Search

Ecol. Lett. 22, 2019, 1483 demonstrated, for the first time, a rapid response of a plant to the airborne sounds of pollinators. Pyke et al. argue that this response is unlikely to be adaptive. Here we clarify some misunderstandings, and demonstrate the potential adaptive value using theoretical modelling and field observations.

Can plants perceive sound? And what sounds are they likely to be "listening" to? The environment of plants includes many informative sounds, produced by biotic and abiotic sources. An ability to respond to these sounds could thus have a significant adaptive value for plants. We suggest the term phytoacoustics to describe the emerging field exploring sound emission and sound detection in plants, and review the recent studies published on these topics. We describe evidence of plant responses to sounds, varying from changes in gene expression to changes in pathogen resistance and nectar composition. The main focus of this review is the effect of airborne sounds on living plants. We also review work on sound emissions by plants, and plant morphological adaptations to sound. Finally, we discuss the ecological contexts where response to sound would be most advantageous to plants.

Stressed plants show altered phenotypes, including changes in color, smell, and shape. Yet, the possibility that plants emitairborne soundswhen stressed – similarly to many animals – has not been investigated. Here we show, to our knowledge for the first time, that stressed plants emit airborne sounds that can be recorded remotely, both in acoustic chambers and in greenhouses. We recorded ∼65 dBSPL ultrasonic sounds 10 cm from tomato and tobacco plants, implying that these sounds could be detected by some organisms from up to several meters away. We developed machine learning models that were capable of distinguishing between plant sounds and general noises, and identifying the condition of the plants – dry, cut, or intact – based solely on the emitted sounds. Our results suggest that animals, humans, and possibly even other plants, could use sounds emitted by a plant to gain information about the plant’s condition. More investigation on plant bioacoustics in general and on sound emission in plants in particular may open new avenues for understanding plants and their interactions with the environment, and it may also have a significant impact on agriculture.

Can plants hear? That is, can they sense airborne sounds and respond to them? Here we show that Oenothera drummondii flowers, exposed to the playback sound of a flying bee or to synthetic sound-signals at similar frequencies, produced sweeter nectar within 3 minutes, potentially increasing the chances of cross pollination. We found that the flowers vibrated mechanically in response to these sounds, suggesting a plausible mechanism where the flower serves as the plant’s auditory sensory organ. Both the vibration and the nectar response were frequency-specific: the flowers responded to pollinator sounds, but not to higher frequency sound. Our results document for the first time that plants can rapidly respond to pollinator sounds in an ecologically relevant way. Sensitivity of plants to pollinator sound can affect plant-pollinator interactions in a wide range of ways: Plants could allocate their resources more adequately, focusing on the time of pollinator activity; pollinators would then be better rewarded per time unit; flower shape may be selected for its effect on hearing ability, and not only on signaling; and pollinators may evolve to make sounds that the flowers can hear. Finally, our results suggest that plants may be affected by other sounds as well, including antropogenic ones.

Can plants sense natural airborne sounds and respond to them rapidly? We show that Oenothera drummondii flowers, exposed to playback sound of a flying bee or to synthetic sound signals at similar frequencies, produce sweeter nectar within 3 min, potentially increasing the chances of cross pollination. We found that the flowers vibrated mechanically in response to these sounds, suggesting a plausible mechanism where the flower serves as an auditory sensory organ. Both the vibration and the nectar response were frequency-specific: the flowers responded and vibrated to pollinator sounds, but not to higher frequency sound. Our results document for the first time that plants can rapidly respond to pollinator sounds in an ecologically relevant way. Potential implications include plant resource allocation, the evolution of flower shape and the evolution of pollinators sound. Finally, our results suggest that plants may be affected by other sounds as well, including anthropogenic ones. published

SummaryNotch signaling is ubiquitously used to coordinate differentiation between adjacent cells across metazoans. Whereas Notch pathway components have been studied extensively, the effect of membrane distribution and dynamics of Notch receptors and ligands remains poorly understood. It is also unclear how cellular morphology affects these distributions and, ultimately, the signaling between cells. Here, we combine live-cell imaging and mathematical modeling to address these questions. We use a FRAP-TIRF assay to measure the diffusion and endocytosis rates of Delta-like 1 (Dll1) in mammalian cells. We find large cell-to-cell variability in the diffusion coefficients of Dll1 measured in single cells within the same population. Using a simple reaction-diffusion model, we show how membrane dynamics and cell morphology affect cell-cell signaling. We find that differences in the diffusion coefficients, as observed experimentally, can dramatically affect signaling between cells. Together, these results elucidate how membrane dynamics and cellular geometry can affect cell-cell signaling.