Study adds to evidence that viruses are alive
A new analysis supports the hypothesis that viruses are living entities that share a long evolutionary history with cells, researchers report. The study offers the first reliable method for tracing viral evolution back to a time when neither viruses nor cells existed in the forms recognized today, the researchers say.
The new study focused on the vast repertoire of protein structures, called “folds,” that are encoded in the genomes of all cells and viruses. Folds are the structural building blocks of proteins, giving them their complex, three-dimensional shapes. By comparing fold structures across different branches of the tree of life, researchers can reconstruct the evolutionary histories of the folds and of the organisms whose genomes code for them.
Source:
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2015-09/uoia-sat092115.php
#research #viruses #evolution #folds
The textbook definition of living is pretty arbitrary, anyway. There's not a lot of difference between the nucleocytoplasmic large viruses and bacteria of the rickettsia and chlamydia groups.
ReplyDeleteTell a Phage that you love it. Exterminate! will be its reply.
ReplyDeleteWonderful post interesting and newsy!
ReplyDeleteWhether viruses are living is not a matter of research or evidence but one of semantics. It's simply a matter of how you choose to define "living". Since the word has no strict definition it is useless in edge cases like this. It's about as relevant as asking if atoms can "touch" :-)
ReplyDeleteAnders Öhlund Actually here we are talking about life as evolution; change ! Unless you do not consider life as a change of orbit electronics.
ReplyDeleteVincenzo Sicari What I'm saying is that the answer to the question "Are viruses alive?" depends less on facts about viruses than it does on how you choose to define "living". As there is no one strict agreed upon definition of "life" and our intuitive definition derived from our understanding of humans and other higher forms of life isn't directly applicable to viruses. Just like our intuitive understanding of touch breaks down on the atomic level. If life means metabolism then they are not alive but if it is evolution and change then many things we wouldn't normally say are alive have to be included. Some Computer programs use algorithms that use evolution.
ReplyDeleteThe word "life" simply becomes irrelevant to the subject. Better to use different words that do have strict definitions is what I'm arguing :-)
Anders Öhlund I had already understood your point of view! of course we can consider as life energy, it has been able to become elements in stars powder of stars, in humans, etc .. but wanting to be simplistic because the only form of life we know it as the basis of carbon, we can exclude the atom! With respect to the touch I do not agree! physical objects do not actually exist; we call it physical only because the electric charges of the atoms repel (Pauli exclusion principle)! if the virus contains the same elements of life, it also evolves then we can say without a doubt that the virus is alive!
ReplyDeletehttps://plus.google.com/+PhysicsclassroomPlus/posts/ETo66dwf554
If it weren't for viruses we or any other living thing would exist. Heck you couldn't be born without viruses. Now we're was that paper?
ReplyDeleteCaptain Jack http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/1/8/e1500527.full-text.pdf on line view: http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/1/8/e1500527.full
ReplyDelete