Trewavas Anthony
Institute of Molecular Plant Science, Kings Buildings, University of Edinburgh, EH9 3JH, Edinburgh, Scotland.
Protoplasma. 2025 Mar;262(2):255-266. doi: 10.1007/s00709-024-02005-1. Epub 2024 Nov 6.
Intelligence is a fundamental property for all life enabling an increased probability of survival and reproduction under wild circumstances. Kingsland and Taiz (2024) think that plants are not intelligent but seem unaware of the extensive literature about intelligence, memory, learning and chromatin topology in plants. Their views are consequently rejected. Their claim of fake quotations is shown to result from faulty reasoning and lack of understanding of practical biology. Their use of social media as scholarly evidence is unacceptable. Darwin's views on intelligence are described, and their pertinence to the adaptive responses of plants is discussed. Justifications for comments I have made concerning McClintock and her "thoughtful" cell, von Sachs writings as indicating purpose (teleonomy) to plant behaviour, Went and Thimann's allusions to plant intelligence and Bose legacy as the father of plant electrophysiology are described. These scientists were usually first in their field of knowledge, and their understanding was consequently deeper. The article finishes with a brief critical analysis of the 36 scientists who were used to condemn plant neurobiology as of no use. It is concluded that participants signed up to a false prospectus because contrary evidence was omitted.
智力是所有生命的一项基本属性,能提高在自然环境下生存和繁殖的概率。金斯兰和泰兹(2024年)认为植物不具备智力,但他们似乎没有意识到关于植物智力、记忆、学习和染色质拓扑结构的大量文献。因此,他们的观点遭到驳斥。事实表明,他们关于虚假引用的说法源于错误推理和对实际生物学的缺乏理解。他们将社交媒体用作学术证据的做法是不可接受的。文中描述了达尔文对智力的观点,并讨论了这些观点与植物适应性反应的相关性。文中阐述了我对麦克林托克及其“有思想”的细胞、冯·萨克斯著作中所体现的植物行为目的(目的性)、温特和蒂曼对植物智力的暗示以及作为植物电生理学之父的博斯遗产所发表评论的依据。这些科学家在各自的知识领域通常都是先驱,因此他们的理解更为深刻。文章最后对36位被用来谴责植物神经生物学无用的科学家进行了简要批判性分析。得出的结论是,由于遗漏了相反证据,参与者签署了一份虚假的计划书。