Exceptions of living things NOT composed of cells?
des at genelab.plus.com
Mon Jan 26 16:00:39 EST 2004
"Mark" <nospam at nspam.com> wrote in message
news:6JdRb.520$X2.32765 at news.tufts.edu...
> Larry D. Farrell wrote:
> > Scott Coutts wrote:
> >>Tom Williams wrote:
> >>>I'm an undergraduate student who's curious about
> >> > something mentioned in an anatomy lecture:
> >>>My professor said that it was possible to have
> >> > life without a cell, or cells.
> >>>How can this be??? Can somebody please explain
> >> > how, or even if this is true?
> >>Hi Tom,
> >>It depends on how he defines 'life'. This always instigates a big
> >>discussion on what 'life' actually means.
> >>He's probably talking about anything able to replicate, so then he's
> >>including viruses. Viruses are able to replicate, but as far as I'm
> >>concerned, this is not 'life'... I dont regard viruses as 'living'. If
> >>you're interested, you might like to look up viriods and prions -
> >>they're able to replicate, but they're smaller than viruses... They're
> >>single molecules!
> > However, none of these are capable of replicating independtly of other
> > organisms, which is pretty much a requirement for "life" as it is
> > generally defined. (Note, of course, that most eukaryotes need another
> > organism in the form of a mate to initiate the process of replication
> > once begun, the process does not depend specifically on the other
> > providing on-going functions for the process to continue to completion.)
> > Viruses and viroids are essentially inert unless placed into (or at
> > in very close proximity to) host cells that provide the essential
> > functions and materials needed for replication, while prions produce
> > copies of themselves only if provided with properly folded copies of the
> > prion protein, usually provided by living host cells.
> > --
> > Larry D. Farrell, Ph.D.
> > Professor of Microbiology
> > Idaho State University
> Of course, we start to get into muddy water with this kind of definition
> when we consider endosymbiotic bacteria such as Buchnera, which I think
> (I might be wrong) is an obligate symbiont - can't live independently of
> the host (aphids in this case). I sometimes wonder if this is really all
> that different to a virus - both seem to grow and reproduce, but only
> given a cellular environment to do it in. Someone was suggested to me
> that the cellular environment that is so essential to these creatures
> might be analogous to the terrestrial environment that we depend upon -
> once outside of it we are not all that good at reproducing or surviving.
> Not too sure about that myself though. Thoughts?
This really is a wonderfull topic for a budding Biologist to put some
serious effort into the study of. Id
encourage a lot or reading and thinking around this question as you will the
encounter many concepts
relating to the majority or core biological areas. An endless feast of
science no less. I seem to remeber the
topic has been addressed several times in Scientific American and New
One interesting approach might be to look at the topic from an ecological
point of view rather than pure a biochemcial/structural/molecular
At one time I personally considered the cell was ''Natures's Wheel'' and
anything not bounded by a functional membrane
did not qualify as life , these days Im not so certain. I think we would all
be interested to know what conclusion you come to
after diving into this area.
I wish you luck and joy on your graduate course.
More information about the Microbio