Natural languages and RNA virus evolution

Abstract

Information concepts from physics, mathematics and computer science support many areas of research in biology. Their focus is on objective information, which provides correlations and patterns related to objects, processes, marks and signals. In these approaches only the quantitative aspects of the meaning of the information is relevant. In other areas of biology, ‘meaningful information’, which is subjective in nature, relies on the physiology of the organism's sensory organs and on the interpretation of the perceived signals, which is then translated into action, even if this is only mental (in brained animals). Information is involved, in terms of both amount and quality. Here we contextualize and review the main theories that deal with ‘meaningful‐information’ at a molecular level from different areas of natural language research, namely biosemiotics, code‐biology, biocommunication and biohermeneutics. As this information mediates between the organism and its environment, we emphasize how such theories compare with the neo‐Darwinian treatment of genetic information, and how they project onto the rapid evolution of RNA viruses. image

Did organs precede organisms in the dawn of life?

“…Although we have focused this hypothesis paper on the origin of the first organisms based on the meaningful assembly of prebiotic proto-organs, we should mention that current research in molecular evolution and genetics associated with the origin of life is inspired by other evolving systems, as proposed in the emerging field of "RNA archaeology" [70] . Following experimental work on ancestral, functional RNA molecules and their progressive integration in coding RNA polymers (which would lead to the building of the first genomes operating in the RNA world), most of these primordial elements or "tools" (including ribozymes) likely lost their original function and are thus considered the "forgotten" or the "losers" in the evolutionary process [71] . In archeo-anthropology, early "tools" used by non-human primates were natural objects without any anthropogenic function, such as stones, shells, or fallen tree branches.…”

“…Language function probably followed spontaneous (non-communicative) individuals' signs and sounds, which "found a social function" in early communities and exponentially increased their semiotic significance when signs and sounds were sequentially and deliberately associated [74] to provide meaningful information. Therefore, sequential molecular assemblies opening the way to complex biomolecules, genetic polymers, and organs could also be interpreted as primitive elements (signs), allowing future communication strategies in the biological language(s) [71] .…”