Holobionts: Ecological communities, hybrids, or biological individuals? A metaphysical perspective on multispecies systems

Who is the biological patient? A new gradational and dynamic model for one health medicine

One Health medicine aims to improve health by focusing on the relations between the health of humans, animals, and the environment. However, One Health does not provide a clear idea of these relations, which are still represented as conceptually separated and not as one health, as the name implies. Inspired by holobiont research, I suggest a new model and conceptual framework for One Health that expands the notion of the biological patient by providing a gradational and dynamic understanding of environments, patients, and their relations. This new model conceptualizes humans and non-humans, individual organisms, and collectives, as belonging to one system that allows for more or less inclusive understandings of patients. As such, it resolves the conceptual tensions of different One Health approaches and supports the implementation of One Health as an interdisciplinary research field.

A pluralistic view of holobionts in the context of process ontology

Developing precise definitions and fine categories is an important part of the scientific endeavour, enabling fidelity of transfers of knowledge and the progress of science. Currently, as a result of research on symbiotic microorganisms, science has been flooded with discoveries which appear to undermine many commonly accepted concepts and to introduce new ones that often require updated conceptualisations. One question currently being debated concerns whether or not a holobiont can be considered an organism. Based on which concept, physiology or evolutionary, of the organism is chosen, the verdict differs. We attempt here to show how a change in perspective, from that of substance ontology into that of process ontology, is capable of reconciling opposing positions within the existing discussion and enabling the implementation of conceptual pluralism.

The holobiont self: understanding immunity in context

Both concepts of the holobiont and the immune system are at the heart of an ongoing scientific and philosophical examination concerning questions of the organism's individuality and identity as well as the relations between organisms and their environment. Examining the holobiont, the question of boundaries and individuality is challenging because it is both an assemblage of organisms with physiological cohesive aspects. I discuss the concept of immunity and the immune system function from the holobiont perspective. Because of the host-microbial close relations of codependence and interdependence, the holobiont is more often than not confused with the host, as the host is the domain in which this entity exists. I discuss the holobiont unique ecological characteristics of microbial assemblages connected to a host in a network of interactions in which the host is one of the organisms in the community but also its landscape. Therefore, I suggest viewing the holobiont as a host-ecosystem and discuss the implication of such a view on the concept of immunity and the meaning of protection. Furthermore, I show that viewing the holobiont as a host ecosystem opens the possibility of using the same ecological definition of boundaries and immunity dealing with an ecological system. Thus, the holobiont's boundaries and immunity are defined by the persistence of its complex system of interactions integrating existing and new interactions. This way of thinking presents a notion of immunity that materializes as the result of the complex interdependence relations between the different organisms composing the holobiont similar to that of an ecosystem. Taking this view further, I discuss the notion of immunogenicity that is ontologically heterogeneous with various causal explanations of the processes of tolerance and targeted immune response. Finally, I discuss the possible conceptualization of already existing and new biomedical practices.

Plant Holobiont Theory: The Phytomicrobiome Plays a Central Role in Evolution and Success

Under natural conditions, plants are always associated with a well-orchestrated community of microbes-the phytomicrobiome. The nature and degree of microbial effect on the plant host can be positive, neutral, or negative, and depends largely on the environment. The phytomicrobiome is integral for plant growth and function; microbes play a key role in plant nutrient acquisition, biotic and abiotic stress management, physiology regulation through microbe-to-plant signals, and growth regulation via the production of phytohormones. Relationships between the plant and phytomicrobiome members vary in intimacy, ranging from casual associations between roots and the rhizosphere microbial community, to endophytes that live between plant cells, to the endosymbiosis of microbes by the plant cell resulting in mitochondria and chloroplasts. If we consider these key organelles to also be members of the phytomicrobiome, how do we distinguish between the two? If we accept the mitochondria and chloroplasts as both members of the phytomicrobiome and the plant (entrained microbes), the influence of microbes on the evolution of plants becomes so profound that without microbes, the concept of the "plant" is not viable. This paper argues that the holobiont concept should take greater precedence in the plant sciences when referring to a host and its associated microbial community. The inclusivity of this concept accounts for the ambiguous nature of the entrained microbes and the wide range of functions played by the phytomicrobiome in plant holobiont homeostasis.

Do Somatic Cells Really Sacrifice Themselves? Why an Appeal to Coercion May be a Helpful Strategy in Explaining the Evolution of Multicellularity

An understanding of the factors behind the evolution of multicellularity is one of today’s frontiers in evolutionary biology. This is because multicellular organisms are made of one subset of cells with the capacity to transmit genes to the next generation (germline cells) and another subset responsible for maintaining the functionality of the organism, but incapable of transmitting genes to the next generation (somatic cells). The question arises: why do somatic cells sacrifice their lives for the sake of germline cells? How is germ/soma separation maintained? One conventional answer refers to inclusive fitness theory, according to which somatic cells sacrifice themselves altruistically, because in so doing they enhance the transmission of their genes by virtue of their genetic relatedness to germline cells. In the present article we will argue that this explanation ignores the key role of policing mechanisms in maintaining the germ/soma divide. Based on the pervasiveness of the latter, we argue that the role of altruistic mechanisms in the evolution of multicellularity is limited and that our understanding of this evolution must be enriched through the consideration of coercion mechanisms.

Fascial Nomenclature: Update 2021, Part 1

The fascial continuum is a topic for which all clinicians and other healthcare professionals come into contact on a daily basis, both consciously and without having the idea that the tissues they deal with can fall within the concept of fascia. The Foundation of Osteopathic Research and Clinical Endorsement (FORCE) organization includes many clinicians and health professionals, as well as researchers in different scientific disciplines. The goal is to dissect some concepts related to daily practice, such as fascial tissue, from a scientific point of view and impartially. Proof of the impartiality of FORCE is the fact that it does not sell any fascial products, no tools, and, above all, all the fascial terminology used has no copyright: research and knowledge are the right of anyone who wishes improvement for the good of the patient. The article aims to review the themes that could add new elements for a broader view of the meaning and nomenclature of the fascial system.