Soru

Passage A
In recent years, proponents of "plant neurobiology" have argued that higher plants exhibit rudimentary cognitive capacities, including memory, learning, and purposeful communication. By observing rapid electrical signaling—action potential-like depolarizations propagating through vascular bundles—and volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions following herbivorous damage, researchers contend that plants possess decentralized processing networks functionally analogous to animal nervous systems. For instance, when Mimosa pudica is repeatedly subjected to non-threatening mechanical drops, it gradually ceases leaf-folding behavior. Advocates interpret this habituation as genuine learned behavioral plasticity mediated by physiological memory rather than simple metabolic exhaustion, suggesting that cognitive frameworks offer the most coherent paradigm for botanical signaling.

Passage B
While plants unquestionably possess sophisticated biochemical communication networks, attributing "cognition," "learning," or "neurobiology" to botanical organisms conflates physiological adaptation with mental representation. Plants lack specialized neurons, synaptic junctions, and centralized integrating organs; their systemic responses, such as VOC release or membrane potential shifts, are parsimoniously explained by modular enzymatic cascades and phenotypic plasticity selected through evolutionary pressures. The habituation-like phenomena observed in Mimosa, for example, can be fully accounted for by receptor desensitization and calcium ion channel kinetics. Re-labeling evolved molecular mechanisms with zoocentric cognitive terminology obscures the distinctive nature of plant physiology and risks replacing rigorous biophysical models with anthropomorphic metaphors.

Based on the paired passages above, match each claim or observed phenomenon on the left with its correct analytical role or perspective attribution on the right.