Difference between revisions of "User:Shawndouglas/sandbox/sublevel7"

From LIMSWiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
(Replaced content with "{{wikipedia::Slime mold}}")
Line 1: Line 1:
[[File:Opensourcelogos.png|right]]
{{wikipedia::Slime mold}}
'''Free and open-source software''' ('''FOSS''') is computer [[software]] that can be classified as a union of two software development models: free software and [[open-source software]]. First, anyone is licensed to freely use, copy, study, and change the software in any way. Second, the source code is openly shared so that people are encouraged to voluntarily improve the design of the software.<ref name="GNUFreeDef">{{cite web |url=https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html |title=What is free software? |work=GNU.org |publisher=Free Software Foundation, Inc |date=01 January 2016 |accessdate=13 January 2016}}</ref> In contrast, [[proprietary software]] is under restrictive copyright, and the source code is usually hidden from users.
 
Despite similarities in their development models, both "free software" and "open-source software" feature differing cultures and philosophies.<ref name="FellerPersp05">{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=C0Z30r8qdpcC |title=Perspectives on Free and Open Source Software |author=Feller, Joseph; Fitzgerald, Brian; Hissam, Scott A.; Lakhani, Karim R. |year=2005 |publisher=MIT Press |location=Cambridge, MA |pages=538 |isbn=9780262062466 |accessdate=13 January 2016}}</ref> "Free" refers to the users' freedom to copy and re-use the software. The Free Software Foundation, an organization that advocates the free software model, suggests that to understand the concept, one should "think of 'free' as in 'free speech,' not as in 'free beer'".<ref name="GNUFreeDef" /> while focusing on the fundamental freedoms it gives to users. The "open-source" component, however, focuses on the perceived strengths of its peer-to-peer development model.<ref name="FellerPersp05" /> Despite these differences, the term "FOSS" can generally be used without particular bias towards either political approach.
 
The benefits of using FOSS potentially include decreasing software costs, increasing security and stability (especially in regard to malware), protecting privacy, and giving users more control over their software development.<ref name="ClaburnStudy07">{{cite news |url=http://www.informationweek.com/study-finds-open-source-benefits-business-/d/d-id/1050799? |title=Study Finds Open Source Benefits Business |author=Claburn, Thomas |work=InformationWeek |publisher=CMP Media, LLC |date=17 January 2007 |accessdate=13 January 2016}}</ref><ref name="WheelerWhy15">{{cite web |url=http://www.dwheeler.com/oss_fs_why.html |title=Why Open Source Software / Free Software (OSS/FS, FLOSS, or FOSS)? Look at the Numbers! |author=Wheeler, David A. |work=DWheeler.com |date=18 July 2015 |accessdate=13 January 2016}}</ref>
 
==History==
In the 1950s and '60s, it was common for computer users to have the source code for all programs they used as well as the permission and ability to modify it for their own use. Software, including source code, was commonly shared by individuals who used computers. Most companies had a business model based on hardware sales, and provided or bundled the software free of charge.<ref name="BainbridgeBerk04">{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=568u_k1R4lUC&pg=PA532 |title=Berkshire Encyclopedia of Human-computer Interaction |editor=Bainbridge, William S. |publisher=Berkshire Publishing Group |location=Barrington, MA |year=2004 |pages=958 |isbn=9780974309125 |accessdate=13 January 2016}}</ref><ref name="RostTheDark11">{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=f_FyOg5XW_IC&pg=PT202 |title=The Dark Side of Software Engineering: Evil on Computing Projects |author=Rost, Johann; Glass, Robert L. |publisher=John Wiley & Sons |location=Hoboken, NJ |year=2011 |pages=316 |isbn=9780470922873 |accessdate=13 January 2016}}</ref> Organizations of users and suppliers such as SHARE and DECUS were formed to further facilitate the exchange of software and provide technical advice.<ref name="JonesTheTech13">{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=_H8lAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA87 |title=The Technical and Social History of Software Engineering |author=Jones, Capers |publisher=Addison-Wesley |location=Upper Saddle River, NJ |year=2013 |pages=496 |isbn=9780133365894 |accessdate=13 January 2016}}</ref>
 
By the late 1960s, the prevailing business model around software was beginning to change. A growing and evolving software industry was competing with hardware manufacturers' bundled software products; rather than funding software development from hardware revenue, these new companies were selling software directly. Leased machines required software support while providing no revenue for software, and some customers able to better meet their own needs did not want the costs of software bundled with their hardware costs. In ''United States vs. IBM'', filed January 17, 1969, the government charged that bundled software was anticompetitive.<ref name="FisherIBM83">{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ZI-1AAAAIAAJ |title=IBM and the U.S. Data Processing Industry: An Economic History |author=Fisher, Franklin M.; McKie, James W.; Mancke, Richard B. |publisher=Praeger |year=1983 |isbn=9780030630590}}</ref><ref name="JonesTheTech13" />
 
By the 1970s and early 1980s, pure software companies were fully developed, with some in the industry beginning to use technical measures (such as only distributing binary copies of computer programs) to prevent computer users from being able to use reverse engineering techniques to study and customize software they had paid for. This idea that the underlying code in software was something to protect was further cemented in 1980, when copyright law was extended to computer programs in the United States<ref name="USGovPL96-517">{{cite web |url=https://history.nih.gov/research/downloads/PL96-517.pdf |title=Public Law 96-517 |publisher=National Institutes of Health |date=12 December 1980 |format=PDF |accessdate=13 January 2016}}</ref> — previously, computer programs could only be considered ideas, procedures, methods, systems, and processes, which were not copyrightable.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.lib.purdue.edu/uco/CopyrightBasics/basics.html |title=Copyright Overview |work=Copyright Basics |publisher=Purdue University |date=2009 |accessdate=13 January 2016}}</ref><ref name="WeberTheSuc09">{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=78SLSiWqy14C&pg=PA4 |title=The Success of Open Source |author=Weber, Steve |publisher=Harvard University Press |location=Cambridge, MA |year=2009 |pages=320 |isbn=9780674044999 |accessdate=13 January 2016}}</ref>
 
In 1983, Richard Stallman, longtime member of the hacker community at the MIT Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, announced the GNU project, saying that he had become frustrated with the effects of the change in culture of the computer industry and its users.<ref name="WilliamsFree02">{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=IELrzjhGFDQC |title=Free as in Freedom: Richard Stallman's Crusade for Free Software |author=Williams, Sam |publisher=O'Reilly and Associates |location=Sabastopol, CA |year=2002 |pages=240 |isbn=9781449323363}}</ref> Software development for the GNU operating system began in January 1984, and the Free Software Foundation (FSF) was founded in October 1985. An article outlining the project and its goals was published in March 1985 titled the ''GNU Manifesto''. The manifesto included significant explanation of the GNU philosophy and went on to promote concepts such as "free software" and "copyleft" licensing.<ref name="GNUMani">{{cite web |url=http://www.gnu.org/gnu/manifesto.en.html |title=The GNU Manifesto |work=GNU.org |publisher=Free Software Foundation, Inc |date=02 June 2015 |accessdate=13 January 2016}}</ref>
 
Stallman's efforts would eventually go on to influence other programmers. Linus Torvalds released the Linux kernel in 1991. Though Linux was not initially released under a free or open-source software license, Torvalds re-licensed the project under the GNU General Public License with version 0.12 in February 1992.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/Historic/old-versions/RELNOTES-0.12 |title=Release notes for Linux v0.12 |author=Torvalds, Linus |work=The Linux Kernel Archive |publisher=Linux Kernel Organization, Inc |date=February 1992 |accessdate=13 January 2016}}</ref> Much like Unix, Torvalds' kernel attracted the attention of volunteer programmers.<ref name="LarkinSamson07">{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=bh6bmGYcCxwC&pg=PA197 |title=Samson and the Pirate Monks: Calling Men to Authentic Brotherhood |author=Larkin, Nate |publisher=Thomas Nelson |location=Nashville, TN |pages=224 |year=2007 |isbn=9781418577698 |accessdate=13 January 2016}}</ref><ref name="EganDBA00">{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=TszUjeyeo8cC&pg=PA2 |title=DBAs Guide to Databases On Linux |author=Egan, David; Zikopoulous, Paul |publisher=Syngress Media, Inc |location=Rockland, MA |pages=485 |year=2000 |isbn=9780080530291 |accessdate=13 January 2016}}</ref> Other open-source projects that started or picked up speed during the early to mid-'90s include FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, and Apache.
 
In 1997, Eric Raymond published ''The Cathedral and the Bazaar'', a reflective analysis of the hacker community and free software principles, comparing commercial (cathedral) and dispersed (bazaar) software development. A roundtable meeting of Linux community members and Raymond resulted in the creation of an "open source" definition and adoption of its ideal; the original announcement of what became known as The Open Source Definition was made on February 9, 1998 on Slashdot<ref name="SDFree98">{{cite web |url=http://news.slashdot.org/story/98/02/09/213900/free-softwares-new-name |title=Free Software's New Name |publisher=SlashdotMedia |work=Slashdot |date=09 February 1998 |accessdate=14 January 2016}}</ref> and elsewhere. The paper and associated community meetings received significant attention afterwards, with Raymond and programmer Bruce Perens starting the Open Source Initiative. Shortly before that, Netscape Communications Corporation announced it would be working towards releasing their popular Netscape Communicator Internet suite — today known as Mozilla Firefox and Thunderbird — as free and open-source software.<ref name="RaymondTheCath97">{{cite journal |url=http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/1472/1387 |title=The Cathedral and the Bazaar |journal=First Monday |author=Raymond, Eric S. |issue=Special issue #2 |date=03 October 2005 |doi=10.5210/fm.v0i0.1472 |accessdate=13 January 2016}}</ref><ref name="MuffattoOpen06">{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=cGW7CgAAQBAJ&pg=PA14 |title=Open Source: A Multidisciplinary Approach |author=Muffatto, Moreno |publisher=Imperial College Press |location=London |pages=260 |year=2006 |isbn=9781908979803 |accessdate=14 January 2016}}</ref>
 
It didn't take long for the free and open source buzz to catch on. One of the first known public uses of the free open-source software concept (outside Raymond and Netscape Communications) was in a Usenet posting on March 19, 1998 advertising the free open-source KLyX word processing app, a little more than a month after the term ''open source'' itself was coined.<ref name="KlausAnnounce98">{{cite web |url=http://www.theusenetarchive.com/usenet-message-de-comp-text-tex-comp-text-tex-fwd-announce-kl-27758785.htm |title=fwd: announce: klyx -- the kde document processor |author=Klaus; Niepraschk, Rolf |work=The Usenet Archive |date=19 March 1998 |accessdate=13 January 2016}}</ref> However, while the Open Source Initiative sought to encourage the use of the new term and evangelize the principles it adhered to, commercial software vendors found themselves increasingly threatened by the concept of freely distributed software and universal access to an application's source code. Microsoft executive Jim Allchin publicly stated in 2001 that "open source is an intellectual property destroyer. I can't imagine something that could be worse than this for the software business and the intellectual-property business."<ref name="CharnyMicrosoft01">{{cite news |url=http://www.cnet.com/news/microsoft-raps-open-source-approach/ |title=Microsoft Raps Open-Source Approach |author=Charny, Ben |work=CNET |publisher=CBS Interactive Inc |date=02 January 2002 |accessdate=14 January 2016}}</ref>
 
Despite this sentiment and the role FOSS has historically played outside the mainstream of software development and business IT, the gradual adoption of open-source software in the business world began to take shape. In August 2005, Oracle president Charles Phillips spoke at the LinuxWorld trade show, reporting that "open source experienced 32 percent unit growth and 31 percent revenue growth in 2004 as it began to move more deeply into the data center."<ref name="HatlestadLinux05">{{cite news |last=Hatlestad |first=Luc |url=http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=168600351 |title=LinuxWorld Showcases Open-Source Growth, Expansion |accessdate=2007-11-25 |date=August 9, 2005 |work=InformationWeek |publisher=CMP Media, LLC |archiveurl=http://www.webcitation.org/5Tchd69ij |archivedate=2007-11-25}}</ref> Companies such as IBM also began to integrate Linux and other open-source solutions into their attempts to better support business-class customers.<ref name="HatlestadLinux05" /> Additionally, companies large and small begun to develop official open-source presences on the internet. As corporate philosophies began to shift, companies like IBM, Oracle, Google, and State Farm started to command a more serious public stake in the competitive open-source market.<ref name="MillerFree10">{{cite journal |title=Free and open source software |journal=IT Professional |author=Miller, K.W.; Voas, J.; Costello, T. |volume=12 |number=6 |pages=14-16 |year=2010 |doi=10.1109/MITP.2010.147}}</ref>
 
==Alternative terms for FOSS==
Much ado has been made over the past few decades about the labels applied to software that does not require payment to use and is open to investigation and modification by the user. Computer scientists such as Richard Stallman<ref name="StallmanFLOSS15">{{cite web |url=http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/floss-and-foss.en.html |title=FLOSS and FOSS |author=Stallman, Richard |work=GNU.org |publisher=Free Software Foundation, Inc |date=09 November 2015 |accessdate=14 January 2016}}</ref>, Bruce Perens<ref name="PerensItsTime99">{{cite web |url=https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/1999/02/msg01641.html |title=It's Time to Talk About Free Software Again |author=Perens, Bruce |work=lists.debian.org |publisher=Software in the Public Interest, Inc |date=17 February 1999 |accessdate=14 January 2016}}</ref>, David Wheeler<ref name="WheelerOpen15">{{cite web |url=http://www.dwheeler.com/oss_fs_refs.html |title=Open Source Software / Free Software (OSS/FS or FLOSS) References |author=Wheeler, David A. |work=DWheeler.com |date=2015 |accessdate=14 January 2016}}</ref>, and Björn Schießle<ref name="SchiebleFree12">{{cite web |url=https://blog.schiessle.org/2012/05/11/free-software-open-source-foss-floss-same-same-but-different/ |title=Free Software, Open Source, FOSS, FLOSS – Same same but different |author=Schießle, Björn |work=blog.schiessle.org |date=11 May 2012 |accessdate=14 January 2016}}</ref> have all published their thoughts on what the most apt terminology should be. Aside from FOSS, the following are the most common terms that have been used.
 
===Free software===
Richard Stallman's Free Software Definition, adopted by the Free Software Foundation (FSF), defines free software as a matter of freedom or liberty, not price. More specifically, he places the following stipulations on free software:
 
<blockquote>A program is free software if the program's users have the four essential freedoms:
 
* The freedom to run the program as you wish, for any purpose (freedom 0).
* The freedom to study how the program works, and change it so it does your computing as you wish (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a precondition for this.
* The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor (freedom 2).
* The freedom to distribute copies of your modified versions to others (freedom 3). By doing this you can give the whole community a chance to benefit from your changes. Access to the source code is a precondition for this.<ref name="GNUFreeDef" /></blockquote>
 
The earliest known publication of the definition of his free software idea was in the February 1986 edition of the FSF's now-discontinued GNU's Bulletin publication.<ref name="StallmanBullFeb86">{{cite journal | url=https://www.gnu.org/bulletins/bull1.txt |title=What is the Free Software Foundation? |journal=GNU's Bulletin |author=Stallman, Richard M. |volume=1 |issue=1 |pages=8–9 |year=February 1986 |accessdate=14 January 2016}}</ref> The canonical source for the document is in the philosophy section of the GNU Project website and is published in 40 different languages.<ref name="GNUFreeDef" />
 
The term "free software" is essentially the predecessor of "open source," which was brought to the public conscious by Eric Raymond's ''The Cathedral and the Bazaar'' in late 1997 and early 1998. In his noted revisions, Raymond documented "I changed 'free software' to 'open source'" on February 9, 1998<ref name="RaymondTheCath97" />, the same day the open source definition was publicly announced.<ref name="SDFree98" />
 
===Open source===
The Open Source Definition is used by the Open Source Initiative (OSI) to determine whether a software license qualifies for the organization's insignia for open-source software. The definition was based on the Debian Free Software Guidelines, written and adapted primarily by programmer and free software activist Bruce Perens.<ref name="PerensTheOpen99">{{cite book |url=http://www.oreilly.com/openbook/opensources/book/perens.html |chapter=The Open Source Definition |title=Open Sources: Voices from the Open Source Revolution |author=Perens, Bruce |publisher=O'Reilly Media |year=1999 |isbn=1565925823}}</ref><ref name="OSI_OSDef">{{cite web |url=http://opensource.org/docs/osd |title=The Open Source Definition |publisher=Open Source Initiative |date=22 March 2007 |accessdate=14 January 2016}}</ref> Perens did not base his writing on the four freedoms of free software from the Free Software Foundation, which were only later available on the web. Perens eventually left the OSI in 1999, a year after co-founding it. In an email to the Debian developers mailing list explaining his decision, he stated that though "most hackers know that Free Software and Open Source are just two words for the same thing", the success of "open source" as a marketing term had "de-emphasized the importance of the freedoms involved in Free Software."; he added, "It's time for us to fix that." He also stated his regret that OSI co-founder Eric Raymond "seem[ed] to be losing his free software focus."<ref name="PerensItsTime99" />
 
===FLOSS===
The term "FLOSS" (free/libre and open-source software) was coined in 2001 by Rishab Aiyer Ghosh, Gregorio Robles, and other members of the Infonomics FLOSS team for a European Commission-funded project on the open source/free software (OS/FS) phenomena.<ref name="FellerPersp05" /><ref name="GhoshFree02">{{cite web |url=http://floss.infonomics.nl/outline.htm |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20021215064824/http://floss.infonomics.nl/outline.htm |title=Free/Libre and Open Source Software: Survey and Study |author=Berlecon Research |publisher=European Commission |date=June 2002 |archivedate=15 December 2002 |accessdate=14 January 2016}}</ref><ref name="HerbstSexing08">{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=QV8ZBwAAQBAJ&pg=PA26 |title=Sexing Code: Subversion, Theory and Representation |author=Herbst, Claudia |publisher=Cambridge Scholars Publishing |location=Newcastle |year=2008 |isbn=9781847184795 |accessdate=14 January 2016}}</ref>
 
The term "FLOSS" aims to avoid taking sides in the debate over whether it was better to say "free software" or to say "open-source software". Proponents of the term point out that parts of the FLOSS acronym can be translated into other languages, with for example the "F" representing "free" (English) or "''frei''" (German), and the '"L" representing "''libre''" (Spanish or French), "''livre''" (Portuguese), or "''libero''" (Italian), "''liber''" (Romanian), and so on. However, this term is not often used in official non-English documents since the words in these languages don't have the same ambiguity as "free" does in English (either as "without cost" or as "freedom").<ref name="WheelerWhy15" /><ref name="StallmanFLOSS15" />
 
==Licensing: copyleft vs permissive==
Licenses that restrict mixing of works licensed under them with proprietary works, like GNU GPL 3, are called copyleft licenses.{{citation needed|date=February 2015}}
 
Licenses considered to have minimum restrictions of that kind, like Apache license, are called permissive software licenses.{{citation needed|date=February 2015}}
 
==Dualism of FOSS==
The primary license difference between free software and open source is one of philosophy. According to the Free Software Foundation, "Nearly all open source software is free software. The two terms describe almost the same category of software, but they stand for views based on fundamentally different values."<ref name="StallmanWhy">{{cite web |last=Stallman |first=Richard |title=Why Open Source misses the point of Free Software |url=https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html |work=GNU.org |publisher=Free Software Foundation |date=n.d. |accessdate=2015-06-27}}</ref>
 
Thus, the Open Source Initiative considers many free software licenses to also be open-source. These include the latest versions of the FSF's three main licenses: the GPL, the Lesser General Public License (LGPL), and the GNU Affero General Public License (AGPL).<ref>{{cite web|title=Licenses by Name|url=http://www.opensource.org/licenses/alphabetical|work=Open Source License|publisher=Open Source Initiative|accessdate=23 October 2011}}</ref>
 
==Adoption==
===By public institutions===
In early 2002, MITRE used the term FOSS in what would later be their 2003 report "Use of Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) in the U.S. Department of Defense".{{cn|date=June 2015}}
 
"We migrated key functions from Windows to Linux because we needed an operating system that was stable and reliable -- one that would give us in-house control. So if we needed to patch, adjust, or adapt, we could."
 
Official statement of the United Space Alliance, which manages the computer systems for the International Space Station (ISS), regarding why they chose to switch from Windows to Linux on the ISS.<ref name="GunterInt13">{{cite news |last=Gunter |first=Joel |title=International Space Station to boldly go with Linux over Windows |work=The Telegraph |date=May 10, 2013 |url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/10049444/International-Space-Station-to-boldly-go-with-Linux-over-Windows.html |accessdate=2015-06-27}}</ref><ref name="BridgewaterInt13">{{cite news |last=Bridgewater |first=Adrian |title=International Space Station adopts Debian Linux, drops Windows & Red Hat into airlock |work=Computer Weekly |date=May 13, 2013 |url=http://www.computerweekly.com/blogs/open-source-insider/2013/05/international-space-station-adopts-debian-linux-drop-windows-red-hat-into-airlock.html |accessdate=2015-06-27}}</ref>
 
The Government of Kerala, India, announced its official support for free/open-source software in its State IT Policy of 2001,<ref>{{cite web| url=http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/apcity/unpan002950.pdf | title="Role of Open or Free Software", Section 15, page 20, of the State IT Policy (2001) of the Government of Kerala, copy available at the UN Public Administration Network (UNPAN) site}}</ref> which was formulated after the first-ever free software conference in India, ''Freedom First!'', held in July 2001 in Trivandrum, the capital of Kerala. In 2009, Government of Kerala started the International Centre for Free and Open Source Software (ICFOSS).<ref>http://www.keralait.org/blog/2011/02/25/chief-minister-inaugurates-icfoss-in-kerala/</ref> In March 2015 the Indian government announced a policy on adoption of open source software.<ref name="AlawadhiGov15">{{cite news |last=Alawadhi |first=Neha | url=http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/tech/tech-news/Govt-announces-policy-on-open-source-software/articleshow/46745926.cms | title=Government announces policy on open source software |work=The Times of India |date=March 30, 2015 |accessdate=2015-06-27 |ref=harv}}</ref><ref>{{cite web | url=http://deity.gov.in/sites/upload_files/dit/files/policy_on_adoption_of_oss.pdf | title=Policy on Adoption of Open Source Software for Government of India}}</ref>
 
In the German City of Munich, conversion of 15,000 PCs and laptops from Microsoft Windows-based operating systems to a Debian-based Linux environment called LiMux spanned the ten years of 2003 to 2013. After successful completion of the project, more than 80% of all computers were running Linux.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.muenchen.de/rathaus/Stadtverwaltung/Direktorium/LiMux/Zahlen_Fakten/Projektstatus.html |title=Landeshauptstadt München - Aktuelle Zahlen |language=German | publisher=Muenchen.de |date= |accessdate=2014-07-28}}</ref>
 
In 2004, a law in Venezuela (Decree 3390) went into effect, mandating a two-year transition to open source in all public agencies. As of June 2009, this ambitious transition was still under way.<ref>[http://radar.oreilly.com/archives/2005/12/venezuela_open_source.html Venezuela Open Source]{{dead link|date=April 2014}}</ref><ref name="Venezuela">{{cite web|url = http://www.tsj.gov.ve/gaceta/Diciembre/281204/281204-38095-08.html|title = Publicado en la Gaceta oficial No 38.095 de fecha 28/ 12/ 2004 |accessdate =23 October 2011|last = Chavez|first = Hugo F.|authorlink = |date=December 2004}}</ref> Malaysia
 
launched the "Malaysian Public Sector Open Source Software Program", saving millions on proprietary software licenses until 2008.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.oscc.org.my/ |title=OSCC.org |work=OSCC.org |accessdate=23 October 2011}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://knowledge.oscc.org.my/newsletters/first-quarterly-e-newsletter-jan-2009 |title=OSCC.org |accessdate=23 October 2011}}</ref>
 
In 2005 the Government of Peru voted to adopt open source across all its bodies.<ref name="ClarkePeru05">{{cite news |last=Clarke |first=Gavin |url=http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/09/29/peru_goes_open_source/ |title=Peru's parliament approves pro-open source bill |work=[[The Register]] |date=September 29, 2005 |accessdate=2015-06-27}}</ref> The 2002 response to Microsoft's critique is available online. In the preamble to the bill, the Peruvian government stressed that the choice was made to ensure that key pillars of democracy were safeguarded: "The basic principles which inspire the Bill are linked to the basic guarantees of a state of law."<ref name="NACI">{{cite web |url=http://www.prodefinity.de/docs/floss_v2_6_9.pdf |title=Free/Libre & Open Source Software and Open Standards in South Africa |accessdate=31 May 2008 |last=National Advisory Council on Innovation Open Software Working Group |authorlink= |date=July 2004 |format=PDF |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/20141222121451/http://www.prodefinity.de:80/docs/floss_v2_6_9.pdf |archivedate=December 22, 2014 }}</ref>
 
In September, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts announced its formal adoption of the OpenDocument standard for all Commonwealth entities.<ref name="CassonOpen06">{{cite book |last1=Casson |first1=Tony |last2=Ryan |first2=Patrick S. |chapterurl=http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1656616 |chapter=Open Standards, Open Source Adoption in the Public Sector, and Their Relationship to Microsoft’s Market Dominance |title=Standards Edge: Unifier or Divider? |editor-last=Bolin |editor-first=Sherrie |date=May 1, 2006 |page=87 |publisher=Sheridan Books |isbn=0974864854}}</ref>
 
In 2006, the Brazilian government has simultaneously encouraged the distribution of cheap computers running Linux throughout its poorer communities by subsidizing their purchase with tax breaks.<ref name="CassonOpen06" />
 
In April 2008,<ref>{{cite web|url = http://compgroups.net/comp.os.linux.advocacy/-news-ecuador-ahead-of-the-world-with/1773288|title = [News] Ecuador Ahead of the World with Democracy of Knowledge|date = |accessdate = |website = |publisher = |last = |first = }}</ref> Ecuador passed a similar law, Decree 1014, designed to migrate the public sector to Libre Software.<ref>[http://www.estebanmendieta.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/Decreto_1014_software_libre_Ecuador.pdf Estebanmendieta.com], Decree 1014</ref>
 
In February 2009, the United States White House moved its website to Linux servers using [[Drupal]] for content management.<ref name="Vaughan-NicholsObama09">{{cite news |last=Vaughan-Nichols |first=Steven J. |url=http://www.pcworld.com/article/174746/obama_invites_open_source_into_the_white_house.html |title=Obama Invites Open Source into the White House |work=PCWorld |date=October 29, 2009 |accessdate=2015-06-27 |ref=harv}}</ref>
 
In March, the French Gendarmerie Nationale announced it will totally switch to Ubuntu by 2015. The Gendarmerie began its transition to open source software in 2005 when it replaced Microsoft Office with OpenOffice.org across the entire organization.<ref name="PaulFrench09">{{cite news |last=Paul |first=Ryan |url=http://arstechnica.com/open-source/news/2009/03/french-police-saves-millions-of-euros-by-adopting-ubuntu.ars  |title=French police: we saved millions of euros by adopting Ubuntu ||work=Ars Technica |date=March 11, 2009 |accessdate=2015-06-27}}</ref>
 
In January 2010, the Government of Jordan announced a partnership with Ingres Corporation (now named Actian), a open source database management company based in the United States, to promote open-source software use, starting with university systems in Jordan.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.itp.net/578825-jordan-information-ministry-signs-deal-on-open-source |title=Jordan Information Ministry signs deal on open source - Government - News & Features |work=ITP.net |accessdate=2012-04-23}}</ref>
 
In September 2014, the Uganda National Information Technology Authority (NITA-U) announced a call for feedback on an Open Source Strategy & Policy<ref>[http://ictau.ug/call-for-feedback-on-the-open-source-strategy-policy/ "Open Source Strategy & Policy" ]</ref> at a workshop in conjunction with the ICT Association of Uganda (ICTAU)
 
==FOSS and Benkler's new economy==
According to Yochai Benkler, Jack N. and Lillian R. Berkman Professor for Entrepreneurial Legal Studies at Harvard Law School, free software is the most visible part of a new economy of commons-based peer production of information, knowledge, and culture. As examples, he cites a variety of FOSS projects, including both free software and open-source.<ref name="BenklerFree03">{{cite journal |last=Benkler |first=Yochai|title=Freedom in the Commons: Towards a Political Economy of Information |journal=Duke Law Journal |date=April 2003 |volume=52 |issue=6 |url=http://www.law.duke.edu/shell/cite.pl?52+Duke+L.+J.+1245+pdf}}</ref>
 
This new economy is already under development. To commercialize FOSS, many companies move towards advertisement-supported software. In such a model, the only way to increase revenue is to make the advertisement more valuable. Facebook has recently been criticized for using novel methods of tracking users to accomplish this.<ref name="ElBoghdadyFace11">{{cite news |last1=ElBoghdady |first1=Dina |last2=Tsukayama |first2=Hayley  |title= Facebook tracking prompts calls for FTC investigation |url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/facebook-tracking-prompts-calls-for-ftc-investigation/2011/09/29/gIQAVdsP8K_story.html |work=The Washington Post |date=September 29, 2011 |accessdate=2015-06-27}}</ref>
 
This new economy has alternatives. Apple's App Stores have proven very popular with both users and developers. The Free Software Foundation considers Apple's App Stores to be incompatible with its GPL and complained that Apple was infringing on the GPL with its iTunes terms of use. Rather than change those terms to comply with the GPL, Apple removed the GPL-licensed products from its App Stores.<ref name="Vaughan-NicholsNo11">{{cite news |last=Vaughan-Nichols |first=Steven |title=No GPL Apps for Apple's App Store |url=http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-source/no-gpl-apps-for-apples-app-store/8046 |work=ZDNet |date=January 8, 2011 |accessdate=2015-06-27}}</ref>
 
==See also==
* [[:Category:Open-source software|Open-source software, by category]]
 
==Further reading==
==Further reading==
* {{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=C0Z30r8qdpcC |title=Perspectives on Free and Open Source Software |author=Feller, Joseph; Fitzgerald, Brian; Hissam, Scott A.; Lakhani, Karim R. |year=2005 |publisher=MIT Press |location=Cambridge, MA |pages=538 |isbn=9780262062466}}
* {{cite journal |url=http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr/vol77/iss5/4/ |title=Commercial Free and Open Source Software: Knowledge Production, Hybrid Appropriability, and Patents |work=Fordham Law Review |author=Vetter, G. |volume=77 |number=5 |pages=2087-2141 |date=2009}}
* {{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=78SLSiWqy14C&pg=PA4 |title=The Success of Open Source |author=Weber, Steve |publisher=Harvard University Press |location=Cambridge, MA |year=2009 |pages=320 |isbn=9780674044999}}
* {{cite web |url=http://www.dwheeler.com/oss_fs_why.html |title=Why Open Source Software / Free Software (OSS/FS, FLOSS, or FOSS)? Look at the Numbers! |author=Wheeler, David A. |work=DWheeler.com |date=18 July 2015}}
 
 
== External links ==
{{Wikibooks|FLOSS Concept Booklet}}
{{wikibooks|FOSS A General Introduction}}
{{Wikibooks|FOSS Open Standards}}
* [http://www.flossworld.org/ FLOSSworld]: Free/Libre/Open Source Software: Worldwide impact study
* [http://freeopensourcesoftware.org/ FreeOpenSourceSoftware.org]: FOSS wiki
* [http://www.ifossf.org/ IFOSSF.org]: International Free and Open Source Solutions Foundation
 
==Notes==
This article reuses some content from [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_and_open-source_software the Wikipedia article].
 
==References==
{{Reflist|colwidth=30em}}
 
<!---Place all category tags here-->

Revision as of 16:57, 19 January 2016

Comatricha nigra (myxogastria) with developing fruiting bodies (sporangia)

Slime mold or slime mould is an informal name given to a polyphyletic assemblage of unrelated eukaryotic organisms in the Stramenopiles, Rhizaria, Discoba, Amoebozoa and Holomycota clades. Most are microscopic; those in the Myxogastria form larger plasmodial slime molds visible to the naked eye. The slime mold life cycle includes a free-living single-celled stage and the formation of spores. Spores are often produced in macroscopic multicellular or multinucleate fruiting bodies that may be formed through aggregation or fusion; aggregation is driven by chemical signals called acrasins. Slime molds contribute to the decomposition of dead vegetation; some are parasitic.

Most slime molds are terrestrial and free-living, typically in damp shady habitats such as in or on the surface of rotting wood. Some myxogastrians and protostelians are aquatic or semi-aquatic. The phytomyxea are parasitic, living inside their plant hosts. Geographically, slime molds are cosmopolitan in distribution. A small number of species occur in regions as dry as the Atacama Desert and as cold as the Arctic; they are abundant in the tropics, especially in rainforests.

Slime molds have a variety of behaviors otherwise seen in animals with brains. Species such as Physarum polycephalum have been used to simulate traffic networks. Some species have traditionally been eaten in countries such as Ecuador.

Evolution

Taxonomic history

Lycogala epidendrum was the first slime mold to be discussed scientifically, by Thomas Panckow in 1654.[1]

The first account of slime molds was Thomas Panckow [de]'s 1654 discussion of Lycogala epidendrum. He called it Fungus cito crescentes, "a fast-growing fungus".[2][1]

German mycologist Heinrich Anton de Bary, in 1860 and 1887, classified the Myxomycetes (plasmodial slime molds) and Acrasieae (cellular slime molds) as Mycetozoa, a new class. He also introduced a "Doubtful Mycetozoa" section for Plasmodiophora (now in Phytomyxea) and Labyrinthula, emphasizing their distinction from plants and fungi.[3][4] In 1880, the French botanist Philippe van Tieghem analyzed the two groups further.[4] In 1868, the German biologist Ernst Haeckel placed the Mycetozoa in a kingdom he named Protista.[4] In 1885, the British zoologist Ray Lankester grouped the Mycetozoa alongside the Proteomyxa as part of the Gymnomyxa in the phylum Protozoa.[4] Arthur and Gulielma Lister published monographs of the group in 1894, 1911, and 1925.[5][6]

In 1932 and 1960, the American mycologist George Willard Martin argued that the slime molds evolved from fungi.[7][8] In 1956, the American biologist Herbert Copeland placed the Mycetozoa (the myxomycetes and plasmodiophorids) and the Sarkodina (the labyrinthulids and the cellular slime molds) in a phylum called Protoplasta, which he placed alongside the fungi and the algae in a new kingdom, Protoctista.[4][9]

In 1969, the taxonomist R. H. Whittaker observed that slime molds were highly conspicuous and distinct within the Fungi, the group to which they were then classified. He concurred with Lindsay S. Olive's proposal to reclassify the Gymnomycota, which includes slime molds, as part of the Protista.[10] Whittaker placed three phyla, namely the Myxomycota, Acrasiomycota, and Labyrinthulomycota in a subkingdom Gymnomycota within the Fungi.[4] The same year, Martin and Alexopoulos published their influential textbook The Myxomycetes.[6]

In 1975, Olive distinguished the dictyostelids and the acrasids as separate groups.[4] In 1992, David J. Patterson and M. L. Sogin proposed that the dictyostelids diverged before plants, animals, and fungi.[11]

Phylogeny

Slime molds have little or no fossil history, as might be expected given that they are small and soft-bodied.[12] The grouping is polyphyletic, consisting of multiple clades (emphasised in the phylogenetic tree) widely scattered across the Eukaryotes. Paraphyletic groups are shown in quotation marks:[13][14]

Eukaryotes

Diversity

Various estimates of the number of species of slime molds agree that there are around 1000 species, most being Myxogastria. Collection of environmental DNA gives a higher estimate, from 1200 to 1500 species.[6] These are diverse both taxonomically and in appearance, the largest and most familiar species being among the Myxogastria. The growth forms most commonly noticed are the sporangia, the spore-forming bodies, which are often roughly spherical; these may be directly on the surface, such as on rotting wood, or may be on a thin stalk which elevates the spores for release above the surface. Other species have the spores in a large mass, which may be visited by insects for food; they disperse spores when they leave.[15]

Macroscopic, plasmodial slime molds: Myxogastria

The Myxogastria or plasmodial slime molds are the only macroscopic scale slime molds; they gave the group its informal name, since for part of their life cycle they are slimy to the touch.[16] A myxogastrian consists of a large cell with thousands of nuclei within a single membrane without walls, forming a syncytium.[17] Most are smaller than a few centimeters, but some species may reach sizes up to several square meters, and in the case of Brefeldia maxima, a mass of up to 20 kilograms (44 lb).[18][19][20]

Cellular slime molds: Dictyosteliida

The Dictyosteliida or cellular slime molds do not form huge coenocytes like the Myxogastria; their amoebae remain individual for most of their lives as individual unicellular protists, feeding on microorganisms. When food is depleted and they are ready to form sporangia, they form swarms. The amoebae join up into a tiny multicellular slug which crawls to an open lit place and grows into a fruiting body, a sorocarp. Some of the amoebae become spores to begin the next generation, but others sacrifice themselves to become a dead stalk, lifting the spores up into the air.[23][24]

Protosteliida

The Protosteliida, a polyphyletic group, have characters intermediate between the previous two groups, but they are much smaller, the fruiting bodies only forming one to a few spores.[25]

Copromyxa

The lobosans, a paraphyletic group of amoebae, include the Copromyxa slime molds.[26][27]

Non-amoebozoan slime molds

Among the non-amoebozoan slime molds are the Acrasids, which have sluglike amoebae. In locomotion, the amoebae's pseudopodia are eruptive, meaning that hemispherical bulges appear at the front.[28] The Phytomyxea are obligate parasites, with hosts among the plants, diatoms, oomycetes, and brown algae. They cause plant diseases like cabbage club root and powdery scab.[29] The Labyrinthulomycetes are marine slime nets, forming labyrinthine networks of tubes in which amoeba without pseudopods can travel.[30] The Fonticulida are cellular slime molds that form a fruiting body in a "volcano" shape.[31]

Distribution, habitats, and ecology

Slime mold beetles such as Sphindus dubius feed exclusively on slime molds.

Slime molds, with their small size and moist surface, live mostly in damp habitats including shaded forests, rotting wood, fallen or living leaves, and on bryophytes.[32][18] Most Myxogastria are terrestrial,[18] though some, like Didymium aquatilis are aquatic,[33][34] and D. nigripes is semi-aquatic.[34] Myxogastria are not limited to wet regions; 34 species are known from Saudi Arabia, living on bark, in plant litter, and rotting wood, even in deserts.[35] They occur, too, in Arizona's Sonoran Desert (46 species), and in Chile's exceptionally dry Atacama Desert (24 species). In contrast, the semi-dry Tehuacán-Cuicatlán Biosphere Reserve has 105 species, and Russia and Kazakhstan's Volga river basin has 158 species.[35] In tropical rainforests of Latin America, species such as of Arcyria and Didymium are commonly epiphyllous, growing on the leaves of liverworts.[36]

The dictyostelids are mostly terrestrial.[37] On Changbai Mountain in China, six species of dictyostelids were found in forest soils at elevations up to 2,038 m (6,686 ft), the highest recorded species there being Dictyostelium mucoroides.[38]

The protostelids live mainly on dead plant matter, where they consume the spores of bacteria, yeasts, and fungi.[37] They include some aquatic species, which live on dead plant parts submerged in ponds.[33] Cellular slime molds are most numerous in the tropics, decreasing with latitude, but are cosmopolitan in distribution, occurring in soil even in the Arctic and the Antarctic.[39] In the Alaskan tundra, the only slime molds are the dictyostelids D. mucoroides and D. sphaerocephalum.[36]

The species of Copromyxa are coprophilous, feeding on dung.[27]

Some myxogastrians have their spores dispersed by animals. The slime mold fly Epicypta testata lay its eggs within the spore mass of Enteridium lycoperdon, which the larvae feed on. These pupate, and the hatching adults carry and disperse spores that have stuck to them.[21] While various insects consume slime molds, Sphindidae slime mold beetles, both larvae and adults, exclusively feed on them.[40]

Life cycle

Plasmodial slime molds

Long strands of Physarum polycephalum streaming along as it forms a plasmodium with many nuclei without individual cell membranes

Plasmodial slime molds begin life as amoeba-like cells. These unicellular amoebae are commonly haploid and feed on small prey such as bacteria, yeast cells, and fungal spores by phagocytosis, engulfing them with its cell membrane. These amoebae can mate if they encounter the correct mating type and form zygotes that then grow into plasmodia. These contain many nuclei without cell membranes between them, and can grow to meters in size. The species Fuligo septica is often seen as a slimy yellow network in and on rotting logs. The amoebae and the plasmodia engulf microorganisms.[41] The plasmodium grows into an interconnected network of protoplasmic strands.[42] Within each protoplasmic strand, the cytoplasmic contents rapidly stream, periodically reversing direction. The streaming protoplasm within a plasmodial strand can reach speeds of up to 1.35 mm per second in Physarum polycephalum, the fastest for any microorganism.[43]

Life cycle of a plasmodial slime mold. Haploid gametes undergo sexual fusion to form a diploid cell. Its nucleus divides (but the cell does not) to form a multinucleate plasmodium. Meiosis halves the number of chromosomes to form haploid cells with just one nucleus.[44]

Slime molds are isogamous, which means that their gametes (reproductive cells) are all the same size, unlike the eggs and sperms of animals.[45] Physarum polycephalum has three genes involved in reproduction: matA and matB, with thirteen variants each, and matC with three variants. Each reproductively mature slime mold is diploid, meaning that it contains two copies of each of the three reproductive genes.[46] When P. polycephalum is ready to make its reproductive cells, it grows a bulbous extension of its body to contain them.[47] Each cell has a random combination of the genes that the slime mold contains within its genome. Therefore, it can create cells of up to eight different gene types. Released cells then independently seek another compatible cell for fusion. Other individuals of P. polycephalum may contain different combinations of the matA, matB, and matC genes, allowing over 500 possible variations. It is advantageous for organisms with this type of reproductive cell to have many mating types because the likelihood of the cells finding a partner is greatly increased, and the risk of inbreeding is drastically reduced.[46]

Cellular slime molds

The cellular slime molds are a group of approximately 150 described species. They occur primarily in the humus layer of forest soils[48] and feed on bacteria but also are found in animal dung and agricultural fields. They exist as single-celled organisms while food is plentiful. When food is in short supply, many of the single-celled amoebae congregate and start moving as a single body, called a 'slug'. The ability of the single celled organisms to aggregate into multicellular forms are why they are also called the social amoebae. In this state they are sensitive to airborne chemicals and can detect food sources. They readily change the shape and function of parts, and may form stalks that produce fruiting bodies, releasing countless spores, light enough to be carried on the wind or on passing animals.[23] The cellular slime mold Dictyostelium discoideum has many different mating types. When this organism has entered the stage of reproduction, it releases a chemical attractant.[49] When it comes time for the cells to fuse, Dictyostelium discoideum has mating types of its own that dictate which cells are compatible with each other. There are at least eleven mating types; macrocysts form after cell contact between compatible mating types.[50]

Chemical signals

The first acrasin to be discovered was cyclic AMP, a small molecule common in cells. Acrasins are signals that cause cellular slime mold amoebae to aggregate.[51]

The chemicals that aggregate cellular slime molds are small molecules called acrasins; motion towards a chemical signal is called chemotaxis. The first acrasin to be discovered was cyclic adenosine monophosphate (cyclic AMP), a common cell signaling molecule, in Dictyostelium discoideum. During the aggregation phase of their life cycle, Dictyostelium discoideum amoebae communicate with each other using traveling waves of cyclic AMP.[51][52][53] There is an amplification of cyclic AMP when they aggregate.[54] Pre-stalk cells move toward cyclic AMP, but pre-spore cells ignore the signal.[55] Other acrasins exist; the acrasin for Polysphondylium violaceum, purified in 1983, is the dipeptide glorin.[56] Calcium ions too serve to attract slime mold amoebae, at least at short distances. It has been suggested that acrasins may be taxon-specific, since specificity is required to form an aggregation of genetically similar cells. Many dictyostelid species indeed do not respond to cyclic AMP, but as of 2023 their acrasins remained unknown.[57]

Study

Use in research and teaching

The practical study of slime molds was facilitated by the introduction of the "moist culture chamber" by H. C. Gilbert and G. W. Martin in 1933.[58] Slime molds can be used to teach convergent evolution, as the habit of forming a stalk with a sporangium that can release spores into the air, off the ground, has evolved repeatedly, such as in myxogastria (eukaryotes) and in myxobacteria (prokaryotes).[59] Further, both the (macroscopic) dictyostelids and the (microscopic) protostelids have a phase with motile amoebae and a phase with a stalk; in the protostelids, the stalk is tiny, supporting just one spore, but the logic of airborne spore dispersal is the same.[59]

O. R. Collins showed that the slime mold Didymium iridis had two strains (+ and −) of cells, equivalent to gametes, that these could form immortal cell lines in culture, and that the system was controlled by alleles of a single gene. This made the species a model organism for exploring incompatibility, asexual reproduction, and mating types.[59]

Biochemicals

Slime molds have been studied for their production of unusual organic compounds, including pigments, antibiotics, and anti-cancer drugs.[59] Pigments include naphthoquinones, physarochrome A, and compounds of tetramic acid. Bisindolylmaleimides produced by Arcyria denudata include some phosphorescent compounds.[60] The sporophores (fruiting bodies) of Arcyria denudata are colored red by arcyriaflavins A–C, which contain an unusual indolo[2,3-a]carbazole alkaloid ring.[61] By 2022, more than 100 pigments had been isolated from slime molds, mostly from sporophores. It has been suggested that the many yellow-to-red pigments might be useful in cosmetics.[15] Some 42% of patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis reacted to myxogastrian spores, so the spores may contribute significantly as airborne allergens.[62]

Computation

Slime molds share some similarities with neural systems in animals.[63] The membranes of both slime molds and neural cells contain receptor sites, which alter electrical properties of the membrane when it is bound.[64] Therefore, some studies on the early evolution of animal neural systems are inspired by slime molds.[65][66][67] When a slime mold mass or mound is physically separated, the cells find their way back to re-unite. Studies on Physarum polycephalum have even shown the organism to have an ability to learn and predict periodic unfavorable conditions in laboratory experiments.[68] John Tyler Bonner, a professor of ecology known for his studies of slime molds, argues that they are "no more than a bag of amoebae encased in a thin slime sheath, yet they manage to have various behaviors that are equal to those of animals who possess muscles and nerves with ganglia – that is, simple brains."[69]

The slime mold algorithm is a meta-heuristic algorithm, based on the behavior of aggregated slime molds as they stream in search of food. It is described as a simple, efficient, and flexible way of solving optimization problems, such as finding the shortest path between nodes in a network. However, it can become trapped in a local optimum.[70]

Toshiyuki Nakagaki and colleagues studies slime molds and their abilities to solve mazes by placing nodes at two point separated by a maze of plastic film. The mold explored all possible paths and solves it for the shortest path.[71]

Traffic system inspirations

Physarum polycephalum network grown in a period of 26 hours (6 stages shown) to simulate greater Tokyo's rail network[72]

Atsushi Tero and colleagues grew Physarum in a flat wet dish, placing the mold in a central position representing Tokyo, and oat flakes surrounding it corresponding to the locations of other major cities in the Greater Tokyo Area. As Physarum avoids bright light, light was used to simulate mountains, water and other obstacles in the dish. The mold first densely filled the space with plasmodia, and then thinned the network to focus on efficiently connected branches. The network closely resembled Tokyo's rail system.[72][73] P. polycephalum was used in experimental laboratory approximations of motorway networks of 14 geographical areas: Australia, Africa, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, China, Germany, Iberia, Italy, Malaysia, Mexico, the Netherlands, UK and US.[74][75][76] The filamentary structure of P. polycephalum forming a network to food sources is similar to the large scale galaxy filament structure of the universe. This observation has led astronomers to use simulations based on the behaviour of slime molds to inform their search for dark matter.[77][78]

Use as food

In central Mexico, the false puffball Enteridium lycoperdon was traditionally used as food; it was one of the species which mushroom-collectors or hongueros gathered on trips into the forest in the rainy season. One of its local names is "cheese mushroom", so called for its texture and flavor when cooked. It was salted, wrapped in a maize leaf, and baked in the ashes of a campfire; or boiled and eaten with maize tortillas. Fuligo septica was similarly collected in Mexico, cooked with onions and peppers and eaten in a tortilla. In Ecuador, Lycogala epidendrum was called "yakich" and eaten raw as an appetizer.[79]

Oscar Requejo and N. Floro Andres-Rodriguez suggest that Fuligo septica may have inspired Irvin Yeaworth's 1958 film The Blob, in which a giant amoeba from space sets about engulfing people in a small American town.[79]

See also

  • Swarming motility – rapid and coordinated translocation of a bacterial population across solid or semi-solid surfaces
  • Water mold – Fungus-like eukaryotic microorganism

References

  1. ^ a b Alexopoulos, Constantine J.; Mims, Charles W.; Blackwell, Meredith M. (1996). Introductory Mycology (4th ed.). New York: John Wiley and Sons. p. 776. ISBN 978-0-471-52229-4.
  2. ^ Panckow, Thomas (1654). Herbarium Portatile, Oder Behendes Kräuter und GewächsBuch. Berlin.
  3. ^ de Bary, A. (1860). "XXV.—On the Mycetozoa". Annals and Magazine of Natural History. 5 (28): 233–243. doi:10.1080/00222936008697211. ISSN 0374-5481.
  4. ^ a b c d e f g Olive, Lindsay S.; Stoianovitch, Carmen (technical assistance) (1975). The Mycetozoans. Academic Press. pp. 1–7. ISBN 978-0-1252-6250-7.
  5. ^ Lister, Arthur; Lister, Gulielma (1911). A monograph of the Mycetozoa : a descriptive catalogue of the species in the Herbarium of the British Museum. London: Printed by order of the Trustees of the British Museum. doi:10.5962/bhl.title.21191.
  6. ^ a b c Schnittler, M.; Mitchell, D. W. (2001) [2000]. "Species Diversity in Myxomycetes based on the morphological species concept – a critical examination". In Nowotny, Wolfgang; Aescht, Erna (eds.). Wolfsblut und Lohblüte – Lebensformen zwischen Tier und Pflanze [Wolves' Blood and Tan Blossom – Life forms between animals and plants]. Ausstellung im Biologiezentrum des OÖ. Landesmuseums. Vol. 73. OÖ Landes-Kultur. pp. 39–53. ISBN 978-3854740568.
  7. ^ Martin, G. W. (1932). "Systematic Position of the Slime Molds and Its Bearing on the Classification of the Fungi". Botanical Gazette. 93 (4): 421–335. doi:10.1086/334272. JSTOR 2471449. S2CID 84506715.
  8. ^ Martin, G. W. (1932). "The Systematic Position of the Myxomycetes". Mycologia. 93 (4): 119–129. doi:10.2307/3756254. JSTOR 3756254.
  9. ^ Copeland, H. F. (1956). The Classification of Lower Organisms. Palo Alto, California: Pacific Books.
  10. ^ Whittaker, R. H. (16 May 1969). "Response: Reassignment of Gymnomycota". Science. 164 (3881). American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS): 857. doi:10.1126/science.164.3881.857.b. ISSN 0036-8075. S2CID 239845755.
  11. ^ Patterson, D. J.; Sogin, M. L. (1992). "Eukaryote origins and protistan diversity". The origin and evolution of prokaryotic and eukaryotic cells. New Jersey: World Scientific. pp. 13–46. ISBN 978-9-8102-1262-9.
  12. ^ "Introduction to the 'Slime Molds'". University of California Museum of Paleontology.
  13. ^ Vallverdú, Jordi; et al. (2018). "Slime mould: the fundamental mechanisms of biological cognition". BioSystems. 165 (165): 57–70. arXiv:1712.00414. Bibcode:2018BiSys.165...57V. doi:10.1016/j.biosystems.2017.12.011. PMID 29326068. S2CID 3909678.
  14. ^ Baldauf, S.L.; Doolittle, W.F. (October 1997). "Origin and Evolution of the Slime Molds (Mycetozoa)". PNAS. 94 (22): 12007–120012. Bibcode:1997PNAS...9412007B. doi:10.1073/pnas.94.22.12007. PMC 23686. PMID 9342353.
  15. ^ a b Stoyneva-Gärtner, Maya; Uzunov, Blagoy; Androv, Miroslav; Ivanov, Kristian; Gärtner, Georg (21 December 2022). "Potential of Slime Molds as a Novel Source for the Cosmetics Industry". Cosmetics. 10 (1). MDPI AG: 3. doi:10.3390/cosmetics10010003. ISSN 2079-9284.
  16. ^ Adamatzky, Andrew (2016). Advances in Physarum Machines: Sensing and Computing with Slime Mould. Springer. p. 4. ISBN 978-3-319-26662-6.
  17. ^ Ples, Marek (2023-11-11). "Lab Snapshots by Marek Ples; Microbiology - The biology on a different level". weirdscience.eu. Retrieved 2023-07-02.
  18. ^ a b c Ing, B. (1999). The myxomycetes of Britain and Ireland: an identification handbook. Slough, England: Richmond Publishing. pp. 4, 9. ISBN 978-0-85546-251-2.
  19. ^ Nannenga-Bremekamp, N.E. (1974). De Nederlandse Myxomyceten. Zuthpen: Koninklijke Nederlandse Natuurhistorische Vereniging. ISBN 978-90-03-93130-6.
  20. ^ Zhulidov, Daniel A.; Robarts, Richard D.; Zhulidov, Alexander V.; Zhulidova, Olga V.; Markelov, Danila A.; Rusanov, Viktor A.; Headley, John V. (2002). "Zinc accumulation by the slime mold Fuligo septica (L.) Wiggers in the former Soviet Union and North Korea". Journal of Environmental Quality. 31 (3): 1038–1042. Bibcode:2002JEnvQ..31.1038Z. doi:10.2134/jeq2002.1038. PMID 12026071.
  21. ^ a b Stephenson, Steven L. (15 June 2000). Myxomycetes. Portland: Timber Press. p. 65. ISBN 978-0-88192-439-8.
  22. ^ Krivomaz, Т. І.; Michaud, A.; Minter, D. W. (2012). "Metatrichia vesparium" (PDF).
  23. ^ a b Jacobson, R. (April 5, 2012). "Slime Molds: No Brains, No Feet, No Problem". PBS Newshour.
  24. ^ Kin, K.; Schaap, P. (March 2021). "Evolution of Multicellular Complexity in The Dictyostelid Social Amoebas". Genes. 12 (4): 487. doi:10.3390/genes12040487. PMC 8067170. PMID 33801615.
  25. ^ Fiore-Donno, Anna Maria; Nikolaev, Sergey I.; Nelson, Michaela; Pawlowski, Jan; Cavalier-Smith, Thomas; Baldauf, Sandra L. (January 2010). "Deep Phylogeny and Evolution of Slime Moulds (Mycetozoa)". Protist. 161 (1): 55–70. doi:10.1016/j.protis.2009.05.002. PMID 19656720.
  26. ^ "Species: Copromyxa arborescens M. Nesom & L. S. Olive". The Eumycetozoan Project Database. University of Arkansas. Retrieved June 26, 2010.
  27. ^ a b Brown, Matthew W.; Silberman, Jeffrey D.; Spiegel, Frederick W. (2011). "'Slime Molds' among the Tubulinea (Amoebozoa): Molecular Systematics and Taxonomy of Copromyxa". Protist. 162 (2): 277–287. doi:10.1016/j.protis.2010.09.003. ISSN 1434-4610. PMID 21112814.
  28. ^ Brown, Matthew W.; Silberman, Jeffrey D.; Spiegel, Frederick W. (2012). "A contemporary evaluation of the acrasids (Acrasidae, Heterolobosea, Excavata)". European Journal of Protistology. 48 (2). Elsevier BV: 103–123. doi:10.1016/j.ejop.2011.10.001. ISSN 0932-4739. PMID 22154141.
  29. ^ Neuhauser, Sigrid; Kirchmair, Martin; Bulman, Simon; Bass, David (2014). "Cross-kingdom host shifts of phytomyxid parasites". BMC Evolutionary Biology. 14 (1): 33. Bibcode:2014BMCEE..14...33N. doi:10.1186/1471-2148-14-33. PMC 4016497. PMID 24559266.
  30. ^ Tsui, Clement K. M.; Marshall, Wyth; Yokoyama, Rinka; Honda, Daiske; Lippmeier, J Casey; Craven, Kelly D.; Peterson, Paul D.; Berbee, Mary L. (January 2009). "Labyrinthulomycetes phylogeny and its implications for the evolutionary loss of chloroplasts and gain of ectoplasmic gliding". Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution. 50 (1): 129–40. doi:10.1016/j.ympev.2008.09.027. PMID 18977305.
  31. ^ Deasey, Mary C.; Olive, Lindsay S. (July 1981). "Role of Golgi Apparatus in Sorogenesis by the Cellular Slime Mold Fonticula alba". Science. 213 (4507): 561–563. Bibcode:1981Sci...213..561D. doi:10.1126/science.213.4507.561. PMID 17794844.
  32. ^ Glimn-Lacy, Janice; Kaufman, Peter B. (2006). "Slime Molds". Botany Illustrated. Springer US. p. 45. doi:10.1007/0-387-28875-9_45. ISBN 978-0-387-28870-3.
  33. ^ a b Lindley, Lora A.; Stephenson, Steven L.; Spiegel, Frederick W. (1 July 2007). "Protostelids and myxomycetes isolated from aquatic habitats". Mycologia. 99 (4): 504–509. doi:10.3852/mycologia.99.4.504. PMID 18065001.
  34. ^ a b Hoppe, T.; Kutschera, U. (27 August 2022). "Phenotypic plasticity in plasmodial slime molds and molecular phylogeny of terrestrial vs. aquatic species". Theory in Biosciences. 141 (3). Springer: 313–319. doi:10.1007/s12064-022-00375-9. ISSN 1431-7613. PMC 9474427. PMID 36029433.
  35. ^ a b Ameen, Fuad; Almansob, Abobakr; Al-Sabri, Ahmed (2020). "Records of slime molds (Myxomycetes) from deserts and other arid areas of Saudi Arabia". Sydowia (72). Verlag Ferdinand Berger & Söhne: 171–177. doi:10.12905/0380.sydowia72-2020-0171. ISSN 0082-0598.
  36. ^ a b Glime, J. M. (2019). "Slime Molds: Ecology and Habitats – Lesser Habitats". Bryophyte Ecology. Vol. 2. Bryological Interaction. Ebook sponsored by Michigan Technological University and the International Association of Bryologists.
  37. ^ a b Spiegel, Frederick W.; Steven L. Stephenson; Harold W. Keller; Donna L Moore; James C. Cavendar (2004). "Mycetozoans". In Gregory M. Mueller; Gerald F. Bills; Mercedes S. Foster (eds.). Biodiversity of fungi: inventory and monitoring methods. New York: Elsevier Academic Press. pp. 547–576. ISBN 0125095511.
  38. ^ Zou, Yue; Hou, Jiangan; Guo, Songning; Li, Changtian; Li, Zhuang; Stephenson, Steven L.; Pavlov, Igor N.; Liu, Pu; Li, Yu (26 October 2022). "Diversity of Dictyostelid Cellular Slime Molds, Including Two Species New to Science, in Forest Soils of Changbai Mountain, China". Microbiology Spectrum. 10 (5). American Society for Microbiology: e0240222. doi:10.1128/spectrum.02402-22. ISSN 2165-0497. PMC 9620775. PMID 36190423.
  39. ^ Bonner, John Tyler (7 November 2015). "The Evolution of Evolution: Seen through the Eyes of a Slime Mold". BioScience. 65 (12). Oxford University Press: 1184–1187. doi:10.1093/biosci/biv154. ISSN 1525-3244.
  40. ^ Li, Yan-Da; Tihelka, Erik; Liu, Zhen-Hua; Huang, Di-Ying; Cai, Chen-Yang (23 November 2021). "New mid-Cretaceous cryptic slime mold beetles and the early evolution of Sphindidae (Coleoptera: Cucujoidea)". Arthropod Systematics & Phylogeny. 79: 587–597. doi:10.3897/asp.79.e72724. ISSN 1864-8312.
  41. ^ Ling, H. (2012). "Myxomycetes: Overlooked Native Plants". The Native Plant Society of New Jersey. Archived from the original on 9 June 2015. Retrieved 29 May 2018.
  42. ^ Chimileski, Scott; Kolter, Roberto. "Life at the Edge of Sight". www.hup.harvard.edu. Harvard University Press. Archived from the original on October 19, 2023. Retrieved 2018-01-26.
  43. ^ Alexopoulos, C.J. (1962). Introductory Mycology (Second ed.). New York, N.Y.: John Wiley and Sons. p. 78.
  44. ^ Dee, Jennifer (1960). "A Mating-type System in an Acellular Slime-mould". Nature. 185 (4715): 780–781. Bibcode:1960Natur.185..780D. doi:10.1038/185780a0. S2CID 4206149.
  45. ^ Moskvitch, Katia (9 July 2018). "Slime Molds Remember – but Do They Learn?". Quanta Magazine. Retrieved 2019-11-02.
  46. ^ a b Judson, Olivia (2002). Dr. Tatiana's Sex Advice To All Creation. New York: Henry Holt and Company. pp. 187–193. ISBN 978-0-8050-6332-5.
  47. ^ Renner, B. (2006). "Slime Mold Reproduction". BioWeb. University of Wisconsin System. Archived from the original on November 2, 2019. Retrieved 2019-11-02.
  48. ^ Cavender, James C.; Raper, Kenneth B. (March 1965). "The Acrasieae in Nature. Ii. Forest Soil as a Primary Habitat". American Journal of Botany. 52 (3): 297–302. doi:10.1002/j.1537-2197.1965.tb06789.x. ISSN 0002-9122.
  49. ^ Bonner, J. T. (2009). The Social Amoebae: The Biology of Cellular Slime Molds. Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0-691-13939-5. JSTOR j.ctt7s6qz.
  50. ^ Erdos, Gregory W.; Raper, Kenneth B.; Vogen, Linda K. (June 1973). "Mating Types and Macrocyst Formation in Dictyostelium discoideum". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 70 (6): 1828–1830. Bibcode:1973PNAS...70.1828E. doi:10.1073/pnas.70.6.1828. PMC 433606. PMID 16592095.
  51. ^ a b Nestle, Marion; Sussman, Maurice (August 1972). "The effect of cyclic AMP on morphogernesis and enzyme accumulation in Dictyostelium discoideum". Developmental Biology. 28 (4): 545–554. doi:10.1016/0012-1606(72)90002-4. PMID 4340352.
  52. ^ Levine, Herbert; Reynolds, William (May 1991). "Streaming instability of aggregating slime mold amoebae". Physical Review Letters. 66 (18): 2400–2403. Bibcode:1991PhRvL..66.2400L. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.66.2400. PMID 10043475.
  53. ^ Tyson, John J.; Alexander, Kevin A.; Manoranjan, V. S.; Murray, J.D. (1989-01-01). "Spiral waves of cyclic amp in a model of slime mold aggregation". Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena. 34 (1): 193–207. Bibcode:1989PhyD...34..193T. doi:10.1016/0167-2789(89)90234-0. ISSN 0167-2789.
  54. ^ Roos, W.; Nanjundiah, V.; Malchow, D.; Gerisch, G. (May 1975). "Amplification of cyclic-AMP signals in aggregating cells of Dictyostelium discoideum". FEBS Letters. 53 (2): 139–142. doi:10.1016/0014-5793(75)80005-6. PMID 166875. S2CID 29448450.
  55. ^ Fujimori, Taihei; Nakajima, Akihiko; Shimada, Nao; Sawai, Satoshi (March 2019). "Tissue self-organization based on collective cell migration by contact activation of locomotion and chemotaxis". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 116 (10): 4291–4296. Bibcode:2019PNAS..116.4291F. doi:10.1073/pnas.1815063116. PMC 6410881. PMID 30782791.
  56. ^ Bonner, John Tyler (1983). "Chemical Signals of Social Amoebae". Scientific American. 248 (4): 114–121. Bibcode:1983SciAm.248d.114B. doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0483-114. ISSN 0036-8733. JSTOR 24968880.
  57. ^ Sheikh, Sanea; Fu, Chengjie; Brown, Matthew; Baldauf, Sandra (1 March 2023), Deep origins of eukaryotic multicellularity revealed by the Acrasis kona genome and developmental transcriptomes, doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-2587723/v1
  58. ^ Gilbert, H. C.; Martin, G. W. (1933). "Myxomycetes found on the bark of living trees". University of Iowa Studies in Natural History. 15: 3–8.
  59. ^ a b c d Keller, Harold W.; Everhart, Sydney (2010). "Importance of Myxomycetes in Biological Research and Teaching". Fungi. 3 (1 (Winter 2010)).
  60. ^ Steglich, W. (1 January 1989). "Slime moulds (Myxomycetes) as a source of new biologically active metabolites". Pure and Applied Chemistry. 61 (3). Walter de Gruyter GmbH: 281–288. doi:10.1351/pac198961030281. ISSN 1365-3075. S2CID 53663356.
  61. ^ Dembitsky, Valery M.; Řezanka, Tomáš; Spížek, Jaroslav; Hanuš, Lumír O. (2005). "Secondary metabolites of slime molds (myxomycetes)". Phytochemistry. 66 (7). Elsevier BV: 747–769. Bibcode:2005PChem..66..747D. doi:10.1016/j.phytochem.2005.02.017. ISSN 0031-9422. PMID 15797602.
  62. ^ Lierl, Michelle B. (2013). "Myxomycete (slime mold) spores: unrecognized aeroallergens?". Annals of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. 111 (6). Elsevier BV: 537–541.e2. doi:10.1016/j.anai.2013.08.007. ISSN 1081-1206. PMID 24267365.
  63. ^ Carr, William E. S. (1989). "Chemical Signaling Systems in Lower Organisms: A Prelude to the Evolution of Chemical Communication in the Nervous System". In Anderson, Peter A.V. (ed.). Evolution of the First Nervous Systems. Boston, MA: Springer. pp. 81–94. doi:10.1007/978-1-4899-0921-3_6. ISBN 978-1-4899-0921-3.
  64. ^ Carr, William E. S.; Gleeson, Richard A.; Trapido-Rosenthal, Henry G. (June 1990). "The role of perireceptor events in chemosensory processes". Trends in Neurosciences. 13 (6): 212–215. doi:10.1016/0166-2236(90)90162-4. PMID 1694326. S2CID 46452914.
  65. ^ Lindsey, J.; Lasker, R. (1974). "Chemical Signals in the Sea: Marine Allelochemics and Evolution". Fishery Bulletin. 72 (1): 1–11.
  66. ^ Lenhoff, H M; Heagy, W (April 1977). "Aquatic invertebrates: model systems for study of receptor activation and evolution of receptor proteins". Annual Review of Pharmacology and Toxicology. 17 (1): 243–258. doi:10.1146/annurev.pa.17.040177.001331. PMID 17353.
  67. ^ Janssens, P.M.; Van Haastert, P.J. (December 1987). "Molecular basis of transmembrane signal transduction in Dictyostelium discoideum". Microbiological Reviews. 51 (4): 396–418. doi:10.1128/mr.51.4.396-418.1987. PMC 373123. PMID 2893972.
  68. ^ Saigusa, Tetsu; Tero, Atsushi; Nakagaki, Toshiyuki; Kuramoto, Yoshiki (January 2008). "Amoebae anticipate periodic events". Physical Review Letters. 100 (1): 018101. Bibcode:2008PhRvL.100a8101S. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.100.018101. hdl:2115/33004. PMID 18232821. S2CID 14710241.
  69. ^ MacPherson, Kitta (January 21, 2010). "The 'sultan of slime': Biologist continues to be fascinated by organisms after nearly 70 years of study". Princeton University.
  70. ^ Zheng, Rong; Jia, Heming; Aualigah, Laith; Liu, Qingxin; Wang, Shuang (2021). "Deep ensemble of slime mold algorithm and arithmetic optimization algorithm for global optimization". Processes. 9 (10): 1774. doi:10.3390/pr9101774.
  71. ^ Nakagaki, Toshiyuki; Yamada, Hiroyasu; Toth, Agotha (September 28, 2000). "Maze-solving by an amoeboid organism". Nature. 407 (6803): 470. doi:10.1038/35035159. PMID 11028990.
  72. ^ a b Tero, A.; Takagi, S.; Saigusa, T.; et al. (January 2010). "Rules for biologically inspired adaptive network design" (PDF). Science. 327 (5964): 439–442. Bibcode:2010Sci...327..439T. doi:10.1126/science.1177894. PMID 20093467. S2CID 5001773. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2013-04-21.
  73. ^ Christiansen B (25 January 2010). "Slime Mold Network Engineering". Technovelgy.
  74. ^ Marks, P. (6 January 2010). "Designing highways the slime mould way". New Scientist.
  75. ^ Adamatzky, Andrew; Akl, S.; Alonso-Sanz, R.; et al. (2013). "Are motorways rational from slime mould's point of view?". International Journal of Parallel, Emergent and Distributed Systems. 28 (3): 230–248. arXiv:1203.2851. doi:10.1080/17445760.2012.685884. S2CID 15534238.
  76. ^ Parr, D. (18 February 2014). "Cities in motion: how slime mould can redraw our rail and road maps". The Guardian.
  77. ^ "Slime Mold Simulations Used to Map Dark Matter". NASA. 10 March 2020.
  78. ^ Wenz, J. (12 March 2020). "Slime mold helps astronomers map dark matter". Astronomy magazine.
  79. ^ a b Requejo, Oscar; Andres-Rodriguez, N. Floro (2019). "Consideraciones Etnobiologicas sobre los Mixomicetos" [Ethnobiological Considerations on Myxomycetes]. Bol. Soc. Micol. Madrid (in Spanish). 43: 25–37.