Whether we emphasize the notion of ‘sign’ or the notion of ‘code’, either way the main interest of biosemiotics and Code Biology is the same, and we argue that the idea of the lower threshold is what still unifies these two groups. Code Biology concentrates on the notion of code: living organisms are defined as code-users or code-makers, and so it may be called the ‘lower coding threshold’ in this case. The semiotic threshold on the other hand is a concept without a specific definition. There are many possible ways of understanding this term. In order to maintain the lower threshold as the unifying concept between Code Biology and biosemiotics, it is important to be very clear about where this threshold is located and how it is defined. We focus on establishing the lower semiotic threshold at protein biosynthesis, and we propose basing the semiotic understanding of the lowest life forms on the following criteria: arbitrariness, representation, repetition, historicity and self-replication. We also offer that this definition of the lower threshold need not include the notion of interpretation, in the hope that this newly specified common principle of the lower threshold be accepted as a way forward in the conversation between Code Biology and biosemiotics.

无论我们强调“符号”的概念还是“代码”的概念，无论哪种方式，生物符号学和代码生物学的主要兴趣是相同的，我们认为较低阈值的想法仍然是这两个群体的统一。Code Biology 专注于代码的概念：活的有机体被定义为代码使用者或代码制定者，因此在这种情况下它可能被称为“低编码阈值”。另一方面，符号阈值是一个没有具体定义的概念。有许多可能的方式来理解这个术语。为了保持较低阈值作为代码生物学和生物符号学之间的统一概念，重要的是要非常清楚这个阈值的位置以及它是如何定义的。我们专注于在蛋白质生物合成中建立较低的符号阈值，我们建议基于以下标准对最低生命形式的符号学理解：任意性、代表性、重复性、历史性和自我复制。我们还提出，这个下限的定义不需要包括解释的概念，希望这个新规定的下限共同原则被接受为代码生物学和生物符号学之间对话的前进方向。