Jump to content

The meaning of genetic novelty


noha

Recommended Posts

Hello,

I am translating a book called Microbiology: A very Short introduction, and I don't understand the meaning of arbitrary measures of genetic novelty in the following context:

The application of the term ‘species’ is even more problematic for viruses than bacteria and we rely upon arbitrary measures of genetic novelty when we refer to different kinds of bacteriophage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Novelty would mean something that is different, so they are looking at unique genetics of one virus vs another. The "arbitrary measure" suggests that some genetic differences might not matter in distinguishing between them, i.e. some measure of genetic difference might tell you that two viruses are different, when they should be classified as being the same virus. (or vice-versa)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would interpret “arbitrary measures” to mean that there is no established protocol for naming bacteriophages especially when it comes to the selection of letters. Generally, the first person to characterize a new virus picks an arbitrary letter from the Greek or Roman alphabet followed by the number 1 followed by the genus of the bacteria they infect. Other variants are given numbers in sequence of their discovery. There is no systematic meaning to the choice of letters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bangstrom said:

I would interpret “arbitrary measures” to mean that there is no established protocol for naming bacteriophages especially when it comes to the selection of letters. Generally, the first person to characterize a new virus picks an arbitrary letter from the Greek or Roman alphabet followed by the number 1 followed by the genus of the bacteria they infect. Other variants are given numbers in sequence of their discovery. There is no systematic meaning to the choice of letters.

The label is beside the point. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OP was asking about arbitrary measures in order to categorize phages (i.e. ways to measure genetic distance), and was not referring to naming conventions as such. 

IOW it is not about how systematic we name phages, but rather how systematic (or not) are we able to distinguish them in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.