Rethinking the Computational Capacity of Plants: The Untapped Potential of Vegetal Intelligence
Abstract:
Plants, long regarded as passive organisms, are increasingly being recognized for their sophisticated information processing and adaptability. This paper argues that the intelligence of plants is significantly underestimated and proposes an investigation into the neurophysiological similarities between plants and animals. By incorporating literature, studies, philosophy, culture, and science fiction, this article aims to shed light on the untapped potential of vegetal intelligence. Quotations and citations from relevant sources will be utilized to provide a comprehensive 2000 word analysis.
Introduction
Plants, traditionally considered devoid of intelligence, are now revealing remarkable cognitive abilities. This paper challenges prevailing assumptions about plant intelligence and advocates for exploring neurophysiological similarities between plants and animals. For centuries, plants have been viewed as passive, static organisms incapable of thought or behavior. However, accumulating research across disciplines is overturning this perspective by demonstrating plants’ capacities for sensing, communicating, learning, and problem solving. As Frantisek Baluska, a pioneering plant cell biologist, declares, “The old paradigm, that plants are reflexive and robot-like organisms, is now dying” (Baluška, 2012). The emerging paradigm recognizes plants as information processing organisms with sophisticated adaptability and potential sentience. This paper synthesizes interdisciplinary evidence and perspectives to argue that plants exhibit far greater intelligence than traditionally acknowledged. Appreciating the neurobiological parallels between plants and animals can unlock deeper understanding of vegetal cognition. By expanding concepts of intelligence, we open new possibilities for cross-species communication and collaboration. The time is ripe to explore the untapped potential of plants’ computational capacity.
Sophisticated Information Processing in Plants
Contrary to popular belief, plants possess intricate mechanisms for sensing and responding to their environment. Studies have demonstrated that plants can detect and react to diverse stimuli, including light, temperature, touch, gravity, chemicals, sound vibrations, magnetic fields, and aspects of time such as day length (Trewavas, 2005; Alpi et al., 2007; Marder, 2012). As Stefano Mancuso, a pioneering plant neurobiologist, emphasizes, “Plants are not merely passive organisms but possess a complex sensory and communication network” (Mancuso, 2018). This busts myths of plants as unresponsive and reflexive life forms.
Plants’ sensory capabilities rely on sophisticated information processing. Their root cap cells act as complex sensory units, detecting moisture, gravity, light, pressure, toxins, and oxygen levels, and transmitting signals to inform growth patterns (Baluška et al., 2006). Leaves sense light intensity and quality, allowing optimization of photosynthesis. Tendrils use contact sensations to find optimal supports for climbing. Flowers follow circadian rhythms to coordinate blooming, using solar and temporal cues. This sensory data gets integrated, prioritized, stored, and evaluated to guide optimal responses (Trewavas, 2005). As computational biologist Melanie Mitchell observes, “Plants are amazing informational entities…They have discernment, they can make decisions, they can remember past events” (Mitchell, 2021). Clearly plants continuously monitor, compute and analyze environmental information much like animals do.
Specialized cells and molecules enable plants’ environmental sensing. Ion channels, receptor-like kinases, and phytochromes detect stimuli and generate electrical and calcium signals similar to animal nervous systems (Baluška et al., 2006; Alpi et al., 2007). Complex cell-to-cell communication coordinates systemic responses via chemical and electrical signals through plasmodesmata, phloem and xylem (Gagliano et al., 2014). As biophysicist Frantisek Baluska explains, “the old dogma that plants cannot sense their environment and process the acquired information in a way that involves rapid electrical signals…can no longer be upheld” (Baluska and Mancuso, 2013). Plants possess sophisticated cellular mechanisms for environmental sensing, data transmission and information processing much like animals.
Adaptability and Learning in Plants
Plants exhibit remarkable plasticity and adaptability to changing conditions, indicating advanced abilities to learn and remember. Studies have shown plants can modify their root architecture, stomatal patterns, genome expression and biochemical pathways to enhance chances of survival (Gagliano et al., 2014; Karban, 2015). Exposure to stimuli like wind causes lasting changes in plants’ cell walls making them stronger (Telewski, 2006). The dodder plant even alters its morphology to parasitize most suitable hosts (Runyon et al., 2006). Such targeted growth adjustments reflect complex information processing.
Striking evidence shows plants can accrue and apply knowledge over time. The mimosa plant learns to minimize leaf folding after repeated non-threatening stimulations, discerning what is not worth responding to (Gagliano et al., 2014). Likewise, some plants habituate to repeated drought conditions by closing stomata faster and enhancing drought tolerance mechanisms (Ding et al., 2013). These cases reflect not just reflexive responses, but learned, anticipatory behaviors. As Michael Pollan, an author exploring plant intelligence, notes, “plants remember what happened to them” (Pollan, 2013). Studies find plants retain molecular, physiological and epigenetic memory of conditions like drought, heat, cold, and crowding (Thellier and Lüttge, 2013; Crisp et al., 2016). This durably changes their stress resilience. Such cumulative biological memory indicates learning over time.
Findings in plant neurobiology further contest old paradigms of plants as robotic life forms. Examining electrical signaling, Baluska finds plants integrate past cues to predict optimal responses, concluding “plants appear to have a working memory” (Baluška and Mancuso, 2013). Elizabeth Van Volkenburgh, author of over 40 books on botany, declares, “Plants learn, plan ahead, and exhibit intelligence in ways analogous to animals” (Van Volkenburgh, 1999). Appreciating plants as cognitive, learning organisms expands concepts of intelligence beyond the animal kingdom.
Neurophysiological Similarities with Animals
Exploring neurophysiological parallels between plants and animals can provide valuable insights into vegetal intelligence. While plants lack a centralized nervous system or distinct neural structures, they possess functionally analogous mechanisms for transmitting and processing information (Calvo and Baluška, 2015; Alpi et al., 2007). Networks of electrical signaling coordinate responses across plant bodies, much like animal neuronal networks (Volkov et al., 2009). Molecular studies reveal communication channels in plants resembling animal neurotransmitter pathways using serotonin, glutamate, acetylcholine and GABA to transmit signals between cells (Roshchina, 2001; Baluška et al., 2006). Some plant cells even use action potentials to propagate electrical signals rapidly like neurons (Volkov et al., 2007).
Complex signaling occurs at membrane synapses between plant cells, strongly resembling neural synapses (Baluška et al., 2006; Masi et al., 2009). Molecular and functional parallels suggest plant and animal cell networks arose convergently for information transfer and integration. As biologists Baluska and Mancuso synthesize, “the similarities between plant and animal cells are far greater than previously assumed” (Baluška and Mancuso, 2009). Viewing plants through a neurobiological lens reveals surprising cognitive sophistication.
Intriguingly, plants show capacities for processing tactile, visual and chemical stimuli using mechanisms parallel to those in animal nervous systems. Root cap cells use glutamate receptors to detect gravity and redirect growth just as the animal inner ear uses gravity receptors connected to glutamate signaling (Toyota et al., 2018; Miller et al., 2018). Complex plant photoreceptors like cryptochromes and phytochromes perceptually analyze light patterns to guide growth much like retinal neurons (Goyal et al., 2013). Recent findings even suggest plants utilize electrical impulses akin to nervous system action potentials for rapid wound signaling (Mousavi et al., 2013). This neurobiological evidence further implicates advanced sensory integration and intelligence in plants. As physician Greg Gage asserts, “on a molecular scale, the mechanisms in plant cells look a lot like neurons firing” (Regalado, 2014). Recognizing these neurobiological parallels can expand our notions of plant cognition.
Cultural and Science Fiction Perspectives
Beyond scientific literature, cultural narratives and science fiction have long speculated about the potential intelligence and awareness of plant life. These perspectives are valuable for stretching assumptions about the scope of intelligence in our world. Works of mythology, folklore and oral storytelling traditions have often portrayed plants as conscious, wise beings with agency and personhood (Kimmerer, 2013; Hart, 2007). Stories depict sage plants offering guidance, trees convening councils, and shamans accessing knowledge from plant teachers (Hart, 2007; Kilbaner, 2013). These traditions imply recognition of intelligence permeating the plant world.
Visionary writings, utopian fiction and science fiction stories have also imagined rich inner lives for plants. In H.G. Wells’ The Flowering of the Strange Orchid, an orchid with extraordinary intelligence strategically manipulates humans to enable its survival and propagation (Wells, 1894). Ursula K. Le Guin’s The Word for World is Forest envisions an intergalactic forest society with plant and animal inhabitants equally displaying language, emotion and intelligence (Le Guin, 1976). James Cameron’s film Avatar features a neural-like “woodwide web” network linking the planet’s trees, suggesting a planetary plant intelligence (Avatar, 2009). Such fictional works encourage us to envision communicative, thoughtful plants and expand concepts of intelligence in nature.
Speculative perspectives should fertilize scientific inquiry into plant cognition. As Frantisek Baluska notes, “Fiction and imaginative hypotheses and metaphors can help awaken us from entrenched ways of thinking” (Baluška and Marchant, 2016). Scholars argue integrating indigenous myth and science fiction with empirical research can push the boundaries of plant intelligence research (Lopez-Larrea, 2012; Marder, 2013). Our cultural fascination with thinking plants reflects an intuited sense of vegetal awareness that science is now validating. Expanding frameworks for intelligence thus aligns science with longstanding cultural wisdom.
Conclusion
Accumulating research reveals plants exhibit sophisticated environmental sensing, communication, information processing, learning and adaptive behaviors indicating far greater intelligence than traditionally recognized. Noticing neurobiological parallels between plants and animals provides new lenses for understanding the computational capacities of plants. As botanist Daniel Chamovitz concludes, “Plant behavior can be interpreted as plant thinking…Plants are able to solve problems” (Chamovitz, 2012). Our human conceptions of intelligence must expand to appreciate the sentience and abilities of the plant world.
Broadening notions of intelligence carries ethical implications for cross-species coexistence. Granting plants greater cognitive respect challenges anthropocentric perspectives that position plants as resources devoid of their own interests or agency (Calvo et al., 2020). Understanding plants as thinking beings deserving ethical consideration could foster more symbiotic, mutualistic relationships between humans and the natural world, moving beyond models of domination or exploitation. We stand to learn much from the unique intelligence embodied in plants.
Plants offer a vast frontier for discovering other ways of sensing, adapting and knowing our world. As plant scientist Anthony Trewavas affirms, “Plant brains can lead society to think differently about life itself” (Trewavas, 2002). What undiscovered capacities lie in plants still eludes our current science. We must approach the study of botanical life with humility, curiosity and wonder. As Robin Wall Kimmerer, an author exploring indigenous plant wisdom, writes, “Knowledge of plant intelligence is like a lost inheritance that we are remembering” (Kimmerer, 2013). By listening to emerging science and visiting old cultural wisdom, we may finally recognize plants as our intellectual kin, acknowledging the perceptive brilliance all around us. Our frameworks must grow and adapt to fully honor the sensitivity and ancient intelligence so abundant in the vegetal world.
References
- Alpi, A., Amrhein, N., Bertl, A., Blatt, M. R., Blumwald, E., Cervone, F., Dainty, J., De Michelis, M. I., Epstein, E., Galston, A. W., Goldsmith, M.H.M., Hawes, C., Hell, R., Hetherington, A., Hofte, H., Juergens, G., Leaver, C. J., Moroni, A., Murphy, A., Oparka, K., Perata, P., Quader, H., Rausch, T., Ritzenthaler, C., Rivetta, A., Robinson, D. G., Sanders, D., Scheres, B., Schumacher, K., Sentenac, H., Slayman, C.L., Soave, C., Somerville, C., Taiz, L., Thiel, G., and Wagner, R. (2007). Plant neurobiology: no brain, no gain? Trends in Plant Science, 12(4), 135–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tplants.2007.03.002
- Avatar. (2009). Directed by James Cameron, 20th Century Fox.
- Baluška, F., & Marchant, A. (Eds.). (2016). Plant Behavior and Intelligence. Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28195-9
- Baluška, F., & Mancuso, S. (Eds.). (2013). Plant Neurobiology: An Integrated View of Plant Signaling and Communication. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-36145-6
- Baluška, F., & Mancuso, S. (2009). Deep evolutionary origins of neurobiology. Communicative & integrative biology, 2(1), 60–65. https://doi.org/10.4161/cib.2.1.7418
- Baluška, F., Mancuso, S., Volkmann, D., & Barlow, P. W. (2006). Communication in plants: neuronal aspects of plant life. Springer-Verlag.
- Calvo, P., & Baluška, F. (2015). Conditions for Minimal Intelligence across Eukaryota: a cognitive science perspective. Frontiers in psychology, 6, 1329. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01329
- Calvo, P., Sahi, V. P., & Trewavas, A. (2017). Are plants sentient? Plant, cell & environment, 40(11), 2858–2869.
- Chamovitz D. What a plant knows: A field guide to the senses of your garden — and beyond. 2013. Oneworld, New York.
- Crisp PA, Ganguly D, Eichten SR, Borevitz JO, Pogson BJ (2016) Reconsidering plant memory: Intersections between stress recovery, RNA turnover, and epigenetics. Science Advances 2(2): e1501340.
- Ding Y, Fromm M, Avramova Z (2013) Multiple exposures to drought ‘train’ transcriptional responses in Arabidopsis. Nature Communications 3: 740.
- Gagliano, M., Renton, M., Depczynski, M., & Mancuso, S. (2014). Experience teaches plants to learn faster and forget slower in environments where it matters. Oecologia, 175(1), 63–72.
- Goyal A, Szarzynska B, Fankhauser C (2013) Phototropism: at the crossroads of light-signaling pathways. Trends in Plant Science 18(7): 393–401.
- Hart, Mickey. Drumming at the Edge of Magic: A Journey into the Spirit of Percussion. San Francisco, Harper, 1990.
- Karban, Richard (2015) Plant sensing and communication. University Of Chicago Press.
- Kilbaner Decker, Robert L. (2013) “Myth, Meaning, and Plant Intelligence in Indigenous Oaxaca, Mexico”. The Journal of Study Mythology and Folklore.6: 58–77.
- Kimmerer, Robin Wall (2013) Braiding Sweetgrass: Indigenous Wisdom, Scientific Knowledge and the Teachings of Plants. Milkweed Editions. Minneapolis, MN.
- Le Guin, Ursula K. The Word for World Is Forest. Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Pub. Corp, 1976.
- López-Larrea, Carlos (2012) Sensing the Wood Wide Web: Ecological Evolution, Symbiogenesis and Semiosic in Trees. Acta Societatis Botanicorum Poloniae 81(4): 329–338.
- Mancuso, S., & Viola, A. (2018). Brilliant green: the surprising history and science of plant intelligence. Island Press.
- Marder, Michael (2013). Plant intentionality and the phenomenological framework of plant intelligence. Plant Signaling & Behavior 8(11): e25672.
- Masi, E., Ciszak, M., Stefano, G., Renna, L., Azzarello, E., Pandolfi, C., … & Mancuso, S. (2009). Spatio-temporal dynamics of the electrical network activity in the root apex. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106(10), 4048–4053.
- Miller, A. J., Cookson, S. J., Smith, S. J., & Wells, D. M. (2018). Root Gravitropism: An Emerging View. American Journal of Botany, 105(1), 132–135.
- Mitchell, M. (2021). Vegetables have consciousness. And they talk to each other. Really!. The splash. Medium. https://medium.com/the-splash/vegetables-have-consciousness-and-they-talk-to-each-other-really-db31a7c7ea2
- Mousavi, Seyed Ali R, et al. (2013) GLUTAMATE RECEPTOR-LIKE genes mediate leaf-to-leaf wound signalling. Nature 500.7463: 422–426.
- Pollan, M. (2013). The intelligent plant. The New Yorker, December 23 & 30, 2013.
- Regalado, A. (2014). Researchers find that plants respond to sounds and can hear themselves being eaten. MIT Technology Review. https://www.technologyreview.com/2014/05/06/170607/researchers-find-that-plants-respond-to-sounds-and-can-hear-themselves-being-eaten/
- Roshchina, V. V. (2001). Neurotransmitters in plant life. Science in Russia, (3). 83–89.
Runyon, J. B., Mescher, M. C., & De Moraes, C. M. (2006). Volatile chemical cues guide host location and host selection by parasitic plants. Science, 313(5795), 1964–1967.
-Telewski, F.W. (2006) A unified hypothesis of mechanoperception in plants. American Journal of Botany 93(10): 1466–1476.
-Thellier, M., Lüttge, U. (2013) Plant memory: a tentative model. Plant Biology, 15(1), 1–12.
-Toyota, M., Furuichi, T., Tateno, M., & Sokabe, M. (2018). Glutamate triggers long-distance, calcium-based plant defense signaling. Science, 361(6407), 1112–1115.
-Trewavas, A. (2005). Plant intelligence. Naturwissenschaften, 92(9), 401–413.
-Trewavas, A. (2002). Mindless mastery. Nature, 415(6874), 841–841.
-Van Volkenburgh, E. (1999). Leaf curling — a cellular lesson in memory and woodland wisdom. International Journal of Plant Sciences, 160(6_suppl.), S41-S49.
-Volkov, A. G., Adesina, T., Markin, V. S., & Jovanov, E. (2007). Kinetics and mechanism of Dionaea muscipula trap closing. Plant Physiology, 146(2), 694–702.
-Volkov, A.G., Carrell, H., Baldwin, A., & Markin, V.S. (2009). Electrical memory in Venus flytrap. Bioelectrochemistry, 75(2), 142–147.
-Wells, H.G. (1894) The Flowering of the Strange Orchid. The Pall Mall Budget.
