viruses, evolution, and net traffic

[AO]

>Okayeeee...first problem: not all viruses can be boxed with 
>retroviruses as "escaped genes", at least, not as RECENTLY escaped 
>genes. 

		

> In fact, there are no classical retroviruses (except maybe 
>some retrotransposons which turn out to be infectious) in plants; 

	This implies (at least to me) that there are no cellular
regulatory proteins with homology to plant virus products.  Obviously,
plants need regulatory strategies just as vertebrates and
invertebrates do.   Why then is there a great abundance of oncogenes
and their related virii in vertebrates and not plants?  


>Second problem: you will find some mammal-infecting viruses in the 
>same superfamilies (based on polymerase homologies) as plant 
>viruses...seeing as land plants and mammals diverged some 10exp9 
>years ago...see what I mean?

	In general how close are the homologies?  Specific proteins
could easily be conserved, even though infectious in mammals or
plants, if the protein fullfulls its functional role.  


Andrew Osterburg
University of Cincinnati

Osterburg at ibm.net
Osterbar at email.uc.edu