2007-01-24 14:34:55 · 6 answers · asked by dundundun 1 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Biology
There's a little more to it than the previous answers indicate. It's hard to imagine a virus succeeding without a cellular host to provide for it's metabolism, etc... Yet ironically, we make the assumption that the first forms of life were self replicating nucleic acids without any cell structures.
There are two schoools of thought on the origin of viruses. One suggests that viruses degenerated from cells, becoming totally dependent on their hosts. This is definitely true for many viruses, particularly DNA viruses. The other theory suggests that viruses, in particular RNA viruses, were the first form of life.
Bottom line, we don't really know.
2007-01-25 00:53:00 · answer #1 · answered by floundering penguins 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
That is because they need the metabolism of a host cell to reproduce. Without the host cell they are just an inanimate particle.
2007-01-24 14:56:09 · answer #2 · answered by Scott S 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
because cells didn't evolve after viruses, then there would be some way of stopping viruses within the tha evolved cell
2007-01-24 14:41:34 · answer #3 · answered by edgar 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
A virus could not reproduce without a host. It needs cells to replicate.
2007-01-24 14:41:10 · answer #4 · answered by Susan M 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
viruses cannot reproduce without 'borrowing' the capacities of cells
2007-01-24 14:40:52 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
viruses are smaller than cells.
2007-01-24 14:41:00 · answer #6 · answered by lees 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋