Welcome


Thank you for visiting our new forum! To start posting again please follow the link below to create a new password. First time forum users please follow the link to register. CFI thanks you for continuing the discussion on evidence-based thinking and humanist values.

A behavioral analysis of Bacteria “screaming” when killed


Forums Forums Science and Technology A behavioral analysis of Bacteria “screaming” when killed

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 36 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #333538
    @write4u
    Participant

    Continued for clarity.

     Such activities include symbiosis, virulence, motility, antibiotic production, and biofilm formation. Autoinducers come in a number of different forms depending on the species, but the effect that they have is similar in many cases. Autoinducers allow bacteria to communicate both within and between different species. This communication alters gene expression and allows bacteria to mount coordinated responses to their environments, in a manner that is comparable to behavior and signaling in higher organisms. Not surprisingly, it has been suggested that quorum sensing may have been an important evolutionary milestone that ultimately gave rise to multicellular life forms.

    https://alchetron.com/Autoinducer

    I have no doubt this is where “comunication” itself started. A gradually evolving “sensitivity” to “sensory inputs”, both from the outside environment as well as from internal auto-induced self-referential reponses.

    • This reply was modified 2 months ago by Write4U.
    • This reply was modified 2 months ago by Write4U.
    #333537
    @write4u
    Participant

    3point14rat said; The video also confuses me. Not the quorum sensing part, but the parts at 8:45 and 12:53 where the speaker makes it seem like bacteria are interested in killing their host. At 8:45 she says that bacteria wait until they have enough numbers to be able to “launch their virulent attack together”, so they can overcome their host.

    timb said: (Perhaps Write would disagree about germs having “intent”.)

    It’s not so much a matter of intent as that the chemical density (proximity) “triggers” a response.  This is called an “auto inducer” which stimulates the genetic code to activate it’s virulent behavior.

    The quorum sensing is a chemical treshold event that triggers the auto-induction

    https://youtu.be/E7Nw8dG97nk

    Autoinducers are signaling molecules that are produced in response to changes in cell-population density. As the density of quorum sensing bacterial cells increases so does the concentration of the autoinducer. Detection of signal molecules by bacteria acts as stimulation which leads to altered gene expression once the minimal threshold is reached.

    https://alchetron.com/Autoinducer

     

    • This reply was modified 2 months ago by Mriana.
    • This reply was modified 2 months ago by Write4U.
    • This reply was modified 2 months ago by Mriana.
    • This reply was modified 2 months ago by Write4U.
    #333544
    @write4u
    Participant

    sorry Mriana…..

    #333551
    @timb
    Participant

    I have no doubt this is where “comunication” itself started. A gradually evolving “sensitivity” to “sensory inputs”, both from the outside environment as well as from internal auto-induced self-referential reponses.

    We know (well, we should know) from Skinner’s functional and descriptive analysis of verbal behavior, that it requires a listener, who provides a response that can establish and promote the communication behavior that a “speaker” emits. And we know, that the “speaker” can in some instances also be the listener.

    So I think that your assertion may be correct as to the etiology of communication.  But the quorum sensing is a far cry from operant verbal behavior.  I view the quorum sensing as reflexive (aka, respondent) behavior.  As creatures became more complex, (and the “listeners”, themselves became capable of selectively responding to the “speaker” I think that the next advance was emotional behaviors being responded to by fellow social creatures.  Eventually, such emotional behaviors (which are, themselves, reflexive behaviors,) that were reinforced by caregivers, were picked up by the “speaker” to be purposefully emitted, and when reinforced by the “listener”, became operant, full blown verbal behavior.

    Example:  A baby who reflexively cries due to feeling cold, or lonely, etc. can learn to cry in order to purposely bring on their caregiver’s presence.  So what was just WAAAAH!!! (a reflexive cry of distress) becomes, (when the baby was not necessarily particularly distressed) a request for the caregiver’s attention.

     

    #333557
    @write4u
    Participant

    timb said: But the quorum sensing is a far cry from operant verbal behavior.  I view the quorum sensing as reflexive (aka, respondent) behavior.  As creatures became more complex, (and the “listeners”, themselves became capable of selectively responding to the “speaker” I think that the next advance was emotional behaviors being responded to by fellow social creatures.  Eventually, such emotional behaviors (which are, themselves, reflexive behaviors,) that were reinforced by caregivers, were picked up by the “speaker” to be purposefully emitted, and when reinforced by the “listener”, became operant, full blown verbal behavior.

    Exactly, that is why it took some 3.5 billion years to evolve communication to human level. But several forms of communication have evolved in different species.

    I have read that whales communicate in vertically stacked words, rather than horizontal sentences.  The whale songs consist of several sounds stacked on top of each other, similar to a  musical chord.

    Insects communicate with pheromones. The mayfly lives 24 hrs and must find a mate during that time. The female produces a pheromone that drifts on the air currents up to several miles where a male may catch the scent and follows the trail to the female. Quite remarkable.

    Below is a comprehensive biography of bacteria. Very informative.

    https://cdn.britannica.com/s:700×500/09/108909-050-681E996E/tree-life-three-domain-system.jpg

    https://www.britannica.com/science/bacteria/Evolution-of-bacteria

    • This reply was modified 2 months ago by Write4U.
    • This reply was modified 2 months ago by Write4U.
    #333560
    @write4u
    Participant

    One of the greatest language imitators is the lyre bird. It can make any sound it hears from all birds it has heard to the sound of a chainsaw and other artificial sounds.

    And this romantic tragedy.

    • This reply was modified 2 months ago by Write4U.
    • This reply was modified 2 months ago by Write4U.
    #333582
    @timb
    Participant

    I have read that whales communicate in vertically stacked words, rather than horizontal sentences.

    I am quite sure that whales have complex verbal behavior.  It is interesting that they would have developed a completely different structure of grammar from us humans, but not surprising as their lives and physiologies and living environment is so different from ours.

    Insects communicate with pheromones.

    To the extent that they have verbal behavior, it will still follow function as verbal behavior does. e.g., The “listener” in the insect pheromonal communication, is “listening” by sensing the pheromone signal. Again, it is probably basic respondent behavior as opposed to operant verbal behavior, but IDK.

    One of the greatest language imitators is the lyre bird.

    That bird is truly amazing.  He has amazingly evolved “echoics” (a form of verbal behavior that develops by an individual being its own “listener”). And it is further, then, reinforced, at times, by a female Lyre “listener”.

    The bowerbird shows body language as communication, in addition to its vocalizations. In the case of body language the “listener” would be the observer (which in this case is the female bird).  Her attention reinforces the complex vocalizations and body language.

    (Also, it struck me that the bowerbird is representative of how guys will do anything to get laid.)

     

    #333588

    @timb   (Also, it struck me that the bowerbird is representative of how guys will do anything to get laid.)

    Amen

    The correct way to say what the bacteria were doing, would be more like “When their numbers reach a certain threshold, they attack in unison, and may thusly overcome their host.”

    As for beating on that horse, I had a swat at it, but reading on, saw that others pointed out the obvious:

    Over coming the host’s defenses, does not immediately imply death is the outcome – sometimes sure, but often not.

    W4U, nice addition.  thanks

     

    Although, I’m noticing not much attention was paid to the environment around those viruses – the environment (and changes within it) drives virus behavior as much as any intent or imperative within them.  Of course, that creates a quantum shift by introducing an overwhelming amount of information to sort out – so scientists focus on studying what’s within their reach.

    #333591
    @timb
    Participant

    Although, I’m noticing not much attention was paid to the environment around those viruses –

    Yes, organisms exist within environments.  And their behavior is always a product of aspects of the environment in which they exist.

    That can definitely be too complex to tease out the most salient of environmental factors for any particular behavior.  But we know enough to make some well educated guesses re: controlling factors for specific behaviors, given enough properly gathered data, (data that is designed to be gathered for the purpose of achieving a credible functional analysis).

    #333593
    @write4u
    Participant

    timb said; That bird is truly amazing.  He has amazingly evolved “echoics” (a form of verbal behavior that develops by an individual being its own “listener”). And it is further, then, reinforced, at times, by a female Lyre “listener”.

    I should like to know about the “mirror neural system” in lyre birds. From what I know about imitative abilities, it always seems to rest on the ability to mirror behaviors.

    Translating Birdsong: Songbirds as a model for basic and applied medical research
    Michael S. Brainard, PhD  and Allison J. Doupe, MD, PhD
    Abstract:

    Songbirds, long of interest to basic neuroscientists, have great potential as a model system for translational neuroscience. Songbirds learn their complex vocal behavior in a manner that exemplifies general processes of perceptual and motor skill learning, and more specifically resembles human speech learning. Song is subserved by circuitry that is specialized for vocal learning and production, but that has strong similarities to mammalian brain pathways. The combination of a highly quantifiable behavior and discrete neural substrates facilitates understanding links between brain and behavior, both normally and in disease. Here we highlight 1) behavioral and mechanistic parallels between birdsong and aspects of speech and social communication, including insights into mirror neurons, the function of auditory feedback, and genes underlying social communication disorders, and 2) contributions of songbirds to understanding cortical-basal ganglia circuit function and dysfunction, including the possibility of harnessing adult neurogenesis for brain repair…..more

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4130661/

     

    #333613
    @timb
    Participant

    I should like to know about the “mirror neural system” in lyre birds. From what I know about imitative abilities, it always seems to rest on the ability to mirror behaviors.

    When it comes to verbal behaviors, one should always consider function.  IOW, what does the lyre get out of echoing?  I suggest that his echoing behaviors are initially reinforced almost exclusively, automatically, by the behavior.  IOW, he was born with the characteristic of enjoying imitating sounds.  Then during the course, in his life, of doing so, he learns that if he does it enough, it can also provide the function of resulting in female lyre attention. At that point, I believe, it becomes an operant bit of verbal behavior.

    Of course there are neurological mechanisms that have evolved (including, quite possibly, mirror neurons) that result in individuals behaving according to the principles of the behavior of organisms.

    #333865

    Having spent the past week and next couple days, enticing and following a 15 month old around, I can tell you, from following his actions and expressions, he is a little mirroring machine.  It comes so natural, it must have primal roots.

    #333938
    @timb
    Participant

    A 15 month old!  That one’s verbal behavior is just beginning.  When even younger, his natural tendency to babble, gave his primary caregiver’s who listened, a chance to shape words like “mama” or “CC” into other functional verbal behavior, like saying “mama” when wanting mama to be present, or to name mama.  So yes, echoics are absolutely rooted in our evolved neurology and physiology. (And I don’t use the word “absolutely” indiscriminately like news talk guests do.)

    #333980

    #333981

     

    Tim: a chance to shape words like “mama” or “CC” into other functional verbal behavior,

    CC ?   Nah.

    Napa!   😉       {Nana & Napa}

    Though he’s just starting with the verbalization.  Pointing and grunting seems to be working pretty good, he’s got the eye contact and communication thing down for sure.

    He’s not too good on his ‘yes’ and ‘no’, but he’s got his confident ‘yes nod’ and  ‘no shake’ down.

    It really is amazing how much he understands.  Straight talk and listening, is all it takes.

    Ah but my pride is in watching him shimmy off the couch feet first, just like his Napa spent hours working on, during his crawling days.  Heck, seems like just months ago, … and the stairs, like a little champ both directions.  Come to think of it.  Holy moly, it really was just months ago.

     

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 36 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.