original version of this story Appeared in Quanta Magazine.
Ever since viruses were discovered in the late 1800s, scientists have distinguished them from other forms of life. Viruses were much smaller than cells and contained more than just genes inside their protein shells. They couldn’t grow, copy their genes, or do much of anything. The researchers believed that each virus was an isolated particle floating around the world alone, capable of replicating only if it happened to hit the right cell that could take it up.
He said it was this simplicity that attracted many scientists to the virus in the first place. Marco Vignuzzi, a virologist at the Institute of Infectious Diseases, Science and Technology Agency, Singapore. “We were trying to be reductionist.”
That reductionism paid off. The study of viruses was essential to the birth of modern biology. Lacking the complexity of cells, they have uncovered the fundamental rules of how genes work. But viral reductionism comes at a cost, Vignuzzi says. “By assuming that viruses are simple, we are blinding ourselves to the possibility that they are still complex in ways we don’t know about.”
For example, if we think of viruses as isolated packages of genes, it would be foolish to imagine that they have social lives. But Vignuzzi and like-minded new virologists don’t think that’s entirely unreasonable. In recent decades, some strange features of viruses have been discovered that make no sense if they are solitary particles. They instead reveal the virus’ surprisingly complex social world. Social virologists, as researchers sometimes call them, believe that viruses only make sense as members of a community.
Indeed, the social life of viruses is quite different from that of other species. Viruses don’t post selfies on social media, volunteer at food banks, or commit identity theft like humans. They do not fight with their mates for control of the herd like baboons do. Unlike honey bees, they do not collect nectar to feed the queen. It also does not clump into a slimy mat for general protection, as some bacteria do.Nevertheless, social virologists believe that viruses deceive, cooperate and interact With other viral friends.
The field of social virology is still young and small. The first conference dedicated to the social life of viruses was held in 2022. Number 2 It will be held in June this year. A total of 50 people are scheduled to participate. Still, social virologists argue that the impact of their new field could be profound. If we consider viruses in isolation from each other, a disease like influenza does not make sense. And if we can decipher the social lives of viruses, we might be able to use it to fight the diseases they cause.
under our nose
Some of the most important evidence about the social life of viruses has been in plain view for almost a century. After the influenza virus was discovered in the early 1930s, scientists discovered a way to increase strains of the virus by injecting it into chicken eggs and growing them inside. Researchers can use the new virus to infect lab animals for research, or they can inject it into new eggs to continue growing the new virus.
In the late 1940s, Danish virologist Preben von Magnus was growing viruses when he noticed something strange. Many of the viruses produced in one egg were unable to replicate when injected into another egg. By his third cycle of infection, only 1 in 10,000 viruses was still able to replicate. However, in subsequent cycles, defective viruses became rare and replicating viruses recovered. Von Magnus suspected that a virus that cannot replicate was not fully developed, and called the virus “incomplete.”
