News Analysis #2

Thomas E. Altizer
Biology 1090
Salt Lake Community College
4/9/2017

Since the dawn of biological science, the idea of three domains in the evolutionary tree
has been foundational knowledge since elementary school for most students. But recent
discoveries of giant viruses may just add a new domain to the age-old, three-legged tree. Study
and research into newly discovered giant viruses, Mimivirus and Klosneuvirus, are showing
that their evolutionary and hereditary traits may just trace back to the top of the tree itself. When
microbiologists first discovered Mimivirus in 2003, their hypothesis suggested that the ability of
the virus to create proteins, which viruses usually are only able to induce their host to do, suggest
that their ancestors could live outside a host cell (Reardon 2017). The only problem with their
hypothesis was, according to the biologists themselves in their journal entry for Science,
Mimivirus lacks universal bacterial genes, such as those encoding ribosomal RNA or proteins,
as well as other proteins involved in protein translation. This finding put the debate to rest until
the discovery just a few days ago of Klosneuvirus, a much more advanced giant virus, which
could in fact do all of those things. Klosneuvirus was discovered by accident when international
scientists were studying samples of sewage. When discovering the virus in the sample, they first
noticed the sheer size of it, relatively comparable to the bacteria also in the sample (viruses
usually cannot be seen under the same microscope as bacteria) (Reardon 2017). When studying
the virus further, they noticed, Klosneuviruses encode an expanded translation machinery,
including aminoacyl transfer RNA synthesases, with specificities for all 20 amino acids
(Frederik Shulz 2017). But when running the genetic material side by side of Klosneuvirus with
Mimivirus, the researchers found that the two share four distinct genome patterns unique to each
other, suggesting common ancestry, and their hypothesis is that they descended from the same
evolutionary root ancestor, but a much smaller virus through extensive gain of host genes
(Frederik Shulz 2017).
I found the two primary sources used in the article in Nature to be actually quite readable.
They most certainly supplemented the information of the article, and used terms that simply went
over my head, but it seemed like Reardon in her article transposed the information into a
readable format for the semi-layperson to understand. Both the articles enhanced my knowledge
of the subject matter, for instance, when reading the journal entry A Giant Virus found in
Amoebae, I learned that the Mimivirus was discovered while researching the pneumonia virus,
that was not mentioned in the article, but it didnt need to be (Bernard La Scola 2003). The
interaction and correlation between the three sources was quite complementary and not
distractive in the least.
Although there does not seem to be any major public health or biologic implications of
this discovery, it does change the way we have understood our hierarchy of evolution over time.
It also shows us that there are still many possibilities on this planet yet to be discovered that
explain where we come from and how species, even microscopic ones evolve. Therefore it can
bring a whole new understanding on how even fragmental pieces of cellular or even viral
material could have an evolutionarily giant cousin that is a species of its own!
 In all the articles, the scientists discovering these viruses all were mentioned as
researchers for universities. Most of which, I might add, were mentioned as working for
European state universities, and I do not believe were influenced by a for-profit motive, like
say for pharmaceutical sales. However, the subject of debate was definitely raised. In Reardons
article, she clearly states that there are two camps or sides in the evolutionary origin of viruses
debate. On the one side are the people who say that viruses started out as self-sufficient
organisms that became trapped inside other cells, eventually becoming parasitic, and jettisoning
genes they no longer need; the other side is the one of the scientists in the study which say
essentially that viruses are particles that snatched genetic material from host organisms over
hundreds of millions of years (Reardon 2017).
I tend to agree with the latter argument, essentially because I was oblivious to the subject
matter prior to reading it. But it definitely stretches the imagination and makes one wonder of all
the possible things we have not discovered yet. I chose this article to analyze because I want to
broaden my horizons to the smaller, microscopic world, as well as the macroscopic universe and
see the dynamic symphony of all phenomena that I have spent the majority of my life completely
oblivious to. This article did a great job and opening that door for me.
I personally think Sara Reardon did a phenomenal job at relaying this very heady subject
matter to a professed lay person like myself. I cannot quite ascertain if I would have truly been
able to grasp the subject matter, though, had I not taken this Biology course, however.
Regardless, she mirrored the primary sources quite well, and now I understand so much more
about the microscopic world as a result of this exercise. But had she not set up the information
and I just read the primary source, I would have been entirely lost, for sure.
Works Cited
Bernard La Scola, Stphane Audic, Catherine Robert, Liang Jungang, Xavier
de Lamballerie, Michel Drancourt, Richard Birtles, Jean-Michel Claverie,
Didier Raoult. "A Giant Virus in Amoebae." Science, March 2003.
Frederik Shulz, Natalya Yutin, Natalia N. Ivanova, Davi R. Ortega, Tae Kwon
Lee, Julia Vierheilig, Holger Dames, Matthias Horn, Michael Wagner,
Grant J. Jensen, Nikos C. Kyrpides, Eugene V. Koonin, Tanja Woyke.
"Giant viruses with an expanded complement of translation system
components." Science, April 2017.
Reardon, Sara. Giant virus discovery sparks debate over tree of life. April 06,
2017. http://www.nature.com/news/giant-virus-discovery-sparks-
debate-over-tree-of-life-1.21798 (accessed April 08, 2017).