Advertisement

Prosaic, Poetic, Psychedelic, and Paranormal Communications of Plants

  • Chris S. DuvallEmail author
Reference work entry

Abstract

Plants have been conversation topics since the origins of human language. The idea that plants actively communicate, however, is quite recent and remains controversial. This chapter surveys evidence for plant communication, organizing it under four heuristic labels. Prosaic evidence comes from ecological sciences and shows that plants transmit expositive information to other organisms about environmental and individual conditions. Prosaic communication seems evolutionarily inevitable. Poetic evidence suggests that plants transmit evocative information to other organisms. Poetic communication arises partly from physiological processes but may necessitate the existence of mind in beings that receive such communication. Poetic evidence merges with psychedelic evidence, which suggests plants can communicate directly with human and, potentially, animal minds. Psychedelic communication implies the existence of a global consciousness, a concept pursued in fringe science. Paranormal evidence extends from the psychedelic and suggests that plants are fully sentient beings. Paranormal evidence is supported by pseudoscience, although some religious traditions also consider plants to be sentient beings. The chapter concludes that evidence for plant communication challenges dominant philosophies of thought and being: how to bound (or unbound) the human within nature; how to demarcate knowledge from nonsense; and how to consider nonhumans within moral frameworks.

Keywords

Plant communication Ecology Science 

References

  1. 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., & Wagner, R. (2007). Plant neurobiology: No brain, no gain? Trends in Plant Science, 12(4), 135–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Backster, C. (1968). Evidence of primary perception in plant life. International Journal of Parapsychology, 10(4), 329–348.Google Scholar
  3. Backster, C. (2003). Primary perception: Biocommunication with plants, living foods, and human cells. Anza: White Rose Millennium Press.Google Scholar
  4. Baluska, F., Mancuso, S., Volkmann, D., & Barlow, P. W. (2009). The ‘root-brain’ hypothesis of Charles and Francis Darwin: Revival after more than 125 years. Plant Signaling and Behavior, 4(12), 1121–1127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bose, J. C. (1929). Growth and tropic movement of plants. London: Longmans, Green, and Co.Google Scholar
  6. Brenner, E. D., Stahlberg, R., Mancuso, S., Baluska, F., & Van Volkenburgh, E. (2007). Response to Alpi et al.: Plant neurobiology: The gain is more than the name. Trends in Plant Science, 12(7), 285–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brightman, M., Grotti, V., & Ulturgasheva, O. (Eds.). (2012). Animism in rainforest and tundra: Personhood, animals, plants, and things in contemporary Amazonia and Siberia. Oxford, UK: Berghahn Books.Google Scholar
  8. Bringlismark, T., Hartig, T., & Patil, G. G. (2009). The psychological benefits of indoor plants: A critical review of the experimental literature. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29(4), 422–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Broom, D. M. (2014). Sentience and animal welfare. Oxfordshire: CABI.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brown, C. M. (2016). Jagadish Chandra Bose and vedantic science. In Y. Fehige (Ed.), Science and religion: East and west (pp. 104–122). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  11. Bruce, T. J., Wadhams, L. J., & Woodcock, C. M. (2005). Insect host location: A volatile situation. Trends in Plant Science, 10(6), 269–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Calvo Garzón, P., & Keijzer, F. (2011). Plants: Adaptive behavior, root-brains, and minimal cognition. Adaptive Behavior, 19(3), 155–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Carroll, R. T. (2015). The Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research (PEAR). The Skeptic’s dictionary. Retrieved July, 4, 2016 from http://skepdic.com/pear.html
  14. Cooke, S. J., Sack, L., Franklin, C. E., Farrell, A. P., Beardall, J., Wikelski, M., & Chown, S. L. (2013). What is conservation physiology? Perspectives on an increasingly integrated and essential science. Conservation Physiology, 1, 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Darwin, C. (1880). The power of movement in plants. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
  16. Dietrich, L., & Körner, C. (2014). Thermal imaging reveals massive heat accumulation in flowers across a broad spectrum of alpine taxa. Alpine Botany, 124(1), 27–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Doyle, R. M. (2011). Darwin’s pharmacy: Sex, plants and the evolution of the noosphere. Seattle: University of Washington Press.Google Scholar
  18. Drescher, M. R. (2015). The seduction of understanding: Notes on the realities of poetry, science and floriography. In A.-S. Jürgens & T. Tesche (Eds.), LaborARTorium (pp. 213–227). Bielefeld: transcript.Google Scholar
  19. Fenchel, T. (2002). The origin and early evolution of life. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Galston, A. W., & Slayman, C. L. (1979). The not-so-secret life of plants: In which the historical and experimental myths about emotional communication between animal and vegetable are put to rest. American Scientist, 67(3), 337–344.Google Scholar
  21. Greenaway, K. (1884). Language of flowers. London: Routledge & Sons.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hall, M. (2011). Plants as persons: A philosophical botany. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  23. Han, K.-T. (2007). Responses to six major terrestrial biomes in terms of scenic beauty, preference, and restorativeness. Environment and Behavior, 39(4), 529–556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Haraway, D. (2015). Anthropocene, Capitalocene, Plantationocene, Chthulucene: Making kin. Environmental Humanities, 6, 159–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Harris, R. J., & Reed, J. M. (2002). Behavioral barriers to non-migratory movements of birds. Annales Zoologici Fennici, 39, 275–290.Google Scholar
  26. Jäger, C. (2008). Noosphere. In S. E. Jørgensen & B. D. Fath (Eds.), Global ecology (pp. 80–83). Amsterdam: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  27. Kalan, A. K., Mundry, R., & Boesch, C. (2015). Wild chimpanzees modify food call structure with respect to tree size for a particular fruit species. Animal Behaviour, 101, 1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Karban, R. (2015). Plant sensing and communication. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Karban, R., & Maron, J. (2002). The fitness consequences of interspecific eavesdropping between plants. Ecology, 83(5), 1209–1213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kaufman, A. J., & Lohr, V. I. (2008). Does it matter what color tree you plant? Acta Horticulturae, 790, 179–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kinnersley, A. M., & Turano, F. J. (2000). Gamma aminobutyric acid (GABA) and plant responses to stress. Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences, 19(6), 479–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Labate, B. C., & Cavnar, C. (2016). Peyote: History, tradition, politics, and conservation. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO.Google Scholar
  33. Leonard, A. S., & Papaj, D. R. (2011). X marks the spot: The possible benefits of nectar guides to bees and plants. Functional Ecology, 25(6), 1293–1301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lev-Yadun, S. (2003). Why do some thorny plants resemble green zebras? Journal of Theoretical Biology, 224, 483–489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Li, Q. (2010). Effect of forest bathing trips on human immune function. Environmental Health and Preventive Medicine, 15(1), 9–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lovelock, J. (2000). Gaia: A new look at life on earth (3rd ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  37. MacKerron, G., & Mourato, S. (2013). Happiness is greater in natural environments. Global Environmental Change, 23(5), 992–1000.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.03.010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Mancuso, S., & Viola, A. (2015). Brilliant green: The surprising history and science of plant intelligence. Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
  39. Nagel, A. H. M. (1997). Are plants conscious? Journal of Consciousness Studies, 4(3), 215–230.Google Scholar
  40. Nelson, R. D. (2013). The global consciousness project: Meaningful patterns in random data. In S. Krippner, A. J. Rock, J. Beischel, H. L. Friedman, & C. L. Fracasso (Eds.), Advances in parapsychological research (Vol. 9, pp. 15–37). Jefferson: McFarland & Co.Google Scholar
  41. Orians, G. H., & Heerwagen, J. H. (1992). Evolved responses to landscapes. In J. H. Barkow, L. Cosmides, & J. Tooby (Eds.), The adapted mind: Evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture (pp. 555–579). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  42. Panksepp, J. (2011). Toward a cross-species neuroscientific understanding of the affective mind: Do animals have emotional feelings? American Journal of Primatology, 73(6), 545–561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Pate, D. W. (1994). Chemical ecology of Cannabis. Journal of the International Hemp Association, 2(29), 32–37.Google Scholar
  44. Pelizzon, A., & Gagliano, M. (2015). The sentience of plants: Toward a new regime of plant rights, or the intersection of animal rights and rights of nature? Australian Animal Protection Law Journal, 11, 5–13.Google Scholar
  45. Pitt, D., & Samson, P. R. (Eds.). (1999). The biosphere and noosphere reader: Global environment, society and change. Oxfordshire: Routledge.Google Scholar
  46. Pollan, M. (2001). The botany of desire: A plant’s eye view of the world. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  47. Raguso, R. A. (2004). Flowers as sensory billboards: Progress towards an integrated understanding of floral advertisement. Current Opinion in Plant Biology, 7, 434–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Samorini, G. (2002). Animals and psychedelics: The natural world and the instinct to alter consciousness. Rochester: Park Street Press.Google Scholar
  49. Satterlie, R. A. (2011). Do jellyfish have central nervous systems? Journal of Experimental Biology, 214, 1215–1223.  https://doi.org/10.1242/jeb.043687.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Schaefer, H. M., & Ruxton, G. D. (2011). Plant-animal communication. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Schmithausen, L. (1991). The problem of the sentience of plants in earliest Buddhism. Tokyo: International Institute for Buddhist Studies.Google Scholar
  52. Shannon, C. E., & Weaver, W. (1949). The mathematical theory of communication. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  53. Siegel, R. K. (2005). Intoxication: The universal drive for mind-altering substances (2nd ed.). Rochester: Park Street Press.Google Scholar
  54. Smith, A. F. (2016). A critique of the moral defense of vegetarianism. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Sugiyama, A., & Yazaki, K. (2012). Root exudates of legume plants and their involvement in interactions with soil microbes. In J. M. Vivanco & F. Baluska (Eds.), Secretions and exudates in biological systems. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  56. Thellier, M., & Lüttge, U. (2012). Plant memory: A tentative model. Plant Biology, 15, 1–12.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1438-8677.2012.00674.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Tompkins, P., & Bird, C. (1973). The secret life of plants. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  58. Trewavas, A. (2007). Response to Alpi et al.: Plant neurobiology – All metaphors have value. Trends in Plant Science, 12(6), 231–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Trewavas, A. (2014). Plant behaviour and intelligence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Tsing, A. (2012). Unruly edges: Mushrooms as companion species. Environmental Humanities, 1, 141–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Tucker, A. O., & Tucker, S. S. (1988). Catnip and the catnip response. Economic Botany, 42, 214–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Ulrich, R. S. (1981). View through a window may influence recovery from surgery. Science, 224, 420–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Vieira, P., Gagliano, M., & Ryan, J. C. (Eds.). (2016). The green thread: Dialogues with the vegetal world. Lanham: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
  64. Wiley, R. H. (1983). The evolution of communication: Information and manipulation. In T. R. Hallieday & S. PJB (Eds.), Animal behaviour, Vol. 2, Communication (pp. 156–189). Oxford: Blackwell Scientific.Google Scholar
  65. Yoon, C. K. (2011, March 15). No face, but plants like life too. New York Times, p. D4.Google Scholar
  66. Yu, D. W. (2001). Parasites of mutualisms. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 72, 529–546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Geography and Environmental StudiesUniversity of New MexicoAlbuquerqueUSA

Personalised recommendations