Not in the least. It would simply require a concentration-dependent chemical reaction that gave its possessors an evolutionary advantage over those bacteria that didn't have it.
This "communication" ability sounds somewhat similar to the ability to detect smells. Does smelling require symbolism?
You are wrong, very wrong. Communication does require symbolism. While it is true that smells can and probably do create chemical reactions in our glands, that does not constitute communication. Communication requires understanding the meaning of what our senses perceive. For that you need symbolism and understanding, something totally unexplainable by materialism.
What you do not understand is that our bodies, and those of higher organisms have a dual nature. On one hand they are run by proteins, on another hand they have a nervous system and a brain that runs on electrical impulses. What this means is that for the senses to communicate with the brain back and forth the information has to be translated into symbols which the other will understand. So yes, communication requires symbolism.
What you do not understand is that our bodies, and those of higher organisms have a dual nature. On one hand they are run by proteins, on another hand they have a nervous system and a brain that runs on electrical impulses.
Your argument sounds like materialism to me. Here is a dictionary definition of materialism:
a theory that physical matter is the only or fundamental reality and that all being and processes and phenomena can be explained as manifestations or results of matter.