ERVs in genomes are not from viruses.

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience' started by Zeno, Oct 18, 2017.

  1. Zeno Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    188
    After giving this some thought, I have concluded that ERV sequences in genomes of organisms are not from viruses but are part of the original design of the organism. I have learned that chimps and humans have many ERVs at the same locations in their genomes. The probability that this could occur by random chance is very, very small. I conclude then that these sequences are not from viruses but are part of the original design of the organism. Also, some of the ERV sequences have been shown to have function.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. river Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,411
    ERV -means ..Zeno what ?
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Zeno Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    188
    Endogenous Retrovirus.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. river Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,411
    Endogenous - having an internal cause or origin
    - growing or originating from within the organism


    Retrovirus - any group of RNA viruses that insert a DNA copy of their genome into the host cell in order to replicate . Example HIV .

    Agreed Zeno
     
  8. river Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,411
    From your post#1

    What reasoning leads to this conclusion ?

    No judgement here just asking .
     
  9. Zeno Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    188
    I explained my reasoning in the opening post.
     
  10. river Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,411
    Sure

    But not in depth .

    Explain further
     
  11. Yazata Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,659
    I'd guess that many of these are very old, which may be why similar ones are found in humans and chimps. They may have originally infected a common ancestor.

    And that antiquity might help explain how they have gradually acquired functions. They may have been present in our and our ancestors' genomes for millions of years. So some of the proteins they encode acquired functions, and genes that produced damaging proteins acquired inhibitors.

    That's how I'm inclined to look at it at the moment. But I'm not an expert on this stuff and maybe you are right.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endogenous_retrovirus
     
  12. Yazata Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,659
    Retroviruses are a class of RNA viruses whose RNA is transcribed backwards (that was once thought to be impossible) into DNA. (There are other kinds of RNA viruses as well, whose RNA acts like messenger RNA and generates proteins more directly.) There are theoretical reasons to speculate that retroviruses may be among the earliest viruses and date back to the time the first cells appeared. The most familiar kind of retrovirus today might be the Aids/HIV virus.

    More on the varieties of viruses here:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baltimore_classification

    The thing with retroviruses is that the DNA they induce the cell to make can be inserted into the cell's own genome. So if the cell doesn't die, it passes the viral-derived DNA down as it divides, along with its own DNA. If that happens in germ cells and gets into eggs and sperm, it can pass from generation to generation indefinitely

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retrovirus

    An endogenous retrovirus is a retrovirus that no longer circulates freely in the environment as a virus and is only found in fossil form, so to speak, in the genes that a long-ago retrovirus once inserted into the genome, that are still passed down. It's estimated that 5-8% of our human genome consists of these ancient viruses. They seem to all be scraps of ancient virus genome and no longer can code for complete viruses. Most of them seem to be very old, millions of years.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endogenous_retrovirus

    Finding the same ones in related taxa can be evidence of common descent, since the simplest explanation for their presence is that the long-gone retrovirus once infected a distant common ancestor.

    But despite not being able to code for a complete virus, some of the endogenous retroviral fragments do code for proteins that are important in various cellular processes, so natural selection has seemingly found a use for them over the years. The idea of non-human DNA in our genomes sounds icky, but we've evolved to the point where we need those genes.
     
    Last edited: Oct 18, 2017
  13. Zeno Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    188
    The reason why I came to this conclusion is as follows:

    There are several possibilities...
    1. ERVs prove that there was a common ancestor to humans and apes because ERVs infected a common ancestor millions of years ago and that's why we find ERV sequences in the same locations in the genomes of apes and humans. Evolution is a fairy tale so this possibility can be dismissed.

    2. Humans and apes were created separately and were subsequently infected by ERVs and they just happened to wind up in the same locations in the genomes of apes and humans. The probability of this occurring is too small so this possibility can be dismissed also.

    3. Humans and apes were created separately and the ERV sequences were part of the original genome when the organism was created. This is the only reasonable hypothesis.
     
  14. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    24,271
    That is implausible in the extreme, beginning with the notion that either apes or humans were "created" - a thoroughly and multiply discredited speculation - and continuing with the extreme unlikelihood of separate origins of any kind producing matching genetic code of this nature. It is not reasonable, at all.

    We essentially "know" humans and apes have common ancestry, by evaluating their morphology and physiology as well as their genetics. That's nailed down, and has been nailed down since long before the discovery of ERVs. We think, and this is quite well established itself, that the sequences now identified as ERVs originated in retroviruses, on grounds of independent genetic structural analysis of those sequences and their embedding in the larger genomes of apes and humans both. We have at hand a well-documented and well-described mechanism of inheritance that completely accounts for their conservation through the necessary ancestral generations, and is observed to be operating in both apes and humans. So the direct and indicated conclusion is that the original viral infections producing the shared ERVs were in the common ancestor(s) of apes and humans.
     
    Last edited: Oct 19, 2017
    Jake Arave likes this.
  15. Jake Arave Icthyologist/Ethologist Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    145
    Using the words "created" and "reasonable" here seems facetious. How can I expect to take you seriously when you're ignoring all the foundational observations of biology as a discipline? I guess it's only a fairy tale that we're breathing oxygen and affected by the gravity of our planet.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  16. origin Trump is the best argument against a democracy. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,921
    So saith the Lord. Amen.

    Now, why is this in the science section?

    I'll ask the mods if this should go into the religion section or maybe to one of the denial of evolution threads.
     
  17. origin Trump is the best argument against a democracy. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,921
    It seems to me that you need to give this a little more thought (maybe a lot more thought)...
     
  18. Zeno Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    188
  19. Jake Arave Icthyologist/Ethologist Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    145
  20. Zeno Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    188
    You didn't answer the question. Why are you posting if your posts are irrelevant and not addressing the point being made?
     
  21. Jake Arave Icthyologist/Ethologist Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    145
    I see no point in arguing faith over biology. As soon as you respect my discipline, I'd love to help you. You understand there's a reason why your thread was moved to pseudoscience right?...
    If you really want to know what information we know of HERVs, feel free to enlighten yourself.

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1187282/

    As of now I'm done with this, but good luck living a fantasy!
     
  22. Zeno Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    188
    Your best answer is to point out that it's in pseudoscience? That's very telling.
     
    Last edited: Oct 20, 2017
  23. Michael 345 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,483
    What's telling is that it stayed in pseudoscience

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     

Share This Page