Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

At Phys.org: Learning to better understand the language of algae

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

Can algae talk? “Well, although they don’t have any mouth or ears, algae still communicate with their own kind and with other organisms in their surroundings. They do this with volatile organic substances they release into the water,” says Dr. Patrick Fink, a water ecologist at the UFZ’s Magdeburg site.

These chemical signals are known as BVOCs (biogenic volatile organic compounds) and are the equivalent of odors in the air with which flowering plants communicate and attract their pollinators. When under attack by parasites, some plant species release odors that attract the parasites’ natural enemies to them.

“Algae also employ such interactions and protective mechanisms,” says Fink. “After all, they are among the oldest organisms on Earth, and chemical communication is the most original form of exchanging information in evolutionary history. However, our knowledge in this area still remains very fragmentary.”

An example from the ocean: A diatom bloom represents a true feast for copepods. This rich offering of nutrients should ensure that their population subsequently grows. However, this is not the case.

“Although the copepods are well nourished, their spawn that they carry with them in their egg sack is at serious risk. Because the BVOCS from the diatoms impede cell division and thus disrupt embryonic development,” Fink explains “In this way, the diatoms prevent excessive predation on their descendants—thereby ensuring the preservation of their kind.”

“As the primary producers, algae form the basis of life of all aquatic food webs,” says Fink. “It is therefore important that we learn to better understand the chemical communication of algae and their basic functional relationships in aquatic ecosystems.”

The authors believe that increased understanding of the language of algae could also have useful technical applications, such as in using chemical signals to deter parasites, thereby reducing the use of pharmaceuticals in aquaculture. A better understanding of the chemical communication paths is also important to enable the development of more efficient environmental strategies.

Complete article at Phys.org.

Communication implies the purposeful interchange of information. How does intentionality arise from natural interactions between atoms?

Comments
Caspian/14 I don’t think the algae show intentionality. I think this is simply stimulus-response behavior ……..chuckdarwin
November 2, 2022
November
11
Nov
2
02
2022
02:07 PM
2
02
07
PM
PDT
Caspian at 14, All animals and insects are given infused knowledge to interact with their environment effectively. Examples: Bees make hives and engage in complex tasks. Ants build tunnels and engage in complex tasks. Behaviors are distinct. Dogs do not behave just like cats do. Each animal has their own built-in nature. Random chance cannot explain this. Not the behaviors or the tasks that each animal and insect carries out.relatd
November 2, 2022
November
11
Nov
2
02
2022
12:49 PM
12
12
49
PM
PDT
@14
Note that “thermodynamic processes” are results of electromagnetic interactions between atoms that follow the law of conservation of energy (1st law of thermo) and the law of increasing entropy (2nd law), to put it in simple terms.
I think you're making quantum thermodynamics seem too simple. Our theories of how heat and energy behave in macroscopic systems are not so easily connected to our theories of atomic and subatomic systems.
How do the laws of physics lead to an organism that exhibits intentionality and purposeful behavior, and this (in the evolutionary paradigm) applies not just to algae, but to all creatures, including humans, who are much more than even a collection of “drives to survive”.
If you're asking for a theory which makes this connection conceivable, I could describe one that I've read about. If you're asking for a theory which has been experimentally confirmed, I don't think anyone would say that we have that.PyrrhoManiac1
November 2, 2022
November
11
Nov
2
02
2022
10:20 AM
10
10
20
AM
PDT
I don’t believe that anyone has begun to answer my question:
This is a poor place to ask questions that someone might try to answer. People are generally here to rant not educate or understand. Especially on something no one understands. This particular question can only be answered by speculation since there will not be any evidence pointing to a path. It happened, so there must be a series of steps that led to it. Next comes the speculation which then becomes evidence.jerry
November 2, 2022
November
11
Nov
2
02
2022
08:11 AM
8
08
11
AM
PDT
Despite the number of comments so far, I don't believe that anyone has begun to answer my question: "How does intentionality arise from natural interactions between atoms?" Note that "thermodynamic processes" are results of electromagnetic interactions between atoms that follow the law of conservation of energy (1st law of thermo) and the law of increasing entropy (2nd law), to put it in simple terms. How do the laws of physics lead to an organism that exhibits intentionality and purposeful behavior? In the evolutionary paradigm, this applies not just to algae, but to all creatures, including humans, who are much more than even a collection of "drives to survive".Caspian
November 2, 2022
November
11
Nov
2
02
2022
07:10 AM
7
07
10
AM
PDT
@12 Well, if Chemero is about the concept of a niche, then an empty niche is (perhaps) incoherent. What might be said instead is that there are ecological roles that could be filled by the emergence of a new organism-environment relationship. For example, on my view, the giant terrestrial phorusrachids were, although apex predators, occupied that ecological role in ways different from apex predators in other ecosystems. (There's been some intriguing recent research suggesting that a major driver of recent hominid evolution was the evolution of hominids into apex predators; see "Humans Were Apex Predators for Two Million Years".) South American phorusrachids in the Eocene and hominids in the Afro-Eurasian Pleistocene were both apex predators, but the niches were also really different. And that's just comparing two terrestrial endotherms! In other words, while humans are supremely good at niche construction, my suggestion is that in a more subtle way, all niches are constructed. (I just learned that there's a difference between selective niche construction and developmental niche construction, which is really interesting!)PyrrhoManiac1
November 2, 2022
November
11
Nov
2
02
2022
06:59 AM
6
06
59
AM
PDT
...whether niches can be specified independently of organisms.
Empty niches can! The hugely important factor is feedback. I think the rest of your comment can be thus reasonably summarized. Humans are perhaps supreme at niche construction. But perhaps the Great Oxidation Event could be considered pivotal to how life on Earth is now (for the moment if CO2 keeps climbing).Alan Fox
November 2, 2022
November
11
Nov
2
02
2022
06:21 AM
6
06
21
AM
PDT
@7
Good grief! The niche is an organism’s immediate environment. This is not difficult.
There is actually a subtle but (I think) deep and fascinating debate about whether niches can be specified independently of organisms. Tony Chemero, in Radical Embodied Cognitive Science, suggests that we understand a niche as the set of all affordances that an organism has. The term affordance is taken from the ecological psychologist J. J. Gibson to mean "the perceivable opportunities for movement" -- e.g. a monkey will see a branch as graspable, a bird will see the same branch as perchable, etc. Affordances aren't something independent from what the animal can do. (I don't know if there's any literature on affordances in plants or fungi.) If a niche is the set of all affordances, then niches aren't specifiable independent of organisms. Affordances are nicely connected to the concept of habit. Habits aren't just 'what is there anyway', nor are they intrinsic features of individual organisms. Habits are relationships between organisms and environments. (This is why a change of environment is often necessary to change a habit, especially addictions.) This makes contact with a lovely essay by Lewontin and Levins, "The Organism as Subject and Object of Evolution". Their point is that evolution isn't just about what happens to organisms but also about what organisms do: organisms are agents that are sensitive to their surroundings and purposively respond to them. Some people object to evolution because they see it as an "object theory": a theory that treats organisms as objects, and when applied to humans, treats humans as objects. (This is one strand of the misguided association of evolution with "materialism", insofar as materialism is taken to be a metaphysics in which there are no subjects but only objects.) Lewontin and Levins, as well as Chemero in his work and Denis Walsh in his Organisms, Agency, and Evolution, demonstrate that evolution is a subject theory (or better, a theory of the organism-environment relationship and therefore both a subject theory and an object theory). TLDR; niches aren't immediate environments but the network of affordances and habits through which organisms relate to their environments.PyrrhoManiac1
November 2, 2022
November
11
Nov
2
02
2022
05:47 AM
5
05
47
AM
PDT
If an organism moves around a lot, does it have changing immediate environments
Arctic Terns move around a lot. In moving from Arctic to Antarctic each year they experience two summers.Alan Fox
November 1, 2022
November
11
Nov
1
01
2022
04:36 PM
4
04
36
PM
PDT
Andrew at 8, A man leads the animals to a movie set and provides them with food. All kidding aside. Animals just show up in the right niche for them? Who says so? Supposedly, in the ancient past, Earth had more active volcanoes and numerous threats, meaning animals looking to eat other animals. And like evolution, any specific animal just happened to find a place for itself by luck? By chance? Random chance? Not likely. If a fire broke out and the animals had to leave "their niche," then what? It's easy to tell made-up stories as if describing a scene in a movie. It's quite another to provide evidence.relatd
November 1, 2022
November
11
Nov
1
01
2022
03:56 PM
3
03
56
PM
PDT
"The niche is an organism’s immediate environment." AF, If an organism moves around a lot, does it have changing immediate environments? Andrewasauber
November 1, 2022
November
11
Nov
1
01
2022
03:36 PM
3
03
36
PM
PDT
Good grief! The niche is an organism's immediate environment. This is not difficult.Alan Fox
November 1, 2022
November
11
Nov
1
01
2022
02:42 PM
2
02
42
PM
PDT
How about God of the Niche?Seversky
November 1, 2022
November
11
Nov
1
01
2022
02:24 PM
2
02
24
PM
PDT
The niche! The niche! The niche, the niche, the niche! Yawn. I think the "niche" being envisioned looks more like a Hollywood movie set than real life.relatd
November 1, 2022
November
11
Nov
1
01
2022
02:18 PM
2
02
18
PM
PDT
"different ecological niches" It's The Niche, It's The Niche, Oh The Niche is back! PM1, What's an example of an ecological niche? Andrewasauber
November 1, 2022
November
11
Nov
1
01
2022
01:28 PM
1
01
28
PM
PDT
@2
Proponents of evolution would have us believe that our thoughts consist only of chemical reactions, nothing more.
Can you find a passage from Darwin, Mayr, Lewontin, Gould, Sober, or Walsh that can justify that assertion?
That people can conceive and then produce new inventions, for example, shows that this idea that you can’t even trust your own thoughts is not true.
I don't know who is supposedly claiming that "we can't trust our own thoughts", but I have no idea what you think it would mean to trust our own thoughts or what that has to do with creativity.
In the animal world, dogs behave as dogs and cats as cats. They have their own distinct natures.
Sure, but that's obviously compatible with evolution: evolutionary theory explains cat behavior and dog behavior as different evolved responses in social carnivores to different ecological niches. If this is supposed to be a challenge to evolution, I'm not seeing it.PyrrhoManiac1
November 1, 2022
November
11
Nov
1
01
2022
01:13 PM
1
01
13
PM
PDT
PM1 at 1, That is the right question. Proponents of evolution would have us believe that our thoughts consist only of chemical reactions, nothing more. That people can conceive and then produce new inventions, for example, shows that this idea that you can't even trust your own thoughts is not true. In the animal world, dogs behave as dogs and cats as cats. They have their own distinct natures. It is obvious that all mammals have infused knowledge.relatd
November 1, 2022
November
11
Nov
1
01
2022
12:55 PM
12
12
55
PM
PDT
How does intentionality arise from natural interactions between atoms?
It doesn't. That's the wrong question to begin with. The better question to begin with is, "how might purposive organisms have arisen from thermodynamics processes?" together with "how might we explain intentionality in terms of purposive animal behavior?" There have been quite a few books and articles on those questions, some of them rather insightful. I think we're far closer to answering them now than we ever have been. But who has the time to read books, when there's so much "content" online that demands our constant attention?PyrrhoManiac1
November 1, 2022
November
11
Nov
1
01
2022
12:38 PM
12
12
38
PM
PDT

Leave a Reply