Author
|
Topic: virus: Re: [Fwd: STUDY IMPLICATES HUMAN CORONAVIRUS AS MAIN CAUSE OF SARS] (Read 369 times) |
|
Cassidy McGurk
Adept
Gender: 
Posts: 128
Reputation: 7.91
Rate Cassidy McGurk
http://www.isec.info/ get me out of here!
|
 |
virus: Re: [Fwd: STUDY IMPLICATES HUMAN CORONAVIRUS AS MAIN CAUSE OF SARS]
« on: 2003-04-10 03:09:54 » |
 |
the plural of virus is viridae!?
>
> Dear Sean
>
> As a registered user of www.thelancet.com, I thought you would be
> interested to know that research from Hong Kong, fast-tracked for
> publication on THE LANCETs website, provides evidence that a new
> virus belonging to the family Coronaviridae is likely to be the main
> cause of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS).
>
> Malik Peiris from the University of Hong Kong and colleagues studied
> 50 patients with SARS from five separate outbreak clusters. After
> identifying a new type of coronavirus from two patients, they
> subsequently found evidence of virus activity in 90% of the patients
> compared with 0% for a control group of healthy individuals or those
> with unrelated illnesses.
>
> The investigators comment that the new virus is not one of the two
> known human coronaviruses. Nor is it exactly like any of the known
> animal coronaviruses. Although more genetic analysis needs to be
> done to be certain, Peiris believes that it may be a new virus which
> may have originated from animals.
>
> He comments: This report provides evidence that a virus in the
> coronavirus family is the etiological agent of SARS. However it
> remains possible that other viruses act as opportunistic secondary
> invaders to enhance the disease progression, a hypothesis that needs
> to be investigated further.
>
> Ann Falsey and Edward Walsh from the University of Rochester, New
> York, USA, state in an accompanying Commentary: These findings
> significantly strengthen the tentative aetiological association
> reported by other investigators who have also isolated a novel
> coronavirus from patients with SARS. As other pathogens, such as
> human metapneumovirus and Chlamydia spp, are identified in SARS
> patients, it will be important to use control groups to determine
> their role in causality or as cofactors for severe disease.
>
> This study has been published early online at www.thelancet.com and
> is available by clicking the link below:
> http://www.thelancet.com/journal/vol361/iss9364/full/llan.361.9364.early_online_publication.25242.1
>
> For more information on how to receive your own personal weekly copy
> of THE LANCET including full text online access to the extensive
> journal archive simply click on the link:
> www.thelancet.com/subscription.
>
> Best regards
> Richard Horton
> Editor, THE LANCET
>
> If you would prefer not to receive any further emails from THE
> LANCET, please update your profile by going to
> www.thelancet.com/profile and clicking the box requesting no special
> offers.
>
>
>
>
---
To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
|
I must remember to change this sig regularly
|
|
|
rhinoceros
Archon
Gender:
Posts: 1318
Reputation: 8.27
Rate rhinoceros
My point is ...
 
|
|
Re:virus: Re: [Fwd: STUDY IMPLICATES HUMAN CORONAVIRUS AS MAIN CAUSE OF SARS]
« Reply #1 on: 2003-04-10 06:45:55 » |
|
[irvken]
the plural of virus is viridae!?
>
> Dear Sean
>
> As a registered user of www.thelancet.com, I thought you would be
> interested to know that research from Hong Kong, fast-tracked for
> publication on THE LANCETs website, provides evidence that a new
> virus belonging to the family Coronaviridae is likely to be the main
> cause of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS).
<snip>
[rhinoceros]
Hmm... both dictionary.com and yourdictionary.com only mention "viruses" as the plural for "virus".
Wikipedia says:
http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virus
<quote>
"Despite frequent claims to the contrary, the only correct English plural of the word for any of these senses is viruses. The Latin word does not appear to have had a plural. Virii would be the plural of the word virius, and viri was the plural of the word vir, meaning man."
<end quote>
[rhinoceros]
and then they refer to this:
What's the Plural of `Virus'?
http://www.perl.com/language/misc/virus.html
Seeing that they don't mention "viridae", I also found this:
http://www.mumbai-central.com/nukkad/mar2001/msg00076.html
<quote>
".. viruses
It is not 'virii'.
BTW, the Latin plural of virus is viridae.
This was discussed at length on Taxacom, the Biological
Systematics mailing list, and the consensus of the experts
was that the Latin word _virus_, meaning "slime", had no
plural (being sort of a collective noun), but that the plural
of the English word virus is viruses."
<end quote>
[rhinoceros]
I am not sure I understand what this one says, but I did notice that "viridae" is a suffix used in taxonomy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
