Future natural selection of neuroelectric processes (Planta/Fungi

Administrador del Nodo Postmaster at neubio.sld.ar
Mon Dec 25 06:51:08 EST 1995

>From Postmaster Mon, 25 Dec 95 08:40:24 ARG remote from neubio
>Received: by neubio.sld.ar (UUPC/PcCorreo 3.0) with UUCP; Mon, 25 Dec 95 08:40:24 ARG
>Date: Mon, 25 Dec 95 08:40:24 ARG
>From: Administrador del Nodo <Postmaster at neubio.sld.ar>
>Message-ID: <683lz363 at neubio.sld.ar>
>X-Mailer: UUPC/PcCorreo 3.0
>Subject: Future natural selection of neuroelectric processes (Planta/Fungi
>Dear netters,
>            In another list (namely, <Neur-sci at net.bio.net>,
>which on this subject is also re-posted on two South-Ameri-
>can academic lists) it was raised the subject of the possibi-
>lity for the future natural selection of neuroelectric proce-
>sses in Planta and Fungi, up to a level of complexity compa-
>rable to that of Animalia nervous systems.
>             As neuroscientists we are much aware of the cru-
>ciality of neuroelectromagnetic arrangements (by concentra-
>tion and dispersion of ions) for brain functioning, all other
>complexities of brain pharmacology serving to tune it. And myself 
>in particular, as pertaining to the academic tradition in which
>the reverberating interference of such arrangements was first
>modeled since 1906 as instrumental to define structures of the
>mental contents (models known since about 1966 as holographic-
>holophonic-like definition of such structures); and also in
>which the formal homology between such interferences and the
>mechanisms for ciliary control in Proterozoic Ciliata was for-
>warded since 1966, am specially interested in assessing if again
>we can expect of future geological times the natural selection of
>those neural structures. We also acknowledge habitually that, in
>passing from ganglia to brain parenchymae, upon those physiolo-
>gical devices the function was added -and physically performed-
>of differentially producing one-witness, or subjective, non-struc-
>tural characterizations biasing behaviour.  All this I summarize
>here only to provide some context to the discussed question (who-
>se origination was not mine).
>             However as neuroscientists we found being not enough
>aware of the complexities of Planta and Fungi electrophysiology,
>at least not enough as for evaluating if some of their ionic cu-
>rrents follow wirings of certain complexity, whereon the timing of
>such currents can add further patterning.  Again in particular I
>suspect that we might be beguiled by the difference in time scale:
>since we usually deal with quite rapid electrophysiological events,
>if in Planta and Fungi cognate events would happen more slowly, we
>would probably be prone not to assimilate them to neuroelectricity.
>(A similar case is the consuetudinary denial of behaviour to Plan-
>ta and Fungi, due to the same difference in time scale with the
>"true", animal behaviour).
>              So I am now posting our problem to this and a few o-
>ther botanical fora in the hope of receiving, in answer, some sum-
>mary opinions and concepts, and perhaps some bibliographical indi-
>	      Please mail your kind answer to
>              Neur-sci at net.bio.net
>                  Thanks in advance!

       Prof. Mariela Szirko,
       <postmaster at neubio.sld.ar> 
       Centro de Investig. Neurobiologicas, Ministry of
Health & Welfare, Argentine Republic; and 
       Lab. of Electroneurobiological Res., 
Hospital "Dr. Jose Tiburcio Borda", Municipality of Buenos Aires,
       Office:  Phone/Fax (54 1) 306 -7314
                e-mail <postmaster at neubio.gov.ar>
       Standard disclaimer: Las opiniones de este mensaje son
personales y no comprometen las dependencias a cargo de la firmante
  Reply to THIS message,  ONLY to: <postmaster at neubio.sld.ar> 

More information about the Neur-sci mailing list