The behavioural cue of ‘flexible self-protection’ is a way to establish whether an animal feels pain, scientists say

Crickets that received the hot probe “overwhelmingly” directed their attention to the affected antenna – they groomed it more frequently, and tended to it over a longer period of time, he says. “They weren’t just agitated and flustered. They were directing their attention to the actual antennae that was hit with this hot probe.”

Link to the paper

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

It depends on the definition:

a basic bodily sensation that is induced by a noxious stimulus, is received by naked nerve endings, is associated with actual or potential tissue damage, is (such as pricking, throbbing, or aching), and typically leads to evasive action

It does fit this definition. The only part that arguably doesn't fit is the "characterized by physical discomfort" part, but that's characterized by, not defined by. It isn't necessarily required, and I can see an argument to say it's true for many plants too.

To say it's definitely not pain I think is far too strong a belief. I can go either way on it. I would lean towards calling it pain, but it's far from clear.

As you said, this is a scientific community. One of the most important things to science is being skeptical of our biases and pre-existing ideas. Claiming they don't feel pain for certain is not that.

[–] Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml 2 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Plants don't have nerves at all, so no

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

OK, yeah. They don't, but they do have chemical receptors. They don't technically have a nervous system, but they can react to stimuli.

[–] Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 hour ago

A bear trap can react to stimuli