 |
| Close up of a virus brain? |
I. Background
The better part of a decade ago Dredd Blog was complaining about a non-existent science called "Abiology" that should exist (Weekend Rebel Science Excursion - 27, quoting Dredd Blog posts from 2012).
About a year after that post I complained, along with other scientific researchers, about the scientists of the biology persuasion having loose lips:
"Since at least the 17th century (and mostly because of Newton), natural scientists have stopped using formal or final causes to explain natural phenomena ... except in biology. This was first pointed out by Colin Pittendrigh (Pittendrigh, C. S. Behavior and Evolution) (ed. by A. Rose and G. G. Simpson), Yale University Press, 1958), who coined the term "teleonomy" to refer to the kind of teleological phenomena observed in biological processes."
(On The Origin of Genieology - 2). "Abiology" still doesn't exist, and the elite among them still go on and on about possibly not knowing the difference between bio-(live) and abio-(not live), i.e. biology and abiology (Are Viruses Alive?).
And I am still pointing out that viruses are discussed in the science commentariat (media) without knowing what microbial host the viruses are replicated by:
"Seriously, it behooves researchers to closely examine the microbes that replicate the SARS-CoV-2 viruses (they haven't yet specified exactly which microbes those are)." (The Doll As Metaphor - 3; cf. On The Origin Of The Home Of COVID-19)
A microbiologist wrote: "Easy to see though, plaque assays for counting phages [a type of virus] do not work if you have − or suspect you have − lots of phages in a sample but the host bacteria are difficult or impossible to culture on plates, or − even worse − not known." (Small Things Considered, emphasis added).
The virus commentariat's 'solution' all too often is to ignore "the host bacteria" of the virus ('home' of the virus), and to substitute that location/home with what is actually the "meta-host" or "epi-host".
That is, they substitute the host bacteria of that virus and tell us that the virus is "in a human host", "in an animal host", or in "a plant host".
That is a cover-up of their failure to locate the microbe host (including its characteristics and genome) from the public.
Thus, the worst case scenario of not knowing or saying what "the microbe host" of a virus (the single-celled microbe) really is happens to be a common practice:
"Previous outbreaks of human disease caused by coronaviruses, such as SARS and MERS, happened when a virus jumped from animals to humans. Investigations of virus genetics have shown that bats are host to a diverse range of coronaviruses, and the transfer of SARS and MERS viruses to humans involved intermediate hosts, camels in the case of MERS. On-going investigations of the new coronavirus, [SARS-CoV-2] the cause of COVID-19, also suggest that bats are the original host."
(Where did the new coronavirus come from?, emphasis added). Don't forget that the actual host of a virus is a single celled microbe located within a 'meta-host' or 'epi-host' (animal, human, plant).When the single celled microbe host that replicates a virus is unknown, it is like asking a person for their address and receiving the answer "Earth".
Maybe morphology classes would be useful (What is Morphology?).
II. Why Are RNA Virus Mutation Rates So Damn High
One suspect is quantum mutation that takes place when a DNA or RNA virus is stable:
"At an extreme, an organism that’s “perfectly” adapted to its constant environment would do best to reduce its mutation rate to zero—there are no more beneficial mutations, so all mutations are likely worse than the current genotype. In a constant environment (one where the fitness landscape does not change), it would be best for the optimal genotype to not mutate at all."
(Why are RNA virus mutation rates so damn high). Quantum Biology has an answer to the question that historically has not been well received.
It has to do with "quantum tunneling" and other events of the science of quantum physics, i.e. quantum mechanics (The Doll As Metaphor - 4).
Ignoring the impact of protons (and photons?) on RNA takes place more often than it does with DNA.
So, the question is not being dealt with in a manner that includes all possible answers.
DNA quantum morphing was introduced decades ago, and was recently revisited by a research group at Cornell University (An Open Quantum Systems approach to proton tunneling in DNA, September 2021).
However, the RNA virus once again was not included in those Cornell University studies, even though there is a "double trouble" likelihood of such mutations.
III. Closing Comments
Thus, it is time to take the quantum hypothesis more seriously as I recently posted:
That Cornell University Paper uses the A-T ('T' = thymine) base pair of DNA in its work, whereas I will use the A-U ('U' = uracil) base pair of RNA in this post:
"Uracil is a pyrimidine type nitrogenous base that is found only in RNA molecules. It always pairs with adenine. Chemical difference of uracil and thymine is very small. Uracil has a hydrogen atom at C-5 carbon while thymine has a methyl group at the same [C-5]carbon."
(The Doll As Metaphor - 4). It is time to focus on the host microbe of a particular RNA virus in cases where the most stability is likely, while remembering the statement above:
"In a constant environment (one where the fitness landscape does not change), it would be best for the optimal genotype to not mutate at all."
(ibid @ Cornell University Paper quoted above). That is where the rubber meets the road, in terms of examining why mutations take place when they should not take place (because the fitness landscape has not changed).
Especially if they take place at the A-U ('U' = uracil) base pair of RNA in addition to the G-C location of RNA, as was studied in DNA viruses (double trouble).
The next post in this series is here.
Yep, the sounds of silence Double Trouble:
No comments:
Post a Comment