Comments on: Could Bacteria Communicate by Bouncing Electrons Around Their Chromosomes?

By: Barbara

Barbara — Thu, 20 Oct 2011 20:07:40 +0000

I have been studying microbiology for a long time for personal interests. A few years ago, I believed that bacteria were able to communicate with each other in the environment and inside of us. I realize this is in its early stages of learning their secrets but in time I believe that science will learn that our own microbial biota has a direct impact on evolutionary changes over time.

Afterall, their survival is dependent on the reproduction success of all species too. They do not like unwanted pathogens on their turf anymore than we like getting sick from them.

By: Matt

Matt — Wed, 25 May 2011 16:53:52 +0000

Did this by any chance appear on April first?

By: Peter

Peter — Mon, 09 May 2011 15:46:33 +0000

… one bacteria says to other bacteria, right next to him:”Revolution!”

By: Juber

Juber — Wed, 27 Apr 2011 19:44:51 +0000

Look up Endosymbiotic Theory! It is VALID science for those who don’t follow Star Wars symbolism.

By: Juber

Juber — Wed, 27 Apr 2011 19:01:43 +0000

I still believe in the Midichlorians of Star Wars. Now put that in your pipe and smoke it! The implications are enormous! And it’s not as far fetched as spooky action at a distance.

By: Iain

Iain — Tue, 26 Apr 2011 18:24:23 +0000

So why not set up an experiment whereby a colony of bacteria is partially attacked by some kind of slow working poison or pathogen or something and measure the change in radio activity. Do it many more times using different strength and type of bacti killers etc., etc., etc., eventually there will be a pattern or no pattern and the basic question would be answered, deliberate or not?
Just out of perversity, save a few bacti from each onslaught and breed them, see if they learn.

By: GD

GD — Tue, 26 Apr 2011 16:44:40 +0000

From the paper, it looks to me like they’re modelling electron motion around a perfectly circular and static DNA loop as if it were a circular wire. How does this still work when basic biochemical processes like transcription, DNA repair and DNA replication are considered? Bacterial chromosomes are pretty dynamic places – they’re densely coated with proteins, melted for transcription, they are continually broken and rejoined during replication and usually accommodate multiple replication forks. Undergraduate texts might show them as “perfect circles” but in real life that’s just not the case. The paper presents no experimental evidence and the Montaigner papers were pretty thin (to be charitable) as well. The math might work, but the basis here is pretty lame…

By: RR

RR — Tue, 26 Apr 2011 16:32:39 +0000

1)There is a multitude of opportunities of discovering …but do we have the instruments to measure it?
2)All this can be related to the popular believe of long distance interaction between living beans, is there an opportunity to seriously study this?
3)If we are only 10%, how are the coordination and communication of all cells?

By: Veronique Greenwood

Veronique Greenwood — Tue, 26 Apr 2011 15:09:59 +0000

@John Lerch, that’s a great point–mito DNA is circular. Presumably the same phenomenon might be possible with human cells, then. I wonder if anyone’s copped a listen?

By: John Lerch

John Lerch — Tue, 26 Apr 2011 14:34:41 +0000

I wonder why they forgot to mention that higher animals including humans also have loops, just not in our main DNA. Our mitochondria are also loops.

By: Templar 7

Templar 7 — Tue, 26 Apr 2011 14:31:17 +0000

I think this is pretty fascinating myself, and quite within the realm of possibility.

By: Amos Zeeberg (Discover Web Editor)

Amos Zeeberg (Discover Web Editor) — Tue, 26 Apr 2011 14:11:41 +0000

OK, Georg, perhaps not the best phrasing there, but that doesn’t mean it’s crackpottery. Edited to make it clearer/more accurate. As for whether the science is right—well, that’s another question…

By: Georg

Georg — Tue, 26 Apr 2011 12:42:47 +0000

“”and because electrons have quantized energy, they will be jumping between several discrete energy states.”"

This sentence is most indicative of crackpottery in that text. It is plainly silly.
There is more nonsense in, but I think one is enough.

By: Bernard VonQuark

Bernard VonQuark — Tue, 26 Apr 2011 11:33:22 +0000

Nice name, Tanya :)

Radio emissions are a physical phenomenon, not a sign of intelligence or of communication.

Simply because we use radio signals as a form of communication does not say anything about radio signals themselves, nor whether other life-forms might use them to communicate.

Bacteria already communicate using a variety of methods; heat, chemicals, approach/avoid behavior, and so forth. Communication for bacteria can be intracellular or extracellular. Communication itself does not mean sentience. It means that information is passing from one point in space and time to something capable of receiving the communication at another point.

That being said, and with Occam shaving the hell out of either communication or sentience, there is always room for possibility. It is possible that bacteria or bacterial DNA is communicating using radio waves. It is also possible that bacteria are sentient in some manner.

By: Tanya McPositron

Tanya McPositron — Mon, 25 Apr 2011 23:55:31 +0000

If we are truly only 10% us + 90% bacteria and the 90% has a secret language…creepy. I hope the 90% doesn’t have a plan.