Page #: 2/2 |
@shadow27 | 28 February 21 | |
The idea that a symbiotic virus or any symbiotic relationship could have such a profound influence on the evolution of a new species is both new and controversial. For more than a century after Charles Darwin published On the Origin of Species, scientists focused on competition as evolutions chief driving force. Biologist Lynn Margulis wasn't convinced. The late University of Massachusetts researcher believed that cooperation also played a role. Her evidence lurked in every cell of every plant and animal. Beginning in the late 1960s, Margulis argued that our cells contained symbiotic bacteria known as mitochondria and chloroplasts, which earned room and board by either supplying energy or producing food from sunlight. Margulis's idea was ridiculed, and she struggled to find a journal that would publish her hypothesis. |
||
@shadow27 | 28 February 21 | |
By the 1990s, however, enough genetic evidence had accumulated to show that Margulis was right. Symbiosis was responsible for some of the most significant evolutionary leaps in the history of the planet. Most scientists, however, viewed this event as an anomaly, a once-off freak occurrence that, although significant, didnt play a role in the ongoing evolution of most species. Margulis, though, saw symbiosis everywhere and believed that this softer, gentler side of evolution was getting short shrift in research. Although most symbiosis research has focused on the role of the microbiome, the viruses tucked into our DNA can play a similar role in splitting apart two populations, turning one species into two. The first wedge scientists discovered was a protein called syncytin.
|
||
@shadow27 | 28 February 21 | |
Blah blah blah Katzourakis and Reijo Pera both believe that endogenous retroviruses are blurring the line between virus and human. ''It's changing how we think of ourselves as a species. Such an intimate interaction between ourselves and these viruses, and exchanging DNA that's useful for us, has really molded how we're now thinking of ourselves as a dynamic soup of DNA that's now infiltrated by viruses,'' Kazourakis says. Haig puts it more succinctly. ''Are these viruses a part of us? They definitely are.'' |
||
@shadow27 | 1 March 21 | |
|
||
@shadow27 | 1 March 21 | |
Covid is a fu*king retrovirus. And there is a baby boom right now because of the lockdowns. |
||
@shadow27 | 1 March 21 | |
You can't vaccinate against something that has integrated itself into your genome.. surely?
|
||
@shadow27 | 1 March 21 | |
This is why people still test positive after they get it.. make sense to you now?
|
||
@shadow27 | 1 March 21 | |
@ shadow27 - 1.03.21 - 02:40am You can't vaccinate against something that has integrated itself into your genome.. surely? CRISPR gene editing tech could be the solution. |
||
@somerson | 1 March 21 | |
*
@ shadow27 - 28.02.21 - 09:07am The rise of the mammals may be feel like a familiar tale, but there's a twist you likely don't know about: If it wasnt for a virus, it might not have happened at all. One of the few survivors of the asteroid impact 65 million years ago was a small, furry, shrew-like creature that lived in underground burrows and only ventured out at night, when predators werent active. The critter - already the product of some 100 million years of evolution - looked like a modern mammal, with body hair and mammary glands, except for one tiny detail: according to a recent genetic study, it didn't have a placenta. And its kind might never have evolved one if not for a chance encounter with a retrovirus. |
||