Compare and contrast provirus and retrovirus.
-
Don't be desperate, honey. I'll give you the basics and then you can research more if you need to. This material is easy to find with internet access, I'm sure.
Basically, the difference is in how these two types of viruses reproduce, using host bacterial cells to do so.
A retrovirus injects RNA into the bacterium, which alters the host bacterial genetic material by splicing with the host's own DNA by something called reverse transcription. The basic concept is that a retrovirus changes the DNA of the host bacterium, which then passes this on when it replicates its DNA so the virus is spread in that manner.
A provirus is really aggressive. It injects its own DNA into the bacterium, which replicates independently from the bacterium cell's own DNA. Essentially, this is like 'invasion of the body snatchers' because the virus takes over the bacterial cell, turning it into a virus 'factory' in which its own DNA replicates more and more viruses until the host bacterial cell cannot hold any more viruses and splits open, releasing many viruses into the host organism.
So, to sum up, the retrovirus alters the DNA of the host bacterial cell, so when the bacterial cell replicates DNA, it is replicating the viral DNA because it has merged with it and so has been chemically altered.
With proviruses, they take over the bacterial cell completely, injecting their own DNA into the bacterium which does NOT merge with the bacterial cell, but which goes about replicating within the bacterial cell, making more and more viruses until the bacterial cell literally bursts open because it cannot hold any more viruses. The bacterial cell is turned into a 'virus factory', but the DNA from the virus does not merge or alter the DNA of the bacterial cell. The virus uses the bacterial cell as a location for making more and more viruses within it until it literally bursts open like a balloon with too much air in it, thereby releasing a large number of viruses into the host.
I hope this helps; I'm sure you can find more detail if you research it a bit more.
Basically, the difference is in how these two types of viruses reproduce, using host bacterial cells to do so.
A retrovirus injects RNA into the bacterium, which alters the host bacterial genetic material by splicing with the host's own DNA by something called reverse transcription. The basic concept is that a retrovirus changes the DNA of the host bacterium, which then passes this on when it replicates its DNA so the virus is spread in that manner.
A provirus is really aggressive. It injects its own DNA into the bacterium, which replicates independently from the bacterium cell's own DNA. Essentially, this is like 'invasion of the body snatchers' because the virus takes over the bacterial cell, turning it into a virus 'factory' in which its own DNA replicates more and more viruses until the host bacterial cell cannot hold any more viruses and splits open, releasing many viruses into the host organism.
So, to sum up, the retrovirus alters the DNA of the host bacterial cell, so when the bacterial cell replicates DNA, it is replicating the viral DNA because it has merged with it and so has been chemically altered.
With proviruses, they take over the bacterial cell completely, injecting their own DNA into the bacterium which does NOT merge with the bacterial cell, but which goes about replicating within the bacterial cell, making more and more viruses until the bacterial cell literally bursts open because it cannot hold any more viruses. The bacterial cell is turned into a 'virus factory', but the DNA from the virus does not merge or alter the DNA of the bacterial cell. The virus uses the bacterial cell as a location for making more and more viruses within it until it literally bursts open like a balloon with too much air in it, thereby releasing a large number of viruses into the host.
I hope this helps; I'm sure you can find more detail if you research it a bit more.