Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Viruses called phages, researchers say, are in a grey zone between life and non-life

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

They are called phages: because they eat bacteria:

Scientists have discovered hundreds of unusually large, bacteria-killing viruses with capabilities normally associated with living organisms, blurring the line between living microbes and viral machines.

These phages — short for bacteriophages, so-called because they “eat” bacteria — are of a size and complexity considered typical of life, carry numerous genes normally found in bacteria and use these genes against their bacterial hosts.

University of California, Berkeley, researchers and their collaborators found these huge phages by scouring a large database of DNA that they generated from nearly 30 different Earth environments, ranging from the guts of premature infants and pregnant women to a Tibetan hot spring, a South African bioreactor, hospital rooms, oceans, lakes and deep underground.

Altogether they identified 351 different huge phages, all with genomes four or more times larger than the average genomes of viruses that prey on single-celled bacteria.

Among these is the largest bacteriophage discovered to date: Its genome, 735,000 base-pairs long, is nearly 15 times larger than the average phage. This largest known phage genome is much larger than the genomes of many bacteria…

“Typically, what separates life from non-life is to have ribosomes and the ability to do translation; that is one of the major defining features that separate viruses and bacteria, non-life and life,” Sachdeva said. “Some large phages have a lot of this translational machinery, so they are blurring the line a bit.”

University of California – Berkeley, “Huge bacteria-eating viruses close gap between life and non-life” at ScienceDaily

Paper. (open access)

It’s not clear why phages are not just assumed to be life forms. If they turn out to communicate and learn from experience, as bacteria do, that would strengthen the case.

See also: In What Ways Are Bacteria Intelligent?
As antibiotic resistance grows, researchers are discovering that these microbes are not just single, simple cells. We must understand the surprisingly complex ways bacteria “think” in order to keep them in check.

Comments
Upright BiPed
Next he’ll be telling you that you are “angry” or some such. This is his pattern.
Maybe it's true that some people are biological automatons? Is JVL the (boring) Terminator?Truthfreedom
August 26, 2020
August
08
Aug
26
26
2020
08:25 AM
8
08
25
AM
PDT
. Next he'll be telling you that you are "angry" or some such. This is his pattern.Upright BiPed
August 26, 2020
August
08
Aug
26
26
2020
08:17 AM
8
08
17
AM
PDT
JVL
No, it means that I’m not about to spend time and effort just so that a) anything I find will be denied and disregarded and b) what’s the point when a person’s mind is already made up? You’re not really interested in a dialogue at all, clearly. So I’m not going to waste my time indulging people who have no intention of even considering that they might be wrong.
Summed up: non-answer (or "I have nothing").Truthfreedom
August 26, 2020
August
08
Aug
26
26
2020
08:11 AM
8
08
11
AM
PDT
.
I’m not about to spend time and effort just so that a) anything I find will be denied and disregarded and b) what’s the point when a person’s mind is already made up? I’m not going to waste my time indulging people who have no intention of even considering that they might be wrong.
Pot. Kettle.Upright BiPed
August 26, 2020
August
08
Aug
26
26
2020
08:10 AM
8
08
10
AM
PDT
Truthfreedom: Summed up: non-answer (or “I have nothing”). No, it means that I'm not about to spend time and effort just so that a) anything I find will be denied and disregarded and b) what's the point when a person's mind is already made up? You're not really interested in a dialogue at all, clearly. So I'm not going to waste my time indulging people who have no intention of even considering that they might be wrong. And it means there isn’t any way molecular replicators evolved into living organisms. It also means there isn’t any way that prokaryotes evolved into eukaryotes. Like I said, why even bother to try and have a discussion when someone's mind is made up?JVL
August 26, 2020
August
08
Aug
26
26
2020
07:41 AM
7
07
41
AM
PDT
MatSpirit is confused, as usual. I am not an expert on the Monster. Unlike the anti-IDists I know it exists and what it means. And it means there isn't any way molecular replicators evolved into living organisms. It also means there isn't any way that prokaryotes evolved into eukaryotes. So evos have to ignore it because it proves they have nothing but faith.ET
August 26, 2020
August
08
Aug
26
26
2020
05:18 AM
5
05
18
AM
PDT
JVL
I wasn’t referring to them being created in the lab. You know what, you are far too rude and aggressive to try and have a reasonable conversation with. Your anger will eat you up eventually.
Summed up: non-answer (or "I have nothing").Truthfreedom
August 26, 2020
August
08
Aug
26
26
2020
04:38 AM
4
04
38
AM
PDT
JVL
Oh dear, not a very objective place to start.
Lol. A materialist using the word "objective", while according to their philosophy, "objectivity does not exist". Have you ever heard of self-refuting statements, JVL? Here, for you (to instruct the ignorant, a work of mercy):
In his Introduction to Logic, Harry Gensler defines a self-refuting statement as “[A] statement that makes negative claims so sweeping that it ends up denying itself.” [1] In other words, it results when an argument or position is undercut by its own criteria. (An example of this would be saying, “I cannot speak a word of English” in English).
https://www.google.com/amp/s/winteryknight.com/2010/01/30/what-is-self-refutation-and-what-are-some-examples-of-self-refutation/amp/Truthfreedom
August 26, 2020
August
08
Aug
26
26
2020
04:16 AM
4
04
16
AM
PDT
MatSpirit
He also fails to link to the article he’s criticizing, so we have no idea what Bridget Alex at Discover magazine actually wrote.
The link is there. First paragraph, fifth line. Please, re-read. https://wmbriggs.com/post/25658/
Briggs seems to think that Bridget discovered that ALL humans have evolved to believe in “gods” and he implies that this belief is irresistible.
Wrong. What Mr. Briggs is saying is that evolutionary "theory" (not per se, but when is it illegitimately coupled with philosophical materialism), makes no sense. Why? Because this toxic couple (made in Hell) leads to the following: we are matter "programmed" to everything and the contrary -to believe in "gods" (the "poor peasants") and "not to believe in them"(Bridget Alex types) -to "infer patterns/ design" (the "poor peasants") and "not to infer them" (Richard Dawkins types) -to "seek purpose" (the "poor peasants") and to "understand there is none" (Jerry Coyne fanatic types) Etc... What is the difference then between "evolution has created every single behavior under the sun" and "God did it"?Truthfreedom
August 26, 2020
August
08
Aug
26
26
2020
03:57 AM
3
03
57
AM
PDT
Martin_r: So, again, show me some examples – how life or a virus is created in lab (using your ‘small’ steps) I wasn't referring to them being created in the lab. You know what, you are far too rude and aggressive to try and have a reasonable conversation with. Your anger will eat you up eventually.JVL
August 26, 2020
August
08
Aug
26
26
2020
03:29 AM
3
03
29
AM
PDT
JVL @36 in general, i don't think i am passive (i am running a blog on so called repeated evolution). But you are a liar. So, again, show me some examples - how life or a virus is created in lab (using your 'small' steps) Show me anything ...martin_r
August 26, 2020
August
08
Aug
26
26
2020
01:55 AM
1
01
55
AM
PDT
MatSpirit @29 "These phages — short for bacteriophages, so-called because they “eat” bacteria " i am confused, please explain to me, how T4 bacteriophage eats bacteria. I don't get it. This is exactly the problem with viruses i talk about. Viruses don't live. Don't need to eat. Don't need to replicate, don't need to do anything, because they don't live, unless someone (e.g. an engineer/designer/creator) pre-programmed viruses to execute certain things (e.g. to regulate species populations). So, explain to me, why viruses even exist if they don't live / eat ? What sense does it make to you Darwinians ?martin_r
August 26, 2020
August
08
Aug
26
26
2020
01:49 AM
1
01
49
AM
PDT
Martin_r: really? I am pretty good informed, i can’t see any progress … perhaps you have an access to some confidential research … So please give me some example … I'll think about it because it's really easy to find if you actually spend the time trying to find it. Making other people do your work for you is kind of passive aggressive don't you think?JVL
August 26, 2020
August
08
Aug
26
26
2020
01:49 AM
1
01
49
AM
PDT
Truthfreedom:
Since God exists, and since this Bridget Alex has evolved out of believing in this part of Reality, both theories are plausible.
Oh dear, not a very objective place to start.JVL
August 26, 2020
August
08
Aug
26
26
2020
01:45 AM
1
01
45
AM
PDT
JVL @27 "What I have noticed is that scientists are trying to see if small steps and transitions are possible or probable. I think that is happening." really? I am pretty good informed, i can't see any progress ... perhaps you have an access to some confidential research ... So please give me some example ...martin_r
August 26, 2020
August
08
Aug
26
26
2020
01:41 AM
1
01
41
AM
PDT
Truthfreedom @ 31: I'll try to answer your question, but it's going to be hard because Mr. Briggs seems to be a little confused himself. He also fails to link to the article he's criticizing, so we have no idea what Bridget Alex at Discover magazine actually wrote. He's also in snide mode which adds to the problems. Briggs seems to think that Bridget discovered that ALL humans have evolved to believe in "gods" and he implies that this belief is irresistible. He then says that since she doesn't believe in gods, she is therefore not human. I don't think Briggs is actually dumb enough to believe that, but as I said, he's writing in Snide mode. I've heard theories about God modules and such, but they usually talk about things that increase group bonding. They have nothing to do with any particular god or a compulsion to believe in him/her/them. I don't think Briggs understands this. In fact, that's why what he writes makes no sense. He doesn't understand what he's talking about, so he makes errors like this. For a post where he gives enough of the opposing argument so you can clearly spot his misunderstanding, see https://wmbriggs.com/post/6102/.MatSpirit
August 25, 2020
August
08
Aug
25
25
2020
08:40 PM
8
08
40
PM
PDT
Truthfreedom, did you post a message with a link to your Blog? I thought I saw one, but my computer crashed and it wasn't there when I restarted. Perhaps it's in another thread?MatSpirit
August 25, 2020
August
08
Aug
25
25
2020
07:52 PM
7
07
52
PM
PDT
MatSpirit
Just a few little questions: What are you asking? What makes you think the human brain has escaped evolution?
JVL
What do you mean by ‘escape evolution”? I think it would be good if you were to point to particular issues and transitions you find problematic.
This article is a perfect example of the problem with this line of thinking (to which I do not subscribe, because, well, makes no-sense): Science Writer Miraculously Escapes Ravages Of Evolution
"A science writer at Discover magazine has managed to escape from the clutches of evolution and lived to tell us of it. This Bridget Alex has discovered humans—not her, but humans—have evolved to believe in gods. But, somehow, she did not. Therefore she is not human". "Or if she is, I don’t know if that means evolution is broken or she is some sort of genetic mutant who has evolved not to believe in gods. Since God exists, and since this Bridget Alex has evolved out of believing in this part of Reality, both theories are plausible."
https://wmbriggs.com/post/25658/Truthfreedom
August 25, 2020
August
08
Aug
25
25
2020
07:06 PM
7
07
06
PM
PDT
Just a phage they're going through.Seversky
August 25, 2020
August
08
Aug
25
25
2020
02:34 PM
2
02
34
PM
PDT
I just noticed that News provided some cooboration to the "viruses originated from bacteria" theory in the OP: These phages — short for bacteriophages, so-called because they “eat” bacteria — are of a size and complexity considered typical of life, carry numerous genes normally found in bacteria and use these genes against their bacterial hosts. Sounds like we caught one in the act of evolving.MatSpirit
August 25, 2020
August
08
Aug
25
25
2020
12:38 PM
12
12
38
PM
PDT
JVL: I don’t have an answer. I would guess that viruses arose as ‘lucky’ molecular combinations that could infect living cells and use the cell’s chemicals to reproduce. But I really don’t know. Maybe someday mainstream science will find a plausible orgination path. I think mainstream science found a pretty plausible origination path decades ago. Viruses are DNA/RNA in a protein container. You find all three in bacteria and that's probably where they came from. Think of a virus as a super parasite. It makes a living taking advantage of other organisms and has streamlined itself untill the only thing left is the DNA/RNA and a simple protein container. Look up Spiegelman's Monster for details on how a parasite can simplify itself to aid reproduction. Or, if you want to be entertained, ask ET. He's the local expert on the monster.MatSpirit
August 25, 2020
August
08
Aug
25
25
2020
12:29 PM
12
12
29
PM
PDT
Martin_r:Did you read what i just wrote? I was trying to figure out what your views are. Have you ever wonder, why modern Darwinian scientists are unable to replicate anything from your ‘lucky molecular combinations’ using fancy tools and fancy labs? Should be easy when it happened so many times just by coincidence somewhere in an uncontrolled chemical environment by blind unguided natural process … should be easy to create a virus from scratch … What I have noticed is that scientists are trying to see if small steps and transitions are possible or probable. I think that is happening. But it's slow and complicated work and it takes time. Nothing controversial about that. Unless you're in a hurry to come to a conclusion which I am not.JVL
August 25, 2020
August
08
Aug
25
25
2020
12:23 PM
12
12
23
PM
PDT
Truthfreedom: So I am doing the (bolding) homework for you: (E.g: how is it possible for our brains to “escape” evolution if WE ARE OUR BRAINS AND WE(“BRAINS”) HAVE BEEN SHAPED BY EVOLUTION AND ONLY BY EVOLUTION? What do you mean by 'escape evolution"? I think it would be good if you were to point to particular issues and transitions you find problematic.JVL
August 25, 2020
August
08
Aug
25
25
2020
12:19 PM
12
12
19
PM
PDT
Martin_r: Did YOU design Earth’s ecosystem ? Are you able to judge what amount of killing is needed (in order to regulate any population) ? I was just asking you about what you thought the role of viruses is and how the common cold virus fits into your view. If you don't want to address that that's okay. You're not obligated.JVL
August 25, 2020
August
08
Aug
25
25
2020
12:17 PM
12
12
17
PM
PDT
Truthfreedom: "(E.g: how is it possible for our brains to “escape” evolution if WE ARE OUR BRAINS AND WE(“BRAINS”) HAVE BEEN SHAPED BY EVOLUTION AND ONLY BY EVOLUTION? MatSpirit? Pater Kimbridge? Seversky? Bob O’H? Chuckdarwin? *Deafening silence*." Just a little tip: When you post a message at 4:49 AM, you aren't likely to receive an answer for a few hours. We don't usually call that a deafening silence, though. Just a few little questions: What are you asking? What makes you think the human brain has escaped evolution? Over what time frame do you think it's escaped? Do you have a lot of problems with the UD logon Capcha?MatSpirit
August 25, 2020
August
08
Aug
25
25
2020
12:08 PM
12
12
08
PM
PDT
Truthfreedom "Once you start scratching materialism’s surface, you see how fragile its pillars are." let me add the following: once you start scratching materialism's surface, you will find out, that very clever people (e.g. Darwinian scientists) can believe in very absurd things ... it is very concerning that this is happening in 21st century...martin_r
August 25, 2020
August
08
Aug
25
25
2020
05:38 AM
5
05
38
AM
PDT
JVL @11 “viruses arose as ‘lucky’ molecular combinations” Have you ever wonder, why modern Darwinian scientists are unable to replicate anything from your 'lucky molecular combinations' using fancy tools and fancy labs? Should be easy when it happened so many times just by coincidence somewhere in an uncontrolled chemical environment by blind unguided natural process ... should be easy to create a virus from scratch ...martin_r
August 25, 2020
August
08
Aug
25
25
2020
05:18 AM
5
05
18
AM
PDT
JVL @11 "viruses arose as ‘lucky’ molecular combinations" sure, what else... a lucky accident, after a lucky accident, after a lucky accident :))) Thats all what is left to believe in when you are a Darwinist. Did you read what i just wrote? According to modern Darwinian science, viruses have many evolutionary origins, so you have to believe in hundred of thousands of lucky molecular accidents. It is weird, that all that happened in deep past, and then never again. To be honest, i am not sure how many species of viruses exist. Like i said, only recently were 200,000 new virus-species discovered (never seen before), so, i would not be surprised, if there are millions of virus-species out there. So your faith in lucky molecular accidents has to be really strong :))) https://www.forbes.com/sites/priyashukla/2019/04/30/200koceanviruses/#146946af3942martin_r
August 25, 2020
August
08
Aug
25
25
2020
05:05 AM
5
05
05
AM
PDT
JVL " Do you call all the ID proponents out when they don’t answer questions? Nope." sure, but there is a difference, your Darwinian theory can't answer pretty serious question - where THE MOST ABUNDANT biological entity on Earth (viruses) come from. This is so embarrassing, such an useless theory ...martin_r
August 25, 2020
August
08
Aug
25
25
2020
04:59 AM
4
04
59
AM
PDT
Martin_r
Did YOU design Earth’s ecosystem ? Are you able to judge what amount of killing is needed (in order to regulate any population)?
Of course not. This pitiful line of reasoning is what they use to justify that the Universe has been poorly/ not designed. According to evos, we are: -"random assemblies of particles" - "random assembled brains" -"imperfect brains" -"imperfect animals" - plagued by "cognitive biases" -"never meant to anything apart from survival+reproduction" -"hallucinating our reality" -"illusions" But of course, they CAN ESCAPE ALL THE CRAP ABOVE, AND FLY TO ANOTHER PLANE OF REALITY, TO UNDERSTAND HOW A "GOOD UNIVERSE/ POPULATION CONTROL MECHANISM/ WHATEVER" should be designed (pun intended). AND TO TEACH US "POOR PEASANTS" HOW "DELUDED" WE ARE. Laughable if it were not pathetic.Truthfreedom
August 25, 2020
August
08
Aug
25
25
2020
04:01 AM
4
04
01
AM
PDT
1 2

Leave a Reply