ReviewCommunicative & integrative biology2025
The need for a new perspective on decision-making in bacteria.
Review in Communicative & integrative biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Gut bacteria and their metabolites may influence our decisions, intelligence, cognition, and consciousness.Gut microbes · 2026Review
- Bacterial Sentience Is Determined by the Stochastic, Chaotic, and Deterministic Behavior of Cytoplasmic Particles.Current issues in molecular biology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The individualistic and collectivistic intelligent behaviors observed in mammals, birds, and fishes have been appreciated by many scientists in recent years and supported by the Cambridge Declaration on Consciousness in 2012. Behavioral studies in lower organisms like arthropods and cephalopods showed the presence of multisensory integration, decision-making, and goal-directed behavior in these non-vertebrate animals. The presence of intelligent and history-dependent behaviors has been studied in microorganisms, and recent studies propose the possibility of cognition in single cellular organisms. The Cellular Basis of Consciousness (CBC), proposed by Arthur Reber in 2016 and elaborated by Baluška and Reber in 2019, suggests the possibility of consciousness in single cellular organisms. However, the critics of the Cellular Basis of Consciousness theory state that the individual bacterial cell does not make choices, and the decision-making is the result of stochastic differences in protein levels. Here, we want to address the criticism of decision-making in bacteria. An attempt is made to give a new perspective to the existing model to explain the flexibility in bacterial behavior in an ever-changing environment. The authors would like to consider an alternative perspective on flexibility in decision-making as the result of multiple pathways that have convergence and divergence as observed in the brain. Flexibility provides the possibility to have individualistic behavior, and the existence of such pathways can be considered as the molecular mechanism underlying individualistic decision-making in bacteria as well as in humans.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.