Login

Join for Free!
117466 members


Virus

About microscopic forms of life, including Bacteria, Archea, protozoans, algae and fungi. Topics relating to viruses, viroids and prions also belong here.

Moderator: BioTeam

Postby 2810712 » Sat Apr 09, 2005 10:33 am

that's a good idea to explain . They could really be doubtless-living thing for us in some times . But as Patrick says , huge gene-loss is harder to digest.

hrushikesh
2810712
King Cobra
King Cobra
 
Posts: 697
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 12:19 pm

Postby MrMistery » Sat Apr 09, 2005 7:30 pm

Hey, the guy who discovered viruses got the nobel for chemistry, not bio... Doesn't really matter in our debate, but it is fun to know
"As a biologist, I firmly believe that when you're dead, you're dead. Except for what you live behind in history. That's the only afterlife" - J. Craig Venter
User avatar
MrMistery
Inland Taipan
Inland Taipan
 
Posts: 6832
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2005 10:18 pm
Location: Romania(small and unimportant country)

Postby 2810712 » Sun Apr 10, 2005 2:25 pm

are you looking at viruses as mixtures of chemical than a living organism ? ? ? But we can also be seen as a mix. of chem.s only the problem is we are too big and can move , think etc. on ourselves and all the chara. of living things.

hrushikesh
2810712
King Cobra
King Cobra
 
Posts: 697
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 12:19 pm


Postby MrMistery » Wed Apr 27, 2005 7:52 pm

Of course we can be seen as a mixture of chemicals. But in our case, the whole is not simply the sum of it's parts. That could be the deff of life. We ar still trying to determine if that goes for viruses
"As a biologist, I firmly believe that when you're dead, you're dead. Except for what you live behind in history. That's the only afterlife" - J. Craig Venter
User avatar
MrMistery
Inland Taipan
Inland Taipan
 
Posts: 6832
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2005 10:18 pm
Location: Romania(small and unimportant country)

Postby woopwoop » Mon May 09, 2005 4:20 pm

How can viruses be regarded as a living organism? in all the classifications I have seen there's Living and Non-Living. In the non living category we have viruses, viroids, prions .. etc

A virus if left outside of a cell will not replicate, it will do absolutely nothing at all. Infact some times (especially with RNA viruses) will breakdown.
If it needs another organism to do anything at all I don't see how it can be deemed as living.

And seeing as a fair chunk of the human genome is viral (and surprising retroviral) I don't see why it's not plausible to say that viruses were here first. There's a lot of other points that come into play here but right now I'm too lazy and meant to be writing a report on protein vaccines!
woopwoop
Garter
Garter
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Mon May 09, 2005 3:08 pm

Postby Poison » Mon May 09, 2005 5:51 pm

Oh yes.. Thats why we call them 'non-living'... :)
It matters not how strait the gate
How charged with punishment the scroll
I am the Master of my fate
I am the Captain of my soul.
User avatar
Poison
Inland Taipan
Inland Taipan
 
Posts: 2322
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 12:44 pm
Location: Turkey

Postby muntedkowhai » Sat May 14, 2005 1:38 am

the only hypothesis i can give for the possibility of the idea that viruses co-evolutioned with bacteriums is that they might have ONCE been capable of replicating outside of host cells but evolved to specialised to live intracelluarly and lost a majority of its genes it requires to replicate outside of the host.
many people forget that gene loss plays an important part of micro organism evolution
especially when they specialize in its niche.
muntedkowhai
Garter
Garter
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 1:34 am
Location: Dunedin, New Zealand

Previous

Return to Microbiology

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron