Let there be anti-entropic light (2)

Sunlight or, more specifically, solar UV radiation (UV) acts as the principal natural virucide in the environment. UV radiation kills viruses by chemically modifying their genetic material, DNA and RNA.

See also: Let there be anti-entropic light (1)
Excerpt:

Nutrient-stress and social stress contribute to the accumulation of viral miRNAs that would typically be prevented by nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled feeback loops that link food odors and social odors to the nutrient-dependent physiology of reproduction via controlled changes in the miRNA/mRNA balance.

A Model of Extracellular Enzymes in Free-Living Microbes: Which Strategy Pays Off?
Conclusion:

The combination of an enzyme threshold concentration and the dilute nature of individual compounds could explain the persistence and apparent refractory state of some compounds in oceanic DOM. This aligns with the hypothesis that a large fraction of DOM in the oceans persists primarily due to dilute concentrations (61–63) and calls for further experiments and methodological developments to further investigate this. Extracellular enzymes and how microbes  utilize them in response to ambient DOM carry important implications for microbial ecology and the microbial impact on carbon sequestration in the ocean as DOM.

My comment: In the context of nutrient-dependent metabolic networks and dissolved organic matter (DOM), the authors linked the pheromone-controlled physiology of microbes to genetic networks via extracellular enzymes and thermodynamic cycles of protein biosynthesis and degradation.
In other words, they linked what is known about physics and chemistry to the conserved molecular mechanisms of biophysically constrained RNA-mediated gene duplication and RNA-mediated amino acid substitutions that differentiate all cell types in all individuals of all living genera.
There representation is consistent with works by other serious scientists who are examining ecological variation and nutrient-dependent biodiversity. For example, these researchers do not mention “mutations,” “natural selection,” or “evolution” in the body of their text.
Also, they do not mention anything about the role that viruses might play in links between entropic elasticity and genomic entropy manifested in pathology.  Indeed, this article, which was coauthored by Sachia J. Traving, is about “living” organisms.
An earlier article co-authored by Sachia J. Traving, linked the role of viruses to bacterial growth in the context of  the complexity of what is known about microbial ecosystems. No experimental evidence of biologically-based cause and effect suggests that microbial ecosystems “evolve.”
See also: Increased acidification has a profound effect on the interactions between the cyanobacterium Synechococcus sp. WH7803 and its viruses (2014)
Conclusion: 

The present study demonstrates that the role of viruses in the regulation of cyanobacterial growth may be significantly altered in future climate scenarios, thus emphasizing the need for including viruses in ecosystem modelling.

See also: Viral Genome Junk Is Bunk
Excerpt:

Perhaps the evolutionists have placed the cart before the horse on this issue, as proposed by several creationist scientists.4,6 In fact, in an ironic twist, the evidence mentioned above indicates that viruses likely arose from their hosts and not the other way around. As molecular biologist and biochemist Peter Borger notes, “The most parsimonious answer is: the RNA viruses got their genes from their hosts.”6

My comment: In the excerpt above, young earth creationists linked viruses to all pathology. They did not address the complexity of  links from atoms to ecosystems, but their findings are consistent with what appears to be known about ecosystem modeling to the 2015 Nobel Laureates whose works linked the disciplines of Physics, Chemistry, and Physiology and/or Medicine. For contrast, the likely role of viruses and their threat to ecosystems in the context of global warming has remained virtually unknown to theoretical physicists or to the evolutionary theorists who invented the neo-Darwinian “Modern Synthesis.” As you know, this links the creationist literature to a threat to neo-Darwinian theory. However if you don’t trust the representations of creationists, or simply do not want to read any of their literature…
see The Promise and Pitfalls of Extracellular Biochemistry.