A new theory on the origin and the nature of viruses
Reference (22)
Am. Nat.
(1946)The Natural History of Viruses
(1967)General System Theory
(1969)Virus as Organism
(1945)Principles of Animal Virology
(1955)- et al.
Microbiology
(1980) The Genetic Mechanism and the Origin of Life
(1978)Genetics and the Origin of Species
(1982)The Biology of Animal Viruses
(1968)
Science
Cited by (43)
Investigating the Concept and Origin of Viruses
2020, Trends in MicrobiologyCitation Excerpt :The term ‘virus’ should refer to the process encompassing all phases of the virus infection cycle [3]. In this context, questioning the origin of ‘viruses’ takes a completely different and much broader meaning than simply questioning the origin of the virus particles [2,11,13,16]. The virion- and host-centric virus definitions can cause ambiguities in distinguishing different viral lineages and even viruses from cellular organisms.
The Virocell Concept
2020, Encyclopedia of Virology: Volume 1-5, Fourth EditionShannon's information, Bernal's biopoiesis and Bernoulli distribution as pillars for building a definition of life
2019, Journal of Theoretical BiologyCitation Excerpt :As early as in 1983 Claudiu Bandea argued that the intracellular phase of a virus life cycle is ontologically mature in which “virus shows the major physiological properties of other organisms: metabolism, growth, and reproduction. Therefore, life is an effective presence” (Bândea, 1983). Later Jean-Michel Claverie pointed out that the viral factory corresponds to the true viral organism, whereas the virion corresponds to metabolically inactive spore used by the virus to spread from one cell to others.
To be or not to be alive: How recent discoveries challenge the traditional definitions of viruses and life
2016, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C :Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical SciencesCitation Excerpt :However, there is a continuum of genome sizes from the smallest to the largest viruses, and any division of the virosphere on the basis of genome sizes would necessarily be arbitrary (Forterre et al., 2014). Proponents of regression hypotheses, such as Bandea (1983) and Claverie (2006), who have strongly opposed the “virion/virus” paradigm, possibly do not realize that regression hypotheses function in the framework of this paradigm, the ancient cell being transformed into a virion. I myself supported such regression hypotheses in the 1980s, when I first realised that viruses encode very ancient DNA replication proteins, I concluded that these proteins originated from extinct lineages of ancient cells that subsequently became viruses (Forterre, 1992).
The metaphor that viruses are living is alive and well, but it is no more than a metaphor
2016, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C :Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical SciencesCitation Excerpt :Instead of referring correctly to the replication cycle of a virus, it became standard practice to speak metaphorically of the life cycle of a virus and it seems that some authors became convinced that since viruses went through a life cycle, they had to be alive. Bandea (1983), for instance, did not view the life cycle of a virus simply as a metaphor but claimed that “the living phase of the virus is the intracellular replication phase of its life cycle ”. This living phase, according to him, exhibits the characteristics of metabolism, growth and reproduction present in all living organisms.