viruses are not technically alive because they cant reproduce by themselves, eat, break down food, or grow
Viruses are not an organism at all. They are not alive. They are nonliving. They are like cockle burrs that "grab" hold of your clothing or a dog's coat. They are hijackers. Once they get attached to the cell of a living cell, they can take it over and "make" the living cell produce virus particles instead of cell parts. These particles can assemble into more viruses and then they break out of the cell (killing it) and begin the process again. They cannot make more viruses on their own.
No. Virologists, the scientists who study viruses, don't consider them living things because they do not meet all the criteria of the definition of life.
Most scientists consider viruses as the link between living an non living organisms. Viruses are considered non-living by some scientists because - 1) They donot perform any metabolic activities. 2) Outside the host cell , viruses are present only in crystalised form. (Even after it is un-crystalised , it does not lose it's capacity for infection) 3) It does not require any sort of "food".
Many, if not most biologists do not consider viruses living. So, they are not on any phylogenetic tree that I know of. They may have a phylogeny that I am unaware of, though.
They don't have a Nucleus.
Viruses either have a strand of DNA or RNA not both like living organisms. They need a host (you and me) in order to replicate.
None. Viruses are acellular. Many biologists do not consider viruses to be living things in part because they are acellular. Look at any phylogeny (tree of life). Viruses are not on them.
Bacteria and viruses are small and can only be seen through a microscope. The small living things are microorganisms or microbes. Some people do not think viruses are living things because they are acellular particles. They consider them to be an organic structure that interacts with living organisms.
viruses are not technically alive because they cant reproduce by themselves, eat, break down food, or grow
Biologists consider dormant virions to be non-living because they must obtain a host to function and replicate themselves. However, active viruses are considered to be living, by most scientists.
Viruses are not an organism at all. They are not alive. They are nonliving. They are like cockle burrs that "grab" hold of your clothing or a dog's coat. They are hijackers. Once they get attached to the cell of a living cell, they can take it over and "make" the living cell produce virus particles instead of cell parts. These particles can assemble into more viruses and then they break out of the cell (killing it) and begin the process again. They cannot make more viruses on their own.
No. Virologists, the scientists who study viruses, don't consider them living things because they do not meet all the criteria of the definition of life.
Depends on your definition of "living".Viruses, and Nanobes are smaller, but many do not consider them living.Viruses are smallestNanobes are larger than VirusesNanoarchaeum are larger than Nanobes.Nanoarchaeum are considered the smallest aside from Viruses and Nanobes.
what are some questions that biologist might ask about the living things they study
what are some questions that biologist might ask about the living things they study
what are some questions that biologist might ask about the living things they study