Why are the genes for bacterial virulence factors are often carried by mobile DNA.? are the bacterial virulence factors of any immediate metabolic benefit(s) to the career, in this case the bacteria.?
These genes, the bacterial virulence factors, do not have an immediate metabolic benefit to the organism. May be they are beneficial in "not a direct" way as in making the surrounding environment more favorable for there reproduction.(?) this is interesting because if we can not kill the organism (if we should), may be we can limit the bacterial virulence factors from spreading.(?)
I am very much fascinated by the principle of mobile DNA. I understand much of our evolution comes from gene duplication and local mutation i.e. the same organism: homolog, orthologs, paralogs and so fourth and or through sex (horizontal transfer)--but this is limited to what the cell will have at conception; however, the mobile DNA is very fascinating. The bacterial virulence factors could "add" more capabilities to the cell. Could they, and why are they not used as vectors. They seem to add on functions to the cells on demand and very prices. This comes from an exterior source "i.e. another cell", not from the original adult cell, and to the adult original cell. Instead of regular vectors where it is mostly trial and error as to where the added vector-gene will be inserted in the genome.? All this is done without destroying the cell as in "e.g." most or all viral infection.(?)