Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

katherinesilens t1_ithh8r4 wrote

Reply to comment by pmmbok in Formation of Namibia’s fairy circles isn’t due to termites. Plants are "ecosystem engineers" that survive by forming optimal geometric patterns. by marketrent

Does it curl if otherwise stimulated? Can we rule out that we simply broke something in the plant?

13

Jrook t1_ithr0s4 wrote

So I don't know this particular study but the way Venus flytraps work is each stimulus released a flood of calcium. However there's a trigger point which must be met. And such channels can be made more sensitive or less based on how much calcium it's exposed to.

12

nikolai_470000 t1_itin2js wrote

That kind of adjustment is similar to how neural nets are adjusted in machine learning, which itself is derived from how our brains learn things. I think that makes it a type of intelligence in its own way. Obviously it’s less sophisticated than a brain and not quite sentience, but it’s still quite remarkable

4

Jrook t1_itiueje wrote

I'm more inclined to think it's less of a type of intelligence, personally. It seems mechanical. Like an if/than program. Which I believe is a component to intelligence. But not inherently intelligence.

If I were to break away from the logical side, I don't believe you can have an intelligence in a creature without an organ basically dedicated to it.

2

nikolai_470000 t1_itji31f wrote

I’d say there’s some validity to that except that there are plenty of other species with brains that are ‘dedicated to intelligence’ that aren’t very intelligent and by some standards are barely sentient or not sentient whatsoever, depending on who you ask

It’s definitely not the same as a brain making conscious decisions, but the ability to change its reaction level in certain pathways to alter its response to different kinds of stimuli over time is very similar to what happens to our brains as we develop and learn new things, I would say that makes it a kind of intelligence that’s different from ours but still very much a real form of intelligence

There’s a big difference between general intelligence and other types but that doesn’t make one type any more or less than another

I think it’s fair to say this kind of intelligence could be considered a component of general intelligence but GI is such a broad and amorphous concept, almost anything could

2

spiderpig_spiderpig_ t1_itjzddx wrote

The whole "phenotype" thing really throws me for a loop. Is there really a difference between an organism that changes its reaction level / cells inside a chunk of calcium and one that changes its reaction level / activity in a bounded area of soil? Where is the boundary...?

1

pmmbok t1_ithlhpt wrote

I can't verify from memory, someone will re-read and verify. Unlikely they didn't check.

2