Discrimination Learning and Extinction in Paramecia (<i>P. Caudatum</i>)

Armus, Harvard L.; Montgomery, Amber R.; Gurney, Rebecca L.

doi:10.2466/pr0.98.3.705-711

Cited by 39 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…When irritations were permanently turned off, the memory disappeared (Saigusa et al, 2008). Also in Paramecium caudatum , a single-celled aquatic organism, there is evidence for learning: the cells were trained with electric shocks to discriminate the difference between light and dark (Armus et al, 2006). Tetrahymena, another ciliate, was held in minute water droplets, after release to a larger area it recapitulates the circular swimming trajectories from the confinement for a while (Kunita et al, 2016).…”

Section: Self-model At the Cellular Level?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Acting without Central Agent—Considerations for a Self-Model at the Cellular Level

Kippenberger

Kleemann

Kaufmann

et al. 2017

Front. Hum. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Self-model At the Cellular Level?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Acting without Central Agent—Considerations for a Self-Model at the Cellular Level

Kippenberger

Kleemann

Kaufmann

et al. 2017

Front. Hum. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Although not as well-studied as the P. aurelia complex of species, P. caudatum also has a long history of research (Calkins 1902;Sonneborn 1933). Recent studies on P. caudatum involve investigations into quorum sensing (Fellous et al 2012), thermal adaptation (Krenek et al 2012), learning (Armus et al 2006), endosymbiosis and parasite-mediated selection (Duncan et al 2010(Duncan et al , 2011, and ecotoxicology (Rao et al 2007;Kawamoto et al 2010;Hailong et al 2011). P. caudatum cells are larger than those of the aurelia complex and have a single, larger micronucleus, whereas aurelia species have two smaller micronuclei (Fokin 2010).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Insights into Three Whole-Genome Duplications Gleaned from theParamecium caudatumGenome Sequence

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Paramecium has long been a model eukaryote. The sequence of the Paramecium tetraurelia genome reveals a history of three successive whole-genome duplications (WGDs), and the sequences of P. biaurelia and P. sexaurelia suggest that these WGDs are shared by all members of the aurelia species complex. Here, we present the genome sequence of P. caudatum, a species closely related to the P. aurelia species group. P. caudatum shares only the most ancient of the three WGDs with the aurelia complex. We found that P. caudatum maintains twice as many paralogs from this early event as the P. aurelia species, suggesting that post-WGD gene retention is influenced by subsequent WGDs and supporting the importance of selection for dosage in gene retention. The availability of P. caudatum as an outgroup allows an expanded analysis of the aurelia intermediate and recent WGD events. Both the Guanine+Cytosine (GC) content and the expression level of preduplication genes are significant predictors of duplicate retention. We find widespread asymmetrical evolution among aurelia paralogs, which is likely caused by gradual pseudogenization rather than by neofunctionalization. Finally, cases of divergent resolution of intermediate WGD duplicates between aurelia species implicate this process acts as an ongoing reinforcement mechanism of reproductive isolation long after a WGD event.T HE genus Paramecium has been used as a model unicellular eukaryotic system for over a century, beginning with research by Jennings (1908) and leading to some of the earliest derivations of mathematical population-genetics properties (Jennings 1916(Jennings , 1917. The subsequent discovery of mating types in members of the Paramecium aurelia complex (Sonneborn 1937) permitted the first systematic crossbreeding of different genotypes in any unicellular eukaryote. Later work provided fundamental insights into major issues in biology, including mutagenesis (Igarashi 1966), molecular and developmental genetics (Sonneborn 1947), symbiosis (Beale et al. 1969), mitochondrial genetics (Adoutte and Beisson 1972), aging (Siegel 1967), nuclear differentiation (Berger 1937), and gene regulation (Allen and Gibson 1972). More recently, Paramecium has been used to study maternal inheritance (Nowacki et al. 2005), programmed genome rearrangements and transposon domestication (Arnaiz et al. 2012), epigenetic inheritance (Singh et al. 2014), and whole-genome duplication (Aury et al. 2006; Lynn McGrath, Jean-Francois Gout, Parul Johri, Thomas Graeme Doak, and Michael Lynch, unpublished results). Although not as well-studied as the P. aurelia complex of species, P. caudatum also has a long history of research (Calkins 1902;Sonneborn 1933). Recent studies on P. caudatum involve investigations into quorum sensing (Fellous et al. 2012), thermal adaptation (Krenek et al. 2012), learning (Armus et al. 2006), endosymbiosis and parasite-mediated selection (Duncan et al. 2010(Duncan et al. , 2011, and ecotoxicology (Rao et al. 2007;Kawamoto et al. 2010;Hailong et al. 2011). P...

show abstract

“…The process of embryo development may include elements of learning at the level of individual cells, and this idea is supported by observations of learning-like behaviors in single-cell organisms (Hennessey 1979; Armus et al 2006; Saigusa et al 2008). Cells may actively search for potential differentiation paths based on their position in the embryo and interaction with other cells.…”

Section: Time Scales and Levels Of Constructionmentioning

confidence: 83%

Evolutionary Biosemiotics and Multilevel Construction Networks

Sharov

2016

Biosemiotics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In contrast to the traditional relational semiotics, biosemiotics decisively deviates towards dynamical aspects of signs at the evolutionary and developmental time scales. The analysis of sign dynamics requires constructivism (in a broad sense) to explain how new components such as subagents, sensors, effectors, and interpretation networks are produced by developing and evolving organisms. Semiotic networks that include signs, tools, and subagents are multilevel, and this feature supports the plasticity, robustness, and evolvability of organisms. The origin of life is described here as the emergence of simple self-constructing semiotic networks that progressively increased the diversity of their components and relations. Primitive organisms have no capacity to classify and track objects; thus, we need to admit the existence of proto-signs that directly regulate activities of agents without being associated with objects. However, object recognition and handling became possible in eukaryotic species with the development of extensive rewritable epigenetic memory as well as sensorial and effector capacities. Semiotic networks are based on sequential and recursive construction, where each step produces components (i.e., agents, scaffolds, signs, and resources) that are needed for the following steps of construction. Construction is not limited to repair and reproduction of what already exists or is unambiguously encoded, it also includes production of new components and behaviors via learning and evolution. A special case is the emergence of new levels of organization known as metasystem transition. Multilevel semiotic networks reshape the phenotype of organisms by combining a mosaic of features developed via learning and evolution of cooperating and/or conflicting subagents.

show abstract

Discrimination Learning and Extinction in Paramecia (P. Caudatum)

Cited by 39 publications

References 20 publications

Acting without Central Agent—Considerations for a Self-Model at the Cellular Level

Acting without Central Agent—Considerations for a Self-Model at the Cellular Level

Insights into Three Whole-Genome Duplications Gleaned from theParamecium caudatumGenome Sequence

Evolutionary Biosemiotics and Multilevel Construction Networks

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About