 Speaker 1: quote unquote hearing something. Right, I mean, I would say 165 00:09:08,520 --> 00:09:13,200 Speaker 1: it's hard to imagine that there's a evolutionarily justified reason 166 00:09:13,320 --> 00:09:17,880 Speaker 1: a plant would respond to music in particular, But of 167 00:09:17,920 --> 00:09:20,760 Speaker 1: course there are probably good reasons for plants to respond 168 00:09:20,840 --> 00:09:24,480 Speaker 1: to certain types of noise. So to be very generous, 169 00:09:24,520 --> 00:09:27,240 Speaker 1: I guess it's possible that in some cases some types 170 00:09:27,280 --> 00:09:31,880 Speaker 1: of music might accidentally trigger something like a tropism or 171 00:09:31,880 --> 00:09:35,719 Speaker 1: a stress response in a plant, where where it might 172 00:09:35,840 --> 00:09:38,280 Speaker 1: make the plant, I don't know, look different in some 173 00:09:38,360 --> 00:09:41,720 Speaker 1: way that the owner would be able to detect. It's possible. 174 00:09:41,840 --> 00:09:44,040 Speaker 1: I'm sort of skeptical even as far as that goes, 175 00:09:44,080 --> 00:09:46,679 Speaker 1: like the accidental byproduct of certain types of music. But 176 00:09:46,920 --> 00:09:48,920 Speaker 1: as I said in the last episode, again, if you 177 00:09:48,920 --> 00:09:51,240 Speaker 1: want to play music for your plants, go for it. Yeah. 178 00:09:51,360 --> 00:09:53,520 Speaker 1: I don't think it makes sense to literally believe it's 179 00:09:53,559 --> 00:09:56,120 Speaker 1: doing anything for the plant itself, but it sounds like 180 00:09:56,280 --> 00:10:00,440 Speaker 1: a perfectly wonderful activity. Especially prints. Everybody loves prints, so 181 00:10:00,480 --> 00:10:03,400 Speaker 1: it makes sense that plants would love prints as well. Now, 182 00:10:03,640 --> 00:10:06,480 Speaker 1: this is just one of the senses that plants seem 183 00:10:06,520 --> 00:10:08,960 Speaker 1: to possess. Um. I've read that plants have somewhere between 184 00:10:09,040 --> 00:10:12,600 Speaker 1: fifteen and twenty distinct senses and some of these can 185 00:10:12,640 --> 00:10:16,040 Speaker 1: be compared to our basic set of human senses. UH. 186 00:10:16,120 --> 00:10:19,200 Speaker 1: In addition to sound, as Michael Paullen points out in 187 00:10:19,800 --> 00:10:24,840 Speaker 1: his wonderful article UH the Intelligent Plant from The New Yorker. UH, 188 00:10:24,960 --> 00:10:27,160 Speaker 1: we have, of course, on the human side, smell and taste, 189 00:10:27,640 --> 00:10:30,760 Speaker 1: and plants do seem to sense and respond to chemicals 190 00:10:30,760 --> 00:10:33,880 Speaker 1: in the air or on their bodies. We have sight, 191 00:10:34,440 --> 00:10:38,920 Speaker 1: and plants react differently to various wavelengths of light as 192 00:10:38,960 --> 00:10:41,600 Speaker 1: well as to shadows. So plants like us live in 193 00:10:41,600 --> 00:10:45,760 Speaker 1: a world of of periodic light and darkness, and of 194 00:10:45,760 --> 00:10:50,479 Speaker 1: course they depend heavily upon the light because of photosenses. 195 00:10:50,520 --> 00:10:52,800 Speaker 1: Is so it makes sense that this would be in place. 196 00:10:53,240 --> 00:10:55,439 Speaker 1: And then we have the sense of touch, and a 197 00:10:55,559 --> 00:10:59,000 Speaker 1: vine or root seems to know when it encounters a 198 00:10:59,080 --> 00:11:03,080 Speaker 1: solid object. So plant roots have been found to be 199 00:11:03,160 --> 00:11:08,640 Speaker 1: able to sense gravity, moisture, light, pressure, firmness, so you know, 200 00:11:08,640 --> 00:11:10,400 Speaker 1: it's like they're encountering something that seems to be a 201 00:11:10,440 --> 00:11:12,640 Speaker 1: solid as opposed to something they can continue to grow 202 00:11:12,679 --> 00:11:19,400 Speaker 1: in into volume. Nitrogen, phosphorus, salt, various toxins a lot 203 00:11:19,400 --> 00:11:22,480 Speaker 1: of times. Uh. Pollen points out that the roots of 204 00:11:22,559 --> 00:11:24,600 Speaker 1: the toxins are going to be first encountered by those 205 00:11:24,679 --> 00:11:29,520 Speaker 1: roots microbes as well as chemical signals from other plants, 206 00:11:29,960 --> 00:11:31,719 Speaker 1: and in that just a little bit, you get into 207 00:11:31,760 --> 00:11:34,600 Speaker 1: the realm of communication. Yeah, And so my read on 208 00:11:34,679 --> 00:11:37,320 Speaker 1: this this domain is that while a lot of the 209 00:11:37,400 --> 00:11:41,000 Speaker 1: other things in so called plant cognition could be considered 210 00:11:41,000 --> 00:11:44,120 Speaker 1: pretty controversial, even some of the stuff with better evidence 211 00:11:44,120 --> 00:11:46,120 Speaker 1: for it, like the memory stuff we're talking about, that's 212 00:11:46,160 --> 00:11:51,560 Speaker 1: still somewhat controversial. But but plant sensation plant the plants 213 00:11:51,559 --> 00:11:54,480 Speaker 1: being able to gather information about all kinds of different 214 00:11:54,520 --> 00:11:56,840 Speaker 1: things in their environment, that seems to me to be 215 00:11:56,920 --> 00:12:01,199 Speaker 1: utterly uncontroversial. That's just they clearly do that right now. 216 00:12:01,200 --> 00:12:04,560 Speaker 1: A lot of the more controversial and um uh, it's 217 00:12:04,559 --> 00:12:07,360 Speaker 1: just flat out unbelievable stuff you encounter out there about 218 00:12:07,400 --> 00:12:10,040 Speaker 1: plants listening to music and so forth. This is still 219 00:12:10,080 --> 00:12:14,199 Speaker 1: stemm stemming from that nine The Secret Life of Plants 220 00:12:14,200 --> 00:12:16,800 Speaker 1: book by Tompkins and Bird that we we talked about 221 00:12:16,800 --> 00:12:21,320 Speaker 1: in the first episode. Um popular work of mostly pseudoscience, 222 00:12:22,000 --> 00:12:26,079 Speaker 1: that was also a huge setback for legitimate research. And 223 00:12:27,000 --> 00:12:29,880 Speaker 1: we should also point out that make the point here 224 00:12:29,920 --> 00:12:32,760 Speaker 1: too that there was, of course movement in the field 225 00:12:32,800 --> 00:12:37,600 Speaker 1: of plant research into plants senses and and you know, 226 00:12:37,679 --> 00:12:44,040 Speaker 1: potentially plant intelligence decades earlier before, before Baxter, before these uh, 227 00:12:44,160 --> 00:12:48,280 Speaker 1: these authors wrote this book. UH. For instance, decades before this, 228 00:12:48,559 --> 00:12:52,680 Speaker 1: scientist jagades Chandra bows demonstrated the plants were aware of 229 00:12:52,720 --> 00:12:56,880 Speaker 1: their environment and that they responded to electrical stimulation. But 230 00:12:57,000 --> 00:12:59,960 Speaker 1: then comes The Secret Life of Plants, And it was interesting. 231 00:13:00,160 --> 00:13:01,880 Speaker 1: I was reading what Paul and had to say about 232 00:13:01,920 --> 00:13:04,520 Speaker 1: it in the in that article, and he points out 233 00:13:04,559 --> 00:13:08,040 Speaker 1: that this book may have resulted in the self censorship 234 00:13:08,480 --> 00:13:12,120 Speaker 1: of researchers that were touching on areas of plant cognition 235 00:13:12,240 --> 00:13:16,560 Speaker 1: or anything that hinted at similarities between plant and animal senses. 236 00:13:17,360 --> 00:13:21,240 Speaker 1: Paullen writes, quote, Americans began talking to their plants and 237 00:13:21,280 --> 00:13:24,400 Speaker 1: playing Mozart for them, and no doubt many still do. 238 00:13:24,880 --> 00:13:27,559 Speaker 1: This might seem harmless enough, there will probably always be 239 00:13:27,600 --> 00:13:31,320 Speaker 1: a strain of romanticism running through our thinking about plants. 240 00:13:31,800 --> 00:13:35,920 Speaker 1: Luther Burbank and George Washington Carver both reputedly talked to 241 00:13:36,080 --> 00:13:39,079 Speaker 1: and listen to the plants they did such brilliant work with. 242 00:13:39,720 --> 00:13:42,600 Speaker 1: But in the view of many plants scientists, the science 243 00:13:42,600 --> 00:13:45,520 Speaker 1: The Secret Life of Plants has done lasting damage to 244 00:13:45,679 --> 00:13:48,720 Speaker 1: their field. Yeah, and you can understand how this would happen. 245 00:13:48,800 --> 00:13:52,319 Speaker 1: So there is a there is a very culturally popular 246 00:13:52,440 --> 00:13:56,560 Speaker 1: work of largely based on pseudoscience or not well founded 247 00:13:56,559 --> 00:14:00,480 Speaker 1: claims about the about the intelligence or cognition of plants, 248 00:14:00,760 --> 00:14:03,520 Speaker 1: and then for decades after that, Uh, you would have 249 00:14:03,600 --> 00:14:09,760 Speaker 1: some reticence to get into thematically similar research areas, even 250 00:14:09,800 --> 00:14:13,000 Speaker 1: if you did have a better evidential grounding for them. Yeah, 251 00:14:13,000 --> 00:14:14,560 Speaker 1: I have to say it reminds me a little bit 252 00:14:14,640 --> 00:14:17,920 Speaker 1: of the situation with dolphin communication research coming out in 253 00:14:17,960 --> 00:14:22,680 Speaker 1: the sixties and seventies, with its reputation somewhat tarnished or 254 00:14:22,760 --> 00:14:26,880 Speaker 1: or at least endangered, you know, by some perspectives by 255 00:14:26,960 --> 00:14:29,760 Speaker 1: John C. Lily's work and uh. And also it reminds 256 00:14:29,800 --> 00:14:31,600 Speaker 1: me a bit of the state of psychedelic research coming 257 00:14:31,600 --> 00:14:34,840 Speaker 1: out of the same time period. Um though of course, 258 00:14:35,400 --> 00:14:39,120 Speaker 1: um here with psychedelics there was the added um situation 259 00:14:39,280 --> 00:14:42,720 Speaker 1: of these substances becoming federally outlawed. So no one was 260 00:14:42,760 --> 00:14:46,240 Speaker 1: outlawing speaking to plants or playing music for them, um. 261 00:14:46,280 --> 00:14:48,440 Speaker 1: After the Secret Life of Plants came out. But we 262 00:14:48,480 --> 00:14:51,960 Speaker 1: can see how the whole affair became somewhat distracting and 263 00:14:52,120 --> 00:14:54,920 Speaker 1: off putting to serious researchers. You know, you're you're, you're 264 00:14:55,000 --> 00:14:57,320 Speaker 1: very this is your life's work. You don't want it 265 00:14:57,360 --> 00:15:00,600 Speaker 1: to be associated with this work of pseudoscience, with this 266 00:15:00,680 --> 00:15:06,560 Speaker 1: popular conception um of of what plants are doing, um, etcetera. Yeah, 267 00:15:06,560 --> 00:15:10,240 Speaker 1: I can totally see the parallel to psychedelic research, because, yeah, 268 00:15:10,600 --> 00:15:14,200 Speaker 1: in recent years there's been a thaw on psychedelic research 269 00:15:14,240 --> 00:15:17,840 Speaker 1: and there's more legitimate experiment being done with them. But 270 00:15:17,880 --> 00:15:19,720 Speaker 1: I think for a long time, yeah, it wasn't just 271 00:15:19,880 --> 00:15:22,960 Speaker 1: the law. There was a I think a scientific stigma 272 00:15:22,960 --> 00:15:25,920 Speaker 1: about them because there had been a lot of the 273 00:15:25,960 --> 00:15:29,240 Speaker 1: early work on psychedelics was clearly done by people who 274 00:15:29,280 --> 00:15:33,720 Speaker 1: were not practicing unbiased, objective science, but had become sort 275 00:15:33,720 --> 00:15:39,080 Speaker 1: of psychedelic evangelists. And we're we're we're dedicated, uh, proponents 276 00:15:39,120 --> 00:15:41,760 Speaker 1: of psychedelics, and we're just like, how can I make 277 00:15:41,760 --> 00:15:46,160 Speaker 1: them look good? I'll do anything, Yeah, Ti Timothy Learry 278 00:15:46,480 --> 00:15:50,080 Speaker 1: being the major figure that fits that classification. And I 279 00:15:50,120 --> 00:15:53,160 Speaker 1: have to say, in my very brief survey of some 280 00:15:53,200 --> 00:15:57,040 Speaker 1: of this plant cognition stuff, one thing that does make 281 00:15:57,040 --> 00:16:00,480 Speaker 1: me a little suspicious, perhaps unfairly um of even the 282 00:16:00,520 --> 00:16:05,600 Speaker 1: more legitimate seeming plant cognition research is that plant cognition 283 00:16:05,640 --> 00:16:10,680 Speaker 1: concepts seem to attract partisans who, uh, at least as 284 00:16:10,720 --> 00:16:13,400 Speaker 1: far as I can tell, sometimes over extend what can 285 00:16:13,440 --> 00:16:16,440 Speaker 1: be concluded based on a piece of research. Like you 286 00:16:16,480 --> 00:16:20,080 Speaker 1: could look at a single study about you know, habituation 287 00:16:20,200 --> 00:16:22,640 Speaker 1: or something that looks like learning or memory and plants 288 00:16:23,120 --> 00:16:26,080 Speaker 1: and conclude from that that this means plants are conscious, 289 00:16:26,120 --> 00:16:28,160 Speaker 1: they can think, they can read my mind, they have 290 00:16:28,200 --> 00:16:31,200 Speaker 1: a soul, or so something like that, you know, over 291 00:16:31,240 --> 00:16:35,840 Speaker 1: extrapolating from actually what is a fairly contained result, or 292 00:16:35,960 --> 00:16:39,240 Speaker 1: I think also you see examples of some people and 293 00:16:39,360 --> 00:16:42,840 Speaker 1: I'm not accusing uh, the researchers themselves of this, but 294 00:16:42,920 --> 00:16:46,480 Speaker 1: more like people who are excited about this research proponents, 295 00:16:47,080 --> 00:16:49,520 Speaker 1: people who want to use plant cognition research to prove 296 00:16:49,640 --> 00:16:53,800 Speaker 1: ideas they've already acquired elsewhere, like uh, you know, ideas 297 00:16:53,800 --> 00:16:57,040 Speaker 1: about like a universal life spirit per permeating all things 298 00:16:57,120 --> 00:16:59,760 Speaker 1: or something, or who take on a kind of in 299 00:16:59,800 --> 00:17:04,320 Speaker 1: all actual murder persona like the closed Minded Academy wants 300 00:17:04,359 --> 00:17:08,960 Speaker 1: to destroy the truth, all of which are major red flags. Uh, 301 00:17:09,200 --> 00:17:11,800 Speaker 1: But of course it's something I've noticed more in the 302 00:17:11,840 --> 00:17:14,800 Speaker 1: fans of plant cognition research than in the research itself. 303 00:17:14,840 --> 00:17:17,240 Speaker 1: So I wouldn't hold that against the studies we're about 304 00:17:17,280 --> 00:17:22,040 Speaker 1: to talk about. Yeah, anytime science is used to advance 305 00:17:22,440 --> 00:17:26,159 Speaker 1: a non scientific um, you know, say that theology or 306 00:17:26,440 --> 00:17:29,680 Speaker 1: some sort of an ideology, you get into murky territory, 307 00:17:29,800 --> 00:17:34,520 Speaker 1: even if said um theology or ideology isn't, at least 308 00:17:34,520 --> 00:17:37,719 Speaker 1: on the surface, something that's particularly harmful, even if it's 309 00:17:37,800 --> 00:17:40,280 Speaker 1: yet something like, oh, all life forms are connected on Earth, 310 00:17:40,320 --> 00:17:43,080 Speaker 1: you know, Oh, so nothing nothing wrong with believing that 311 00:17:43,240 --> 00:17:45,720 Speaker 1: is just like, this study does not show that, right, right, 312 00:17:45,760 --> 00:17:47,760 Speaker 1: But the situation is there is a lot of wonderfully 313 00:17:47,800 --> 00:17:51,720 Speaker 1: impressive evidence on the different ways that the plants, since 314 00:17:51,760 --> 00:17:55,760 Speaker 1: their environment, they compete with each other, communicate, and much more. 315 00:17:56,320 --> 00:18:00,400 Speaker 1: And so this this research did continue and in continues 316 00:18:00,440 --> 00:18:03,000 Speaker 1: to this day. A Pollen points to a shifting point 317 00:18:03,480 --> 00:18:05,800 Speaker 1: around the year two thousand six. This is when an 318 00:18:05,880 --> 00:18:08,680 Speaker 1: article came that came out in Trends and Plants Science 319 00:18:09,080 --> 00:18:12,920 Speaker 1: by six scientists who were active in this field of research, 320 00:18:12,960 --> 00:18:17,040 Speaker 1: and they proposed a new field be established plant neurobiology, 321 00:18:17,960 --> 00:18:21,320 Speaker 1: and Pollen writes that more than a decade after this, 322 00:18:21,680 --> 00:18:25,560 Speaker 1: this term was first proposed. The plant science community was 323 00:18:25,560 --> 00:18:28,120 Speaker 1: still somewhat split on all of this, with some arguing 324 00:18:28,119 --> 00:18:30,520 Speaker 1: that this was a necessary step in the right direction 325 00:18:30,640 --> 00:18:35,000 Speaker 1: of reconsidering what constitutes intelligence and and indeed this is 326 00:18:35,040 --> 00:18:38,280 Speaker 1: something we see similar discussions going on regarding the likes 327 00:18:38,280 --> 00:18:41,239 Speaker 1: of ants and slime molds, the ideas of you know, 328 00:18:41,320 --> 00:18:46,679 Speaker 1: emergent intelligence intelligence without brains, uh, you know, getting outside 329 00:18:46,720 --> 00:18:49,960 Speaker 1: of the sort of you know, basic human and animal 330 00:18:50,000 --> 00:18:53,879 Speaker 1: conception of what intelligence is. And of course this is 331 00:18:53,880 --> 00:18:57,360 Speaker 1: also important when we get into discussions of artificial intelligence 332 00:18:57,400 --> 00:19:01,920 Speaker 1: and contemplations of what alien intelligence could consist of. Well, 333 00:19:02,000 --> 00:19:05,359 Speaker 1: this also recalls other types of research along these lines, 334 00:19:05,440 --> 00:19:08,359 Speaker 1: not in plants, but in say, animals, are parts of 335 00:19:08,400 --> 00:19:10,960 Speaker 1: animals in which a brain is not present. You know, 336 00:19:11,119 --> 00:19:14,840 Speaker 1: we did a couple of episodes about, uh, the the 337 00:19:14,880 --> 00:19:19,920 Speaker 1: research perhaps indicating that certain types of flatworms could learn 338 00:19:20,080 --> 00:19:22,640 Speaker 1: without a brain, or that part of their body, when 339 00:19:22,680 --> 00:19:26,520 Speaker 1: cut off, could retain memories without the brain present. It's 340 00:19:26,560 --> 00:19:29,120 Speaker 1: an older series, so I know, I'm I'm forgetting some details, 341 00:19:29,119 --> 00:19:31,720 Speaker 1: but if you want the full story on that, the 342 00:19:31,920 --> 00:19:34,240 Speaker 1: pair of episodes we did, I think we're called Devourer 343 00:19:34,359 --> 00:19:45,320 Speaker 1: of Memories thank so. Anyway, plant neurobiology, some people, some 344 00:19:45,720 --> 00:19:48,600 Speaker 1: researchers in this field very much behind the idea of 345 00:19:48,600 --> 00:19:52,200 Speaker 1: this classification, while others considered it kind of a backslide 346 00:19:52,200 --> 00:19:54,679 Speaker 1: to the seventies, you know, saying, look, we're trying to 347 00:19:54,680 --> 00:19:58,760 Speaker 1: get past the stigma of the secret life of plants. Um. 348 00:19:58,920 --> 00:20:02,400 Speaker 1: This just judges it all back up again. Though though 349 00:20:02,400 --> 00:20:06,080 Speaker 1: to be clear, none of these plant neurobiology proponents were 350 00:20:06,119 --> 00:20:12,040 Speaker 1: making these outrageous claims about telepathy or or plants having emotions. Uh, 351 00:20:12,080 --> 00:20:14,359 Speaker 1: And the sort of intelligence they're proposing is more in 352 00:20:14,440 --> 00:20:17,280 Speaker 1: line with the emergent modes of intelligence that we're discussing 353 00:20:17,320 --> 00:20:20,119 Speaker 1: here now. One of the key arguments for reconsidering the 354 00:20:20,800 --> 00:20:25,320 Speaker 1: lives of plants um actually comes down to big revelations 355 00:20:25,320 --> 00:20:29,960 Speaker 1: made through time lapse footage or if not key to 356 00:20:29,960 --> 00:20:35,640 Speaker 1: the arguments, key to to ways of of illustrating and 357 00:20:35,640 --> 00:20:39,479 Speaker 1: and UM and studying the plants in question. By speeding 358 00:20:39,560 --> 00:20:42,680 Speaker 1: up long shots of growing stems and leaves and vines, 359 00:20:43,119 --> 00:20:45,639 Speaker 1: were able to sort of translate that time scale of 360 00:20:45,720 --> 00:20:49,040 Speaker 1: plants into the time scale of human beings. And it's 361 00:20:49,080 --> 00:20:51,440 Speaker 1: not just a matter of oh, look, if you speed 362 00:20:51,520 --> 00:20:53,880 Speaker 1: up the footage it looks like a vine is crawling. 363 00:20:53,920 --> 00:20:55,439 Speaker 1: Now the vine is kind of like a snake, and 364 00:20:55,440 --> 00:20:58,560 Speaker 1: the snakes and animal, And now I'm viewing the plant 365 00:20:58,680 --> 00:21:01,840 Speaker 1: as more of you know, a national being sort of thing. Uh. 366 00:21:02,280 --> 00:21:04,600 Speaker 1: I guess that's inherently part of it, at least to 367 00:21:04,600 --> 00:21:07,240 Speaker 1: the you know, the casual viewer. Uh. If you're flipping 368 00:21:07,240 --> 00:21:08,959 Speaker 1: around on the TV and you happen to come across 369 00:21:09,200 --> 00:21:11,560 Speaker 1: you know, one of these Planet Earth documentaries and you 370 00:21:11,560 --> 00:21:16,640 Speaker 1: see even brilliant footage like that, but in various experiments, 371 00:21:16,880 --> 00:21:19,359 Speaker 1: it actually allows us, this kind of footage allows us 372 00:21:19,359 --> 00:21:23,240 Speaker 1: to better consider environmental interactions. So one example that Balan 373 00:21:23,280 --> 00:21:25,920 Speaker 1: has brought up before, I believe he. I think he 374 00:21:25,960 --> 00:21:27,760 Speaker 1: brings it up in if not in this article, he 375 00:21:27,800 --> 00:21:29,720 Speaker 1: brings it up in some of his books, but brings 376 00:21:29,720 --> 00:21:33,240 Speaker 1: it up in some some video interview footage that was 377 00:21:33,280 --> 00:21:36,439 Speaker 1: there to the World Science Festival several years back. But 378 00:21:36,880 --> 00:21:39,639 Speaker 1: you have being plants that are competing for a single 379 00:21:39,720 --> 00:21:43,240 Speaker 1: poll on which to grow. And when you when you 380 00:21:43,280 --> 00:21:45,600 Speaker 1: speed up that footage and you watch the time lapse 381 00:21:45,640 --> 00:21:47,720 Speaker 1: of it, you can see them competing. You can see 382 00:21:47,720 --> 00:21:50,040 Speaker 1: them both going after the same pole. You can see 383 00:21:50,160 --> 00:21:54,679 Speaker 1: one uh, claiming the pole, and then the other retreating, 384 00:21:55,040 --> 00:21:57,120 Speaker 1: giving up the fight, saying all right, fair enough, you've 385 00:21:57,160 --> 00:21:59,359 Speaker 1: got it. And so this, you know, this sort of 386 00:21:59,400 --> 00:22:04,240 Speaker 1: reaction to competition, uh, you know, rather than inanimate objects 387 00:22:04,600 --> 00:22:06,639 Speaker 1: is key to tostms in many of these studies like 388 00:22:06,640 --> 00:22:08,520 Speaker 1: this seems to be an area where plants are are 389 00:22:08,560 --> 00:22:13,480 Speaker 1: even more likely to to have this sort of rapid response. Yes, though, 390 00:22:13,520 --> 00:22:17,360 Speaker 1: of course this invites I think highly relevant and interesting 391 00:22:17,440 --> 00:22:21,080 Speaker 1: questions about what intelligence actually is. Intelligence is a concept 392 00:22:21,160 --> 00:22:26,480 Speaker 1: that is notoriously difficult to define, um because I mean, 393 00:22:26,520 --> 00:22:27,959 Speaker 1: just think about it for a second, how would you 394 00:22:28,000 --> 00:22:32,240 Speaker 1: define intelligence? It's clear like there there are some things 395 00:22:32,280 --> 00:22:36,640 Speaker 1: that seem very clearly suggested by the concept, and one 396 00:22:36,680 --> 00:22:39,720 Speaker 1: of them I think is interesting has to do with speed. 397 00:22:40,400 --> 00:22:45,240 Speaker 1: Intelligence clearly has something to do with the rate of things, because, 398 00:22:45,680 --> 00:22:49,560 Speaker 1: like you know, an animal that solves them is quickly. 399 00:22:49,680 --> 00:22:51,600 Speaker 1: We look at that behavior and we say, yeah, that's 400 00:22:51,600 --> 00:22:54,960 Speaker 1: indicative of intelligence. But a slime mold that solves them 401 00:22:55,240 --> 00:22:57,080 Speaker 1: slowly we look at that and say, yeah, that that 402 00:22:57,119 --> 00:23:00,040 Speaker 1: doesn't so much look like intelligence. So our intuition to 403 00:23:00,080 --> 00:23:01,800 Speaker 1: have something to do with speed. But I would also 404 00:23:01,800 --> 00:23:05,040 Speaker 1: say another part is um I think we tend to 405 00:23:05,080 --> 00:23:10,480 Speaker 1: assume that intelligence involves the uh, the selection of behaviors 406 00:23:10,560 --> 00:23:13,879 Speaker 1: or acquisition of goals in ways that are not strictly 407 00:23:14,040 --> 00:23:20,320 Speaker 1: instinctually programmed, but are somehow adaptive to individual situations. Though 408 00:23:20,359 --> 00:23:24,640 Speaker 1: then again, that's that's often difficult to detect. Like when 409 00:23:24,640 --> 00:23:28,600 Speaker 1: you see time lapse footage of a bean stock competing 410 00:23:28,600 --> 00:23:31,520 Speaker 1: for a pole and then reacting to the pole already 411 00:23:31,520 --> 00:23:36,240 Speaker 1: being claimed. Don't is that a purely genetically programmed instinctual 412 00:23:36,320 --> 00:23:39,040 Speaker 1: reaction or should you think of that as in some 413 00:23:39,160 --> 00:23:45,560 Speaker 1: way individually adaptive or reactive to the specific situation? Yeah? Absolutely, 414 00:23:45,600 --> 00:23:49,800 Speaker 1: I mean so much regarding intelligence and certainly cognition. You know, 415 00:23:49,840 --> 00:23:51,959 Speaker 1: it comes back to the old idea that's just so 416 00:23:52,000 --> 00:23:54,360 Speaker 1: hard to put aside the human perception of the thing. 417 00:23:54,400 --> 00:23:57,960 Speaker 1: It's so hard to uh to to even think about say, 418 00:23:58,000 --> 00:24:02,240 Speaker 1: intelligence in our household hats without comparing it to ourselves. 419 00:24:02,840 --> 00:24:05,760 Speaker 1: It's uh, it's it's tricky now, this this, you know, 420 00:24:05,800 --> 00:24:09,520 Speaker 1: coming back to the idea of neurobiology, plant neurobiology. Of 421 00:24:09,760 --> 00:24:13,600 Speaker 1: those opposed to this notion um have frequently stated, well, okay, 422 00:24:13,600 --> 00:24:18,320 Speaker 1: plants just simply do not have neurons, synapses or a brain. Uh. 423 00:24:18,320 --> 00:24:21,240 Speaker 1: Those Pollen points out legitimate scientists in this field are 424 00:24:21,280 --> 00:24:23,680 Speaker 1: not making that claim. They're only suggesting that there might 425 00:24:23,680 --> 00:24:29,480 Speaker 1: be something analogous to a brain to uh, two neurons, etcetera. 426 00:24:29,720 --> 00:24:33,960 Speaker 1: UM So Pollen speaks with plant biologists Lincoln Tays who 427 00:24:34,160 --> 00:24:37,120 Speaker 1: opposes the idea of plant neurobiology as a sort of 428 00:24:37,359 --> 00:24:41,719 Speaker 1: animism which takes the realities of both short and long 429 00:24:41,840 --> 00:24:45,879 Speaker 1: term electrical signaling and neurotransmitter like chemicals and plants. And 430 00:24:45,920 --> 00:24:50,879 Speaker 1: then the argument is over interprets these realities, ultimately leading 431 00:24:50,920 --> 00:24:58,760 Speaker 1: to quote anthropomorphizing, philosophizing and wild speculations. And I suppose 432 00:24:58,840 --> 00:25:01,240 Speaker 1: I can see like the would point to be made 433 00:25:01,240 --> 00:25:03,959 Speaker 1: between these these two sides, right. I mean, for instance, 434 00:25:03,960 --> 00:25:06,400 Speaker 1: we often talk about evolution on the show, and it's 435 00:25:06,600 --> 00:25:10,600 Speaker 1: very easy to fall into the trap of anthropomorphizing evolution, 436 00:25:11,160 --> 00:25:13,639 Speaker 1: discussing it as if it has a will. You know, 437 00:25:13,720 --> 00:25:15,000 Speaker 1: this is the sort of thing that can make it 438 00:25:15,080 --> 00:25:17,439 Speaker 1: easier to comprehend what we're talking about. It can make 439 00:25:17,440 --> 00:25:21,440 Speaker 1: it easier to explain some of what's happening. UM drive 440 00:25:21,480 --> 00:25:24,000 Speaker 1: home what makes it interesting and making it make it exciting. 441 00:25:24,320 --> 00:25:27,639 Speaker 1: But you can also do injustice to the appreciation of 442 00:25:27,640 --> 00:25:31,360 Speaker 1: what it actually is, either subtly or overtly. Yeah, exactly, 443 00:25:31,560 --> 00:25:34,880 Speaker 1: And likewise, it seems to me that yeah, comparing plants 444 00:25:34,920 --> 00:25:38,080 Speaker 1: to animals, it can help explain, it can help excite, 445 00:25:38,119 --> 00:25:42,159 Speaker 1: It can force us to reconsider outdated notions and limitations 446 00:25:42,200 --> 00:25:45,280 Speaker 1: about what plants are and what they're capable of. But 447 00:25:45,520 --> 00:25:47,879 Speaker 1: you can also potentially get into those murky waters. So 448 00:25:48,040 --> 00:25:50,560 Speaker 1: I'm not saying I think either side is is totally 449 00:25:50,560 --> 00:25:53,480 Speaker 1: in the right here, but I can see why there 450 00:25:53,560 --> 00:25:56,000 Speaker 1: is an issue. But Pollen drive something that. Yeah, there 451 00:25:56,000 --> 00:25:58,800 Speaker 1: are some very strong feelings among plant biologists about all 452 00:25:58,800 --> 00:26:02,000 Speaker 1: of this, which actually results and at least a little 453 00:26:02,000 --> 00:26:05,600 Speaker 1: more heat and name calling than usually encounter in the sciences. 454 00:26:06,320 --> 00:26:10,120 Speaker 1: But perhaps it's not all bad. Um Pollen writes, quote 455 00:26:10,119 --> 00:26:13,439 Speaker 1: The controversy is less about the remarkable discoveries of recent 456 00:26:13,480 --> 00:26:16,680 Speaker 1: plants science than about how to interpret and name them. 457 00:26:17,040 --> 00:26:21,040 Speaker 1: Whether behaviors observed in plants which look very much like learning, memory, 458 00:26:21,119 --> 00:26:25,479 Speaker 1: decision making, and intelligence deserve to be called by those terms, 459 00:26:25,680 --> 00:26:29,960 Speaker 1: or whether those words should be reserved exclusively for creatures 460 00:26:30,000 --> 00:26:33,720 Speaker 1: with brains. Yeah, that absolutely tracks with my experience reading 461 00:26:33,720 --> 00:26:36,600 Speaker 1: about a lot of this plant cognition stuff that. Either way, 462 00:26:36,640 --> 00:26:40,720 Speaker 1: you have some very interesting experimental results, but a lot 463 00:26:40,840 --> 00:26:45,000 Speaker 1: of the conflict seems to be in arguing about what 464 00:26:45,080 --> 00:26:48,000 Speaker 1: those results mean and what is a reasonable way to 465 00:26:48,119 --> 00:26:53,840 Speaker 1: characterize them. Yeah. Now, on the topic of plants and brains, 466 00:26:54,240 --> 00:26:56,639 Speaker 1: you might wonder, why don't they have a brain. Perhaps 467 00:26:56,680 --> 00:26:59,000 Speaker 1: you've played a video game before where you have to 468 00:26:59,040 --> 00:27:01,520 Speaker 1: blast the vital organs out of some sort of monster 469 00:27:01,600 --> 00:27:04,560 Speaker 1: plant in order to defeat it. Um, Why does that 470 00:27:04,600 --> 00:27:07,120 Speaker 1: not seem to be the case. Why is the reality 471 00:27:07,160 --> 00:27:09,960 Speaker 1: instead that a plant can lose up to around nine 472 00:27:10,400 --> 00:27:13,280 Speaker 1: of its body without being killed. I mean this this 473 00:27:13,320 --> 00:27:17,880 Speaker 1: all comes down to the fact that plants are are stationary. 474 00:27:17,960 --> 00:27:19,879 Speaker 1: They they stay in one spot. I mean, with some 475 00:27:20,160 --> 00:27:22,320 Speaker 1: um you know, they are rooted to the ground. We 476 00:27:22,359 --> 00:27:25,640 Speaker 1: have some situations where guess plants can travel and UH 477 00:27:25,880 --> 00:27:28,080 Speaker 1: to varying degrees, But for the most part, where the 478 00:27:28,080 --> 00:27:31,359 Speaker 1: plant takes root, the plant stays. The plant can't run away. 479 00:27:31,640 --> 00:27:34,800 Speaker 1: It's got to be ready to sacrifice large portions of 480 00:27:34,840 --> 00:27:37,399 Speaker 1: its body, and so it simply doesn't make sense for 481 00:27:37,480 --> 00:27:41,640 Speaker 1: it to evolve some sort of a centralized, irreplaceable and 482 00:27:41,800 --> 00:27:46,920 Speaker 1: UH insensitive organ like this. UM. The sesile lifestyle requires 483 00:27:47,320 --> 00:27:52,480 Speaker 1: different approaches to two problem solving. Um. And it also 484 00:27:52,600 --> 00:27:54,679 Speaker 1: ends up being one of the reasons that you have 485 00:27:54,800 --> 00:27:58,639 Speaker 1: such a robust biochemical weapons. Why it has such a 486 00:27:58,840 --> 00:28:02,000 Speaker 1: such a robust biochem call arsenal. Uh and there the 487 00:28:02,040 --> 00:28:04,600 Speaker 1: plant the power here, for plants are famous, you know, 488 00:28:04,640 --> 00:28:07,000 Speaker 1: far far more opponent than anything you'll find in animals. 489 00:28:07,160 --> 00:28:09,439 Speaker 1: And that's why so much of human medicine is based 490 00:28:09,480 --> 00:28:13,280 Speaker 1: in Okay, I have this ailment, which plant should I eat? 491 00:28:13,480 --> 00:28:15,439 Speaker 1: And how much of that plant should I eat in 492 00:28:15,520 --> 00:28:17,520 Speaker 1: order to fight it? Yeah. Another way to put that 493 00:28:17,600 --> 00:28:20,960 Speaker 1: is just that the plant kingdom is full of internal 494 00:28:21,040 --> 00:28:25,160 Speaker 1: chemicals that have potent effects on the physiology of animals. Yeah. 495 00:28:25,200 --> 00:28:27,880 Speaker 1: And of course Pollen has written about this quite a bit, 496 00:28:27,960 --> 00:28:31,080 Speaker 1: including the book The Botany of Desire that In this 497 00:28:31,160 --> 00:28:35,960 Speaker 1: New Yorker article he summarizes the biochemical arsenal quite quite nicely. Says, 498 00:28:36,040 --> 00:28:40,200 Speaker 1: unable to run away, plants deploy a complex molecular vocabulary 499 00:28:40,360 --> 00:28:43,960 Speaker 1: to signal, to stress, deter or poison enemies, and recruit 500 00:28:44,040 --> 00:28:48,960 Speaker 1: animals to perform various services for them. Uh So, um, Yeah, 501 00:28:48,440 --> 00:28:51,400 Speaker 1: I think he puts it quite well there. It's almost 502 00:28:51,480 --> 00:28:54,320 Speaker 1: like sort of asking yourself, well, okay, I have a 503 00:28:54,840 --> 00:28:57,920 Speaker 1: computer system. Why doesn't the computer system have a knife? 504 00:28:59,160 --> 00:29:02,600 Speaker 1: Why does it have a lub? It should? It should? Right? Well, no, 505 00:29:02,720 --> 00:29:04,960 Speaker 1: it has these other things and it has them to 506 00:29:05,280 --> 00:29:08,720 Speaker 1: uh you know, all these other defenses are in place 507 00:29:08,720 --> 00:29:11,640 Speaker 1: because it's it's fighting a different type of battle, uh, 508 00:29:11,640 --> 00:29:14,200 Speaker 1: in a on a on a different scale. So again, yeah, 509 00:29:14,400 --> 00:29:17,120 Speaker 1: so much of the of what makes the plant different, 510 00:29:17,160 --> 00:29:19,360 Speaker 1: you know, we can look at the time scale. Uh, 511 00:29:19,480 --> 00:29:22,040 Speaker 1: certainly is a is a huge factor, but also the 512 00:29:22,080 --> 00:29:24,720 Speaker 1: fact that it is a sessile organism. Yeah. And so 513 00:29:24,840 --> 00:29:27,600 Speaker 1: if a plant does indeed contain something that is it 514 00:29:27,640 --> 00:29:30,800 Speaker 1: could legitimately be considered intelligence. It would need a different 515 00:29:30,840 --> 00:29:34,920 Speaker 1: kind of substrate to contain that intelligence than than the 516 00:29:35,000 --> 00:29:39,400 Speaker 1: human brain, which is a centralized command center. Uh. You know, 517 00:29:39,520 --> 00:29:42,720 Speaker 1: because again, like you said, the plant might get of 518 00:29:42,720 --> 00:29:44,440 Speaker 1: it might get eaten, and then it needs to be 519 00:29:44,480 --> 00:29:46,959 Speaker 1: able to grow back. So if you allow for the 520 00:29:46,960 --> 00:29:49,840 Speaker 1: concept of plant intelligence, it would probably need to somehow 521 00:29:49,880 --> 00:29:54,640 Speaker 1: be more modular or distributed rather than housed in a 522 00:29:54,680 --> 00:29:58,040 Speaker 1: command center like the human brain. And so what would 523 00:29:58,120 --> 00:30:01,240 Speaker 1: some of these uh, these physical abstrates or systems b 524 00:30:02,080 --> 00:30:05,320 Speaker 1: I think that is largely unknown, though there are some 525 00:30:05,400 --> 00:30:08,400 Speaker 1: interesting ideas. Like in the previous episode, one of the 526 00:30:08,400 --> 00:30:11,360 Speaker 1: papers we looked at the one that looked at habituation 527 00:30:11,400 --> 00:30:15,720 Speaker 1: in Mimosa putica. It hypothesized one of the possible substrates 528 00:30:15,760 --> 00:30:19,600 Speaker 1: of plant memory formation could be what are called calcium 529 00:30:19,680 --> 00:30:24,160 Speaker 1: ion channels within the plant's tissues, which can form these 530 00:30:24,240 --> 00:30:29,360 Speaker 1: kind of UH sensory chains throughout the plant's body. But 531 00:30:29,840 --> 00:30:32,640 Speaker 1: it's it's still unknown. But but but I guess we 532 00:30:32,680 --> 00:30:34,479 Speaker 1: should look at at least one more study, look at 533 00:30:34,480 --> 00:30:38,560 Speaker 1: some more lab research. So in the previous study we 534 00:30:38,560 --> 00:30:41,800 Speaker 1: looked at the one from in the last episode. It 535 00:30:42,440 --> 00:30:46,760 Speaker 1: found apparent demonstration of a very rudimentary form of learning 536 00:30:46,800 --> 00:30:50,440 Speaker 1: known as habituation in these sensitive plants that could close 537 00:30:50,480 --> 00:30:55,000 Speaker 1: their leaves. And habituation could be defined as the diminishment 538 00:30:55,480 --> 00:30:59,600 Speaker 1: of a programmed reaction to a repeated stimulus. So, maybe 539 00:30:59,640 --> 00:31:02,880 Speaker 1: you jump with fright when you hear a sudden clattering 540 00:31:02,960 --> 00:31:07,320 Speaker 1: sound behind you. Most people would. But if that clattering 541 00:31:07,400 --> 00:31:11,520 Speaker 1: sound is repeated every five minutes, you will eventually stop 542 00:31:11,600 --> 00:31:14,800 Speaker 1: jumping with fright. You will become accustomed to it. You 543 00:31:14,800 --> 00:31:18,520 Speaker 1: will just start ignoring it because you've become habituated, and 544 00:31:18,600 --> 00:31:23,080 Speaker 1: this doesn't require conscious effort. It just happens unconsciously, naturally. 545 00:31:23,440 --> 00:31:26,680 Speaker 1: When you're exposed to the same salient stimulus over and 546 00:31:26,720 --> 00:31:29,960 Speaker 1: over again. What seems salient at first has been encountered 547 00:31:30,080 --> 00:31:32,480 Speaker 1: enough times that your body has just been trained to 548 00:31:32,640 --> 00:31:35,960 Speaker 1: no longer regarded as salient. Is just noise, it's background. 549 00:31:36,280 --> 00:31:38,040 Speaker 1: But of course, there are other types of learning and 550 00:31:38,080 --> 00:31:40,720 Speaker 1: memory that could of course be considered more complex. So 551 00:31:40,760 --> 00:31:44,479 Speaker 1: could plants actually demonstrate any of these other forms of 552 00:31:44,960 --> 00:31:47,680 Speaker 1: memory as well? The next study I want to talk 553 00:31:47,680 --> 00:31:50,760 Speaker 1: about looked at whether you could find evidence of classical 554 00:31:50,840 --> 00:31:54,440 Speaker 1: conditioning in plants. Classical conditioning is one of the big 555 00:31:54,480 --> 00:31:57,360 Speaker 1: concepts in behavioral psychology. I would say it is one 556 00:31:57,400 --> 00:32:00,920 Speaker 1: of the biggest discoveries of psychology in the in the 557 00:32:01,000 --> 00:32:03,479 Speaker 1: last I don't know about the last the twentieth century. 558 00:32:04,120 --> 00:32:07,440 Speaker 1: It is a type of unconscious learning, usually observed in animals, 559 00:32:07,920 --> 00:32:11,600 Speaker 1: in which you repeatedly pair a salient stimulus with a 560 00:32:11,640 --> 00:32:16,760 Speaker 1: neutral stimulus, and over time the animal will eventually respond 561 00:32:16,960 --> 00:32:20,920 Speaker 1: to the previously neutral stimulus the way they respond to 562 00:32:20,960 --> 00:32:24,000 Speaker 1: the salient one. So, if you concrete examples, the original 563 00:32:24,040 --> 00:32:27,240 Speaker 1: one is the story of Pavlov's dogs. This goes back 564 00:32:27,280 --> 00:32:31,080 Speaker 1: to the Russian physiologist Yvon Pavlov, who lived eighteen forty 565 00:32:31,120 --> 00:32:34,840 Speaker 1: nine and nineteen thirty six. He was studying digestion in 566 00:32:34,920 --> 00:32:38,520 Speaker 1: dogs and he started to notice that the dogs in 567 00:32:38,560 --> 00:32:41,480 Speaker 1: his lab would drool not only when their food was 568 00:32:41,520 --> 00:32:44,920 Speaker 1: in sight, but when they saw the specific lab assistant 569 00:32:44,920 --> 00:32:47,840 Speaker 1: who always fed them. So the production of saliva and 570 00:32:47,880 --> 00:32:51,200 Speaker 1: the presence of food is a natural, unconditioned response, that's 571 00:32:51,280 --> 00:32:53,440 Speaker 1: just something that makes sense for the body to do. 572 00:32:53,920 --> 00:32:56,840 Speaker 1: The saliva will be useful once you start eating, but 573 00:32:57,040 --> 00:33:00,200 Speaker 1: the dogs come to associate the assistant with food food, 574 00:33:00,520 --> 00:33:03,920 Speaker 1: so their glands start jacking up the saliva when they 575 00:33:03,960 --> 00:33:07,200 Speaker 1: see and smell that specific person who feeds them, even 576 00:33:07,200 --> 00:33:10,680 Speaker 1: though the person themselves is not actually food. Uh. And 577 00:33:10,720 --> 00:33:13,200 Speaker 1: it of course can be any stimulus that The classic 578 00:33:13,240 --> 00:33:16,360 Speaker 1: example is a sound such as a bell or a metronome. 579 00:33:16,760 --> 00:33:19,360 Speaker 1: So if I give you a painful electric shock every 580 00:33:19,400 --> 00:33:22,440 Speaker 1: time I start playing we Built this City by Starship, 581 00:33:23,320 --> 00:33:25,560 Speaker 1: you will start to have a reaction to the song 582 00:33:25,640 --> 00:33:28,240 Speaker 1: without the shock. Even if there's no shock, you hear 583 00:33:28,280 --> 00:33:31,280 Speaker 1: that first line and you'll you'll probably freeze or wins. 584 00:33:36,160 --> 00:33:41,200 Speaker 1: Thank thank Anyway, given that there is some preliminary evidence 585 00:33:41,240 --> 00:33:45,240 Speaker 1: that at least some plant species can exhibit habituation, would 586 00:33:45,240 --> 00:33:47,760 Speaker 1: it be possible to show this other kind of memory 587 00:33:47,760 --> 00:33:51,400 Speaker 1: based learning in plants? Can plants be classically conditioned to 588 00:33:51,520 --> 00:33:55,959 Speaker 1: associate a neutral queue with a biologically salient que? So 589 00:33:56,000 --> 00:33:58,680 Speaker 1: the study I want to mention was published in Nature 590 00:33:58,720 --> 00:34:04,880 Speaker 1: Scientific Reports and went sixteen by Monica Gagliano, Vladislav Viasovski, 591 00:34:05,040 --> 00:34:12,400 Speaker 1: Alexander Borbelli, Maveri grimond Pres and Martial dep Chinsky. And 592 00:34:12,480 --> 00:34:16,440 Speaker 1: it's called learning by association in plants. So the authors 593 00:34:16,680 --> 00:34:21,120 Speaker 1: justify their investigation by explaining that they think there would 594 00:34:21,200 --> 00:34:24,520 Speaker 1: in fact be evolutionary pressure on plants to show associate 595 00:34:24,560 --> 00:34:26,840 Speaker 1: of learning. So, much like the question we asked earlier 596 00:34:26,880 --> 00:34:30,600 Speaker 1: about sounds and and stuff in plants, it's worth thinking, 597 00:34:30,719 --> 00:34:34,800 Speaker 1: is there actually an ecologically relevant reason for the creature 598 00:34:34,800 --> 00:34:38,440 Speaker 1: you're studying to have the ability you're looking for? And 599 00:34:38,560 --> 00:34:41,200 Speaker 1: uh so that they write quote. In complex and ever 600 00:34:41,320 --> 00:34:44,799 Speaker 1: changing environments, resources such as food are often scarce and 601 00:34:44,920 --> 00:34:49,640 Speaker 1: unevenly distributed in space and time. Therefore, utilizing external cues 602 00:34:49,680 --> 00:34:54,160 Speaker 1: to locate and remember high quality sources allows more efficient foraging, 603 00:34:54,200 --> 00:34:59,080 Speaker 1: thus increasing chances for survival. Associations between environmental cues and 604 00:34:59,160 --> 00:35:03,000 Speaker 1: food are readily formed because of the tangible benefits they confer. 605 00:35:03,480 --> 00:35:05,840 Speaker 1: While examples of the key role they play in shaping 606 00:35:05,880 --> 00:35:09,919 Speaker 1: foraging behaviors are widespread in the animal world, the possibility 607 00:35:09,960 --> 00:35:13,279 Speaker 1: that plants are also able to acquire learned associations to 608 00:35:13,320 --> 00:35:17,000 Speaker 1: guide their foraging behavior has never been demonstrated. Okay, so 609 00:35:17,239 --> 00:35:21,680 Speaker 1: the same ability to discern and make these associations would 610 00:35:21,719 --> 00:35:25,200 Speaker 1: potentially be useful for plants, we just haven't documented evidence 611 00:35:25,239 --> 00:35:27,799 Speaker 1: of it yet. And this study explored the question with 612 00:35:27,840 --> 00:35:29,560 Speaker 1: the use of a different plant than the other one. 613 00:35:29,640 --> 00:35:32,120 Speaker 1: We're not talking about Mimosa putica anymore. In this case, 614 00:35:32,160 --> 00:35:35,440 Speaker 1: they looked at seedlings of the garden p plant or 615 00:35:35,560 --> 00:35:40,680 Speaker 1: Pieceum sativum. Now it's worth clarifying that the plant behavior 616 00:35:40,719 --> 00:35:44,360 Speaker 1: studied in this experiment occurs on a different time scale 617 00:35:44,400 --> 00:35:46,560 Speaker 1: than the ones we talked about in the previous episode. 618 00:35:46,600 --> 00:35:50,760 Speaker 1: In the last episode, uh, there were there were examples 619 00:35:50,760 --> 00:35:53,600 Speaker 1: of the few plants with the ability to move rapidly, 620 00:35:53,640 --> 00:35:56,719 Speaker 1: such as the venus fly trap or Mimosa putica, and 621 00:35:56,800 --> 00:36:00,879 Speaker 1: these rapid movements were examples of what are called nast reflexes, 622 00:36:00,960 --> 00:36:05,040 Speaker 1: reflexes that are independent of the direction of the stimulus 623 00:36:05,040 --> 00:36:08,720 Speaker 1: and they're just guided by the plant's body form. Nastic 624 00:36:08,760 --> 00:36:13,319 Speaker 1: movements were contrasted with what are called tropisms, which tend 625 00:36:13,400 --> 00:36:16,640 Speaker 1: to be slower movements but are stimulus directed. And the 626 00:36:16,640 --> 00:36:20,200 Speaker 1: most common plant tropism you will have observed pretty much 627 00:36:20,239 --> 00:36:24,280 Speaker 1: everybody seen this is phototropism growing towards a light source, 628 00:36:24,320 --> 00:36:27,640 Speaker 1: which totally makes sense for a plant because light provides 629 00:36:27,640 --> 00:36:30,799 Speaker 1: the energy that powers photosynthesis. So you can roughly think 630 00:36:30,800 --> 00:36:33,680 Speaker 1: of a plant growing toward light much like an animal 631 00:36:33,719 --> 00:36:36,360 Speaker 1: moving toward a source of food. And that's what this 632 00:36:37,120 --> 00:36:41,360 Speaker 1: experiment was studying, not nastic reflexes, but tropisms, growth in 633 00:36:41,400 --> 00:36:45,080 Speaker 1: the direction of a biologically salient stimulus, in this case light. 634 00:36:45,920 --> 00:36:48,960 Speaker 1: So the first experimental set up looked like this the 635 00:36:49,000 --> 00:36:53,080 Speaker 1: author's right quote. In the first experiment, p seedlings, forty 636 00:36:53,120 --> 00:36:56,120 Speaker 1: five of them were entrained to an eight hour light 637 00:36:56,239 --> 00:37:00,160 Speaker 1: sixteen hour dark cycle for five to eight days. In 638 00:37:00,160 --> 00:37:03,200 Speaker 1: the subsequent three day training period, they were kept in 639 00:37:03,320 --> 00:37:06,680 Speaker 1: darkness with the exception of one hour light exposures during 640 00:37:06,719 --> 00:37:11,000 Speaker 1: the three daily training sessions, and during this training period 641 00:37:11,040 --> 00:37:13,440 Speaker 1: the seedlings they would place them in what's known as 642 00:37:13,480 --> 00:37:16,000 Speaker 1: a y maze. So to picture this, you think of 643 00:37:16,040 --> 00:37:19,200 Speaker 1: a y shaped pipe. The seedling is down at the 644 00:37:19,239 --> 00:37:21,800 Speaker 1: bottom in the in the single channel part of the tube, 645 00:37:21,800 --> 00:37:25,360 Speaker 1: and then above it the tube forks off into two arms. 646 00:37:25,640 --> 00:37:28,520 Speaker 1: And then there are two different training conditions. One in 647 00:37:28,520 --> 00:37:32,000 Speaker 1: which the seedlings are exposed to a light source from 648 00:37:32,000 --> 00:37:35,160 Speaker 1: one arm of the tube with a fan blowing on 649 00:37:35,239 --> 00:37:38,720 Speaker 1: them from the same arm, and then there's another test 650 00:37:38,920 --> 00:37:41,440 Speaker 1: condition in which they are exposed to a light source 651 00:37:41,520 --> 00:37:43,759 Speaker 1: from one arm and a fan blowing on them from 652 00:37:43,800 --> 00:37:46,759 Speaker 1: the opposite arm. So we have the light associated with 653 00:37:46,800 --> 00:37:50,279 Speaker 1: a fan or a light associated with being opposite the fan. 654 00:37:51,239 --> 00:37:55,960 Speaker 1: So if the plants are capable of classically conditioned associations, 655 00:37:56,200 --> 00:37:59,000 Speaker 1: one group should learn that the airflow from a fan 656 00:37:59,200 --> 00:38:01,920 Speaker 1: is positively correlated with food, so it should start to 657 00:38:01,960 --> 00:38:05,920 Speaker 1: associate a fan with food. And then the other we'll 658 00:38:06,000 --> 00:38:09,239 Speaker 1: learn that the airflow is negatively correlated with food, and 659 00:38:09,280 --> 00:38:12,120 Speaker 1: it should associate going in the opposite direction of the 660 00:38:12,160 --> 00:38:14,560 Speaker 1: fan with food. And to make the direction of the 661 00:38:14,600 --> 00:38:18,239 Speaker 1: incoming light unpredictable, its direction was repeatedly switched around during 662 00:38:18,239 --> 00:38:21,239 Speaker 1: the training period. Though it's association or lack of association 663 00:38:21,560 --> 00:38:24,880 Speaker 1: with the fan was kept consistent with each plan, and 664 00:38:24,960 --> 00:38:28,040 Speaker 1: after this training period, the plants were further subdivided to 665 00:38:28,080 --> 00:38:29,840 Speaker 1: put some in test groups and the other in the 666 00:38:29,880 --> 00:38:33,600 Speaker 1: control group, and the two test groups would be exposed 667 00:38:33,600 --> 00:38:36,960 Speaker 1: to a fan from one direction or the other without 668 00:38:37,239 --> 00:38:40,720 Speaker 1: the light source along with it the author's right quote. 669 00:38:40,719 --> 00:38:43,240 Speaker 1: In this group, to control for the influence of innate 670 00:38:43,280 --> 00:38:47,239 Speaker 1: phototropic response, the fan was placed in the arm opposite 671 00:38:47,320 --> 00:38:51,280 Speaker 1: to last light exposure in the fan plus light group 672 00:38:51,680 --> 00:38:54,000 Speaker 1: and on the arm of the last light exposure in 673 00:38:54,040 --> 00:38:57,360 Speaker 1: the fan versus light group. So that was the second 674 00:38:57,400 --> 00:38:59,200 Speaker 1: is when they were on opposite sides of the y 675 00:38:59,320 --> 00:39:03,320 Speaker 1: Mas quote. The seedlings of the control group were left undisturbed. 676 00:39:03,719 --> 00:39:06,400 Speaker 1: On the morning after the testing day, we visually inspected 677 00:39:06,440 --> 00:39:08,799 Speaker 1: the seedlings and recorded the arm of the maze they 678 00:39:08,800 --> 00:39:12,200 Speaker 1: had grown into. So what did they find When the 679 00:39:12,200 --> 00:39:14,560 Speaker 1: control group, this is the group that got no fan 680 00:39:14,640 --> 00:39:17,960 Speaker 1: exposure in the test phase, so no fan, one of 681 00:39:17,960 --> 00:39:20,680 Speaker 1: the plants grew in the direction of the most recent 682 00:39:20,800 --> 00:39:23,600 Speaker 1: light exposure, wherever the light came from last that's where 683 00:39:23,600 --> 00:39:26,640 Speaker 1: they went. But in the test groups, the author's report 684 00:39:26,680 --> 00:39:30,799 Speaker 1: that the majority of seedlings did indeed show a conditioned response. 685 00:39:31,280 --> 00:39:33,480 Speaker 1: So in the group that had been trained with the 686 00:39:33,520 --> 00:39:36,040 Speaker 1: fan and the light on the same side, sixty two 687 00:39:36,120 --> 00:39:39,080 Speaker 1: percent of them grew toward the fan without the light, 688 00:39:39,560 --> 00:39:41,200 Speaker 1: and in the group that had been trained with the 689 00:39:41,200 --> 00:39:44,960 Speaker 1: fan and the light on opposite sides, six grew away 690 00:39:44,960 --> 00:39:48,920 Speaker 1: from the fan. So if this holds up, it would 691 00:39:48,920 --> 00:39:52,400 Speaker 1: appear to show associate of learning in plants, a type 692 00:39:52,400 --> 00:39:55,719 Speaker 1: of learning that in the majority of cases prevails over 693 00:39:55,760 --> 00:39:59,120 Speaker 1: the basic reflexive tropism to grow in the direction of 694 00:39:59,160 --> 00:40:02,600 Speaker 1: wherever the light came from last. But of course it's 695 00:40:02,600 --> 00:40:05,239 Speaker 1: a good question does this study actually hold up. We 696 00:40:05,400 --> 00:40:07,560 Speaker 1: will come and come back to that in a minute. Here. 697 00:40:08,280 --> 00:40:11,000 Speaker 1: One more thing I wanted to mention, though, is that uh. 698 00:40:11,080 --> 00:40:13,759 Speaker 1: There were also subsequent experiments in the same study, and 699 00:40:13,800 --> 00:40:17,200 Speaker 1: the authors found that the associate of learning only succeeded 700 00:40:17,239 --> 00:40:20,360 Speaker 1: when it took place during the quote daytime from the 701 00:40:20,400 --> 00:40:24,880 Speaker 1: plant's perspective given its training regimen, which the authors suggest 702 00:40:25,000 --> 00:40:29,440 Speaker 1: means that there are metabolic demands on the learning process. Quote. 703 00:40:29,480 --> 00:40:32,480 Speaker 1: This experiment, in which plants were trained at three different 704 00:40:32,480 --> 00:40:35,560 Speaker 1: time periods within twenty four hours, revealed that the learning 705 00:40:35,560 --> 00:40:39,919 Speaker 1: effect disappears when training occurred during the evening hours, when 706 00:40:40,040 --> 00:40:43,880 Speaker 1: light would not normally be available. This finding is particularly 707 00:40:43,920 --> 00:40:47,000 Speaker 1: intriguing and bolsters the argument that associate of learning is 708 00:40:47,000 --> 00:40:51,080 Speaker 1: an adaptive response that is only utilized during daylight hours 709 00:40:51,120 --> 00:40:54,920 Speaker 1: when it is most useful via an internal circadian clock, 710 00:40:55,320 --> 00:40:58,160 Speaker 1: which is interesting because that also invokes a sort of 711 00:40:58,360 --> 00:41:00,959 Speaker 1: second order type of thing that people would have called 712 00:41:00,960 --> 00:41:04,120 Speaker 1: it a type of plant intelligence, which is its ability 713 00:41:04,200 --> 00:41:07,200 Speaker 1: to measure spans of time. Anyway, in the end, the 714 00:41:07,239 --> 00:41:09,759 Speaker 1: authors of this study, they say, quote, our results show 715 00:41:09,800 --> 00:41:13,400 Speaker 1: that associate of learning is an essential component of plant behavior. 716 00:41:13,800 --> 00:41:18,520 Speaker 1: We conclude the dissociative learning represents a universal adaptive mechanism 717 00:41:18,560 --> 00:41:22,560 Speaker 1: shared by both plants, animals and plants. Now this was 718 00:41:22,600 --> 00:41:26,239 Speaker 1: in TWI and I did find a study following up 719 00:41:26,280 --> 00:41:30,480 Speaker 1: on this and attempting a replication and failing. So the 720 00:41:30,840 --> 00:41:35,960 Speaker 1: attempted replication was by Ksey Marcole published in E Life 721 00:41:36,160 --> 00:41:39,160 Speaker 1: called lack of Evidence for Associate of learning and p Plants. 722 00:41:39,280 --> 00:41:43,400 Speaker 1: The year was pretty straightforward. The author tried to repeat 723 00:41:43,440 --> 00:41:47,279 Speaker 1: the twenty sixteen experiment. They repeated the protocol described in 724 00:41:47,280 --> 00:41:50,400 Speaker 1: the first experiment, and they write, quote, However, a replication 725 00:41:50,440 --> 00:41:54,000 Speaker 1: of the protocol failed to demonstrate the same result, calling 726 00:41:54,040 --> 00:41:58,239 Speaker 1: for further verification and study before mainstream acceptance of this 727 00:41:58,360 --> 00:42:02,760 Speaker 1: paradigm shifting phenomenon. This replication attempt used a larger sample 728 00:42:02,800 --> 00:42:07,200 Speaker 1: size and fully blinded analysis, and of course, uh, both 729 00:42:07,239 --> 00:42:09,319 Speaker 1: of those things are always good. Larger samples are good, 730 00:42:09,320 --> 00:42:12,680 Speaker 1: blinded analysis is always good. I wasn't a d percent 731 00:42:12,760 --> 00:42:14,680 Speaker 1: sure exactly what that meant in this case, but I 732 00:42:14,760 --> 00:42:17,600 Speaker 1: think it would mean that whoever compiled and analyzed the 733 00:42:17,640 --> 00:42:20,720 Speaker 1: results of the experiment had no way of knowing which 734 00:42:20,800 --> 00:42:24,000 Speaker 1: groups the subjects were in, which would help prevent any 735 00:42:24,000 --> 00:42:29,359 Speaker 1: possible contamination, intentional or unintentional by experiment or bias. So 736 00:42:29,600 --> 00:42:31,600 Speaker 1: we're we're in the in the middle ground here. One 737 00:42:31,640 --> 00:42:34,440 Speaker 1: study gets a positive result, a follow up attempt does not. 738 00:42:34,640 --> 00:42:36,880 Speaker 1: So how do we sort it out? Well, Actually, the 739 00:42:36,920 --> 00:42:39,960 Speaker 1: authors of the original study replied, publishing a follow up 740 00:42:40,000 --> 00:42:43,960 Speaker 1: comment in the same journal. Uh. They essentially to summarize 741 00:42:43,960 --> 00:42:46,319 Speaker 1: their argument. They essentially say that the experiment may not 742 00:42:46,440 --> 00:42:50,680 Speaker 1: have worked in the replication attempt because of some crucial 743 00:42:50,760 --> 00:42:55,040 Speaker 1: differences in methodology, mainly that the unconditioned stimulus in this 744 00:42:55,120 --> 00:42:59,040 Speaker 1: case light was not tightly controlled enough, and that They 745 00:42:59,040 --> 00:43:02,399 Speaker 1: criticize some things about how the the plants had been 746 00:43:02,440 --> 00:43:05,759 Speaker 1: mounted inside their growth case, and the idea that light 747 00:43:05,880 --> 00:43:08,760 Speaker 1: from one tube may have been penetrating into other tubes, 748 00:43:09,080 --> 00:43:11,919 Speaker 1: making a kind of light noisy environment. There were too 749 00:43:11,920 --> 00:43:16,000 Speaker 1: many light sources and this would introduce randomness into the results. 750 00:43:16,480 --> 00:43:19,400 Speaker 1: So to put it in terms of the Pavlov's dog example, 751 00:43:19,440 --> 00:43:22,000 Speaker 1: this might be a kind of rough comparison, but uh, 752 00:43:22,040 --> 00:43:25,879 Speaker 1: the unconditioned stimulus in Pavlov's dogs would be food. So 753 00:43:26,040 --> 00:43:28,560 Speaker 1: if you were to have a poor control of the 754 00:43:28,640 --> 00:43:30,640 Speaker 1: unconditioned stimulus in that case, it would be kind of 755 00:43:30,680 --> 00:43:34,799 Speaker 1: like imagining that the dogs had constant ambient access to food. 756 00:43:34,840 --> 00:43:38,840 Speaker 1: They're just food bowls constantly full throughout the room they're in. 757 00:43:38,840 --> 00:43:41,759 Speaker 1: In that case, would they salivate when they saw an 758 00:43:41,760 --> 00:43:44,319 Speaker 1: assistant coming in to put some more food in one 759 00:43:44,320 --> 00:43:47,560 Speaker 1: of the bowls? Well, if they've just always got food anyway, 760 00:43:47,560 --> 00:43:49,600 Speaker 1: probably not right. I don't know. I don't know enough 761 00:43:49,640 --> 00:43:52,120 Speaker 1: about dogs. Sometimes I feel like sometimes my cat can 762 00:43:52,160 --> 00:43:54,000 Speaker 1: be kind of like that, where it's like, really, do 763 00:43:54,040 --> 00:43:55,879 Speaker 1: you have food? And here's more food, and now you're 764 00:43:55,880 --> 00:43:58,200 Speaker 1: excited for this, how about the food you already have? 765 00:43:58,520 --> 00:44:00,759 Speaker 1: I trust the research or something. If if they've just 766 00:44:00,800 --> 00:44:02,880 Speaker 1: got food any time they want it, right, then they 767 00:44:02,880 --> 00:44:06,440 Speaker 1: wouldn't associate the the assistant coming in to fill the 768 00:44:06,480 --> 00:44:09,480 Speaker 1: food bowls with them getting the food. It would just, 769 00:44:09,680 --> 00:44:11,600 Speaker 1: you know, that they would just get the food whenever 770 00:44:11,680 --> 00:44:14,719 Speaker 1: they want. So that that's what the authors of the 771 00:44:14,760 --> 00:44:17,120 Speaker 1: original study argued. But then there was a response to 772 00:44:17,120 --> 00:44:20,040 Speaker 1: the response in the same journal again where Marco came 773 00:44:20,080 --> 00:44:22,880 Speaker 1: back and argued for a number of technical reasons that 774 00:44:22,920 --> 00:44:27,560 Speaker 1: the differences they highlighted are unlikely to explain the different outcomes. Quote. 775 00:44:27,600 --> 00:44:31,840 Speaker 1: Despite considerable effort to match the experimental details of the experiment, 776 00:44:32,080 --> 00:44:34,920 Speaker 1: the replication attempt did not find evidence for associate of 777 00:44:35,040 --> 00:44:37,480 Speaker 1: learning and people lants. Of course, this does not rule 778 00:44:37,520 --> 00:44:40,319 Speaker 1: out the existence of such learning, and I sincerely hope 779 00:44:40,360 --> 00:44:44,680 Speaker 1: that future research demonstrates the phenomenon to be reproducible. Uh So, 780 00:44:44,840 --> 00:44:47,160 Speaker 1: I feel like we're kind of in the middle ground here. Personally, 781 00:44:47,200 --> 00:44:50,360 Speaker 1: I don't have the expertise or judgment to reach a 782 00:44:50,400 --> 00:44:54,040 Speaker 1: conclusion on on the technical points they're arguing about in 783 00:44:54,080 --> 00:44:56,839 Speaker 1: the experiment here, So I guess I would just say 784 00:44:56,840 --> 00:45:00,160 Speaker 1: I would have to consider the results very interesting. Bit 785 00:45:00,200 --> 00:45:05,759 Speaker 1: heavily caveatted until we see successful replication. Yeah, now, I 786 00:45:05,800 --> 00:45:09,560 Speaker 1: will say that, Um, the the lead author on this paper, 787 00:45:09,840 --> 00:45:14,440 Speaker 1: Monica Gagliano. I've seen her. Uh. She was part of 788 00:45:14,480 --> 00:45:17,880 Speaker 1: a panel discussion at the World Science Festival back in 789 00:45:18,000 --> 00:45:22,080 Speaker 1: twenty nineteen I Believe Intelligence Without Brains That also featured 790 00:45:22,120 --> 00:45:25,319 Speaker 1: an scientist Mark Moffatt, whose work we've discussed in the 791 00:45:25,320 --> 00:45:30,120 Speaker 1: show before. And UM, yeah that Monica Gagliano's research research 792 00:45:30,160 --> 00:45:34,200 Speaker 1: Associate Professor in Evolutionary ecology at the Biological Intelligence Lab 793 00:45:34,320 --> 00:45:37,719 Speaker 1: at Southern Cross University in Australia. Her primary areas of 794 00:45:37,719 --> 00:45:42,120 Speaker 1: researcher marine ecology and plant cognitive ecology. She also has 795 00:45:42,120 --> 00:45:44,479 Speaker 1: a book out which I was not aware of until 796 00:45:44,480 --> 00:45:46,920 Speaker 1: I was looking back into her work here. But the 797 00:45:46,960 --> 00:45:49,640 Speaker 1: book is thus Spoke the Plant. Yeah, she seems to 798 00:45:49,680 --> 00:45:52,040 Speaker 1: be one of the leading figures in the plant cognition 799 00:45:52,040 --> 00:45:56,000 Speaker 1: domain these days. She wrote another article, uh in eighteen 800 00:45:56,480 --> 00:45:59,640 Speaker 1: summing up some of this recent stuff in Ecologica called 801 00:45:59,680 --> 00:46:03,560 Speaker 1: Plants Learn and Remember Let's get used to it. Actually, sorry, 802 00:46:03,600 --> 00:46:06,279 Speaker 1: that had three authors. She was the first listed author. Well, 803 00:46:06,280 --> 00:46:07,920 Speaker 1: I will say she did seem to have a good 804 00:46:07,920 --> 00:46:12,040 Speaker 1: sense of humor about about herself and about her area 805 00:46:12,040 --> 00:46:14,319 Speaker 1: of research. When I when I saw her gift that talk. 806 00:46:14,360 --> 00:46:16,000 Speaker 1: And by the way, if you want to see that 807 00:46:16,400 --> 00:46:19,359 Speaker 1: talk for yourself, you can find it at the World 808 00:46:19,440 --> 00:46:22,520 Speaker 1: Science Festival's website. Just look for Intelligence without Brains. They 809 00:46:22,520 --> 00:46:24,719 Speaker 1: have the full the full talk up there. Now. I 810 00:46:24,760 --> 00:46:26,960 Speaker 1: guess we've already covered this a good bit earlier on, 811 00:46:27,000 --> 00:46:29,080 Speaker 1: so I won't get into too much detail. I did 812 00:46:29,160 --> 00:46:31,720 Speaker 1: have a few notes about some other articles I was reading, 813 00:46:31,760 --> 00:46:34,319 Speaker 1: for example, by one author you already sided, who came 814 00:46:34,400 --> 00:46:38,640 Speaker 1: up in UM in Pollen's UH New Yorker piece, Lincoln 815 00:46:38,719 --> 00:46:41,960 Speaker 1: tay Ease, who has been a critic of so called 816 00:46:42,000 --> 00:46:46,560 Speaker 1: plant cognition or plant neurobiology UM, and UH comments by 817 00:46:46,600 --> 00:46:50,080 Speaker 1: researchers from this camp. Though a lot of this seemed 818 00:46:50,120 --> 00:46:51,919 Speaker 1: aimed at the kind of thing you were talking about, 819 00:46:51,920 --> 00:46:58,960 Speaker 1: where they're objecting to certain extrapolations or characterizations, extrapolations from 820 00:46:58,960 --> 00:47:02,400 Speaker 1: more characterization of this research rather than the research itself, 821 00:47:02,760 --> 00:47:06,600 Speaker 1: like UM rejecting the idea of plant consciousness and so forth. 822 00:47:07,000 --> 00:47:10,359 Speaker 1: Of course, that opens its own can of worms, because uh, 823 00:47:10,560 --> 00:47:13,359 Speaker 1: of course, you know, there's no actual test for consciousness 824 00:47:13,400 --> 00:47:16,920 Speaker 1: even in humans. Consciousness can only be experienced directly in 825 00:47:16,960 --> 00:47:20,360 Speaker 1: the self and then inferred to exist by analogy and 826 00:47:20,360 --> 00:47:23,840 Speaker 1: other humans and possibly in non human animals. But that 827 00:47:23,920 --> 00:47:26,719 Speaker 1: they've got a number of arguments based on the uh, 828 00:47:26,920 --> 00:47:31,160 Speaker 1: the just physical anatomical qualities of plants that that say, 829 00:47:31,200 --> 00:47:34,920 Speaker 1: you know, it's very unlikely they would have the whatever 830 00:47:35,000 --> 00:47:38,760 Speaker 1: kind of computational complexity the I don't know, calcium channels 831 00:47:38,840 --> 00:47:41,239 Speaker 1: or anything like that, and plants might possess, it would 832 00:47:41,239 --> 00:47:44,319 Speaker 1: be unlikely to possess the level of complexity that we 833 00:47:44,400 --> 00:47:46,680 Speaker 1: see in animal brains and that we assume to be 834 00:47:46,760 --> 00:47:50,480 Speaker 1: the necessary basis for consciousness. But anyway, I mean, so, 835 00:47:50,560 --> 00:47:52,279 Speaker 1: I think where we're left right now, at least from 836 00:47:52,320 --> 00:47:54,239 Speaker 1: my point of view, is that we're still in the 837 00:47:54,320 --> 00:47:56,880 Speaker 1: middle of a research program. There. There's still like a 838 00:47:57,400 --> 00:47:59,919 Speaker 1: you know, a lot of basic research in plant called 839 00:48:00,000 --> 00:48:02,879 Speaker 1: action going on that maybe in five or ten more 840 00:48:02,960 --> 00:48:06,680 Speaker 1: years we will have a better idea of of what 841 00:48:06,800 --> 00:48:10,239 Speaker 1: the direct evidence is about what plants can actually do, 842 00:48:10,960 --> 00:48:13,480 Speaker 1: and then it might we might be more well equipped 843 00:48:13,560 --> 00:48:16,880 Speaker 1: to argue about whether it actually counts as X, Y 844 00:48:17,000 --> 00:48:18,759 Speaker 1: or c that we you know, words we used to 845 00:48:18,760 --> 00:48:22,120 Speaker 1: associate with the mental phenomena of humans. Yeah, yeah, or 846 00:48:22,160 --> 00:48:25,000 Speaker 1: I do. Maybe we'll have a different terminology at that point, 847 00:48:25,239 --> 00:48:29,400 Speaker 1: um it it it's yeah, we we end up in 848 00:48:29,400 --> 00:48:34,359 Speaker 1: the same situation wherever, trying to divorce the study of 849 00:48:34,480 --> 00:48:38,719 Speaker 1: intelligence and content and even potentially consciousness. Uh, you know, 850 00:48:38,760 --> 00:48:43,840 Speaker 1: on across multiple species and multiple organisms. Uh, despite the 851 00:48:43,840 --> 00:48:47,560 Speaker 1: fact that we have this this this experience of these 852 00:48:47,600 --> 00:48:50,480 Speaker 1: things and this this concept of these things that's you know, 853 00:48:50,520 --> 00:48:52,520 Speaker 1: closer than our own breath. One thing that's got me 854 00:48:52,560 --> 00:48:54,279 Speaker 1: thinking about again this is this is we're in the 855 00:48:54,320 --> 00:48:57,520 Speaker 1: speculative realm. Now, this is not what's necessarily justified by 856 00:48:57,560 --> 00:49:00,160 Speaker 1: the existing evidence. But if you were to discus, ever, 857 00:49:00,239 --> 00:49:04,040 Speaker 1: for example, that maybe you can't justify the claim that 858 00:49:04,120 --> 00:49:07,239 Speaker 1: plants can think, but you could justify the claim that 859 00:49:07,280 --> 00:49:11,279 Speaker 1: plants can learn, it would be an important reminder to 860 00:49:11,400 --> 00:49:15,160 Speaker 1: not blur all different types of mental phenomenon together into 861 00:49:15,200 --> 00:49:20,120 Speaker 1: one single substance, Like there may be important differences between, 862 00:49:20,360 --> 00:49:24,600 Speaker 1: for example, remembering and reasoning that make one but not 863 00:49:24,680 --> 00:49:28,600 Speaker 1: the other possible given any physical substrates, say like the 864 00:49:28,719 --> 00:49:32,799 Speaker 1: kinds of I don't know, computational chemical pathways that would 865 00:49:32,800 --> 00:49:35,960 Speaker 1: exist in in plant stems and roots versus in the 866 00:49:36,000 --> 00:49:38,960 Speaker 1: neural tissue of a human being or an animal. Maybe 867 00:49:39,000 --> 00:49:42,239 Speaker 1: human brain tissue can do both, but plant tissue can 868 00:49:42,280 --> 00:49:47,759 Speaker 1: only do one. And this has interesting implications for speculating 869 00:49:47,760 --> 00:49:50,760 Speaker 1: about alien intelligence, Like if there there are other types 870 00:49:50,800 --> 00:49:54,120 Speaker 1: of intelligence out there in the galaxy, we would tend 871 00:49:54,160 --> 00:49:58,560 Speaker 1: to assume those intelligences to bundle together all the myriad 872 00:49:58,600 --> 00:50:02,040 Speaker 1: functions performed by our own primate brains. But it's important 873 00:50:02,040 --> 00:50:04,600 Speaker 1: to remember those are like specifically primate brains. We've got 874 00:50:04,640 --> 00:50:08,080 Speaker 1: a very particular type of meat in our heads, and 875 00:50:08,120 --> 00:50:11,160 Speaker 1: the type of intelligence were familiar with is what that 876 00:50:11,360 --> 00:50:15,920 Speaker 1: meat can do. So what if, like there's another physical 877 00:50:15,960 --> 00:50:19,360 Speaker 1: substrate that's unfamiliar to us and that constitutes what we 878 00:50:19,360 --> 00:50:23,040 Speaker 1: would think of as the alien brain, whatever that is, 879 00:50:23,160 --> 00:50:26,000 Speaker 1: should we be trying to think of it as capable 880 00:50:26,120 --> 00:50:29,839 Speaker 1: of some of the subdivided parts of intelligence what we 881 00:50:29,880 --> 00:50:32,840 Speaker 1: think of as intelligence, but not others. Yeah, that's a 882 00:50:32,840 --> 00:50:35,279 Speaker 1: great point, And uh, you know, I guess I would 883 00:50:35,280 --> 00:50:38,439 Speaker 1: hope that we're at least reaching towards the point where 884 00:50:38,440 --> 00:50:41,200 Speaker 1: we're going to have a more you know, um complicated 885 00:50:41,280 --> 00:50:45,240 Speaker 1: understanding of what memory and learning are because we're already 886 00:50:45,239 --> 00:50:47,880 Speaker 1: having to contend not just with with human and animal 887 00:50:48,120 --> 00:50:52,400 Speaker 1: memory and learning, but also machine learning and machine memory 888 00:50:52,440 --> 00:50:57,239 Speaker 1: and you know potentially uh, plant analogs as well, and 889 00:50:57,320 --> 00:51:00,160 Speaker 1: so yeah, it just it kind of hopefully for us 890 00:51:00,320 --> 00:51:04,120 Speaker 1: is to to push the human experience and the human 891 00:51:04,160 --> 00:51:07,040 Speaker 1: model a little further aside and realize that, yeah, this 892 00:51:07,160 --> 00:51:10,000 Speaker 1: is this is an example of a broader thing and 893 00:51:10,040 --> 00:51:12,880 Speaker 1: it is not the thing itself. Like I'm imagining a 894 00:51:13,280 --> 00:51:16,560 Speaker 1: sci fi concept of story about encountering aliens that maybe 895 00:51:16,719 --> 00:51:19,960 Speaker 1: if this makes any sense, what if they could do 896 00:51:20,160 --> 00:51:24,120 Speaker 1: something that looks like intelligence because they can learn and adapt, 897 00:51:24,280 --> 00:51:28,359 Speaker 1: but they can't do what we would think of as reasoning. Yeah, 898 00:51:28,840 --> 00:51:31,880 Speaker 1: like they can learn, but they can't think. I don't know, 899 00:51:32,239 --> 00:51:34,600 Speaker 1: I'm not sure that even makes sense, but uh, I 900 00:51:34,640 --> 00:51:37,400 Speaker 1: don't know. It gets my gears cranking. All right, we 901 00:51:37,440 --> 00:51:39,520 Speaker 1: just had a brief conversation off Mike. Are we gonna 902 00:51:39,840 --> 00:51:41,880 Speaker 1: are we gonna cap this series here? We're gonna go 903 00:51:41,960 --> 00:51:46,279 Speaker 1: more with the the interesting hidden lives of plants, plant cognition, 904 00:51:46,560 --> 00:51:49,840 Speaker 1: so called plant communication, things like that. Maybe we'll just 905 00:51:49,920 --> 00:51:52,600 Speaker 1: leave it a mystery. You'll be surprised next Tuesday, which 906 00:51:52,840 --> 00:51:55,959 Speaker 1: whether we're onto something else or whether the plants continue. Yeah, 907 00:51:56,040 --> 00:51:57,960 Speaker 1: and In the meantime, you've you've got some hanging out 908 00:51:57,960 --> 00:52:00,440 Speaker 1: to do with your various house plants and and plants 909 00:52:00,440 --> 00:52:03,360 Speaker 1: in the yard, maybe plants out in the wild. Um, 910 00:52:03,400 --> 00:52:05,799 Speaker 1: you know, if if they're within your house, maybe maybe 911 00:52:05,800 --> 00:52:08,840 Speaker 1: play them a little Starship, play them a little some 912 00:52:08,920 --> 00:52:11,680 Speaker 1: prints and uh and some of the other musical examples 913 00:52:11,680 --> 00:52:14,359 Speaker 1: we mentioned these episodes. Uh. We're not saying it's gonna 914 00:52:14,400 --> 00:52:17,399 Speaker 1: do anything, but it might be fun to hang out 915 00:52:17,440 --> 00:52:19,360 Speaker 1: with your plan and listen to Starship. You know. I 916 00:52:19,400 --> 00:52:22,640 Speaker 1: think of it like the the semantic contents of talking 917 00:52:22,680 --> 00:52:25,200 Speaker 1: to your dog. Like if the dogs mostly just going 918 00:52:25,239 --> 00:52:27,319 Speaker 1: to be responding to the tone of your voice. If 919 00:52:27,320 --> 00:52:29,560 Speaker 1: I tell my dog he's a he's a bad boy 920 00:52:29,600 --> 00:52:32,440 Speaker 1: and a good boy voice, he's probably gonna be super happy. 921 00:52:32,520 --> 00:52:34,320 Speaker 1: But you know, I want to say good boy anyway 922 00:52:34,360 --> 00:52:37,719 Speaker 1: because that makes me feel good. All right, Well, we're 923 00:52:37,760 --> 00:52:40,920 Speaker 1: gonna go and close it out here. But as always, 924 00:52:40,960 --> 00:52:43,719 Speaker 1: you can find episodes core episodes of Stuff to Blow 925 00:52:43,760 --> 00:52:46,040 Speaker 1: Your Mind in the Stuff to Blow your Mind podcast 926 00:52:46,120 --> 00:52:50,640 Speaker 1: feed every Thursday and Tuesday. UM. You will also find 927 00:52:50,640 --> 00:52:53,719 Speaker 1: our short form artifact or Monster Fack episodes on Wednesdays. 928 00:52:54,160 --> 00:52:56,640 Speaker 1: Listener Mail on Mondays and on Friday, well we do 929 00:52:56,640 --> 00:52:58,720 Speaker 1: a little weird house cinema. That's when we set aside 930 00:52:58,760 --> 00:53:01,600 Speaker 1: most serious concerns and just talk about a strange film. 931 00:53:01,640 --> 00:53:03,840 Speaker 1: And then on the weekend we have a Vault episode 932 00:53:04,400 --> 00:53:07,640 Speaker 1: that is a rerun from yesteryear. Huge thanks as always 933 00:53:07,719 --> 00:53:11,200 Speaker 1: to our excellent audio producer Seth Nicholas Johnson, though he 934 00:53:11,320 --> 00:53:13,640 Speaker 1: is out this week, so big thanks to our excellent 935 00:53:13,760 --> 00:53:17,200 Speaker 1: guest audio producer Paul decand huge thanks for stepping in 936 00:53:17,200 --> 00:53:19,560 Speaker 1: this week, Poluh. If you would like to get in 937 00:53:19,640 --> 00:53:22,239 Speaker 1: touch with us with feedback on this episode or any other, 938 00:53:22,680 --> 00:53:24,960 Speaker 1: suggest a topic for the future, or just to say hello, 939 00:53:25,000 --> 00:53:27,960 Speaker 1: you can email us at contact at stuff to Blow 940 00:53:28,000 --> 00:53:38,759 Speaker 1: your Mind dot com. Stuff to Blow your Mind is 941 00:53:38,800 --> 00:53:41,520 Speaker 1: production of I Heart Radio. For more podcasts for my 942 00:53:41,560 --> 00:53:44,600 Speaker 1: heart Radio, visit the iHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or 943 00:53:44,600 --> 00:54:01,880 Speaker 1: wherever you're listening to your favorite shows. US has a 944 00:54:01,920 --> 00:54:03,240 Speaker 1: stomack about a prote