Sensitivity of Cyanobacterial Antenna, Reaction Center and CO2 Assimilation Transcripts and Proteins to Moderate UVB: Light Acclimation Potentiates Resistance to UVB †¶
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We tested the hypothesis that cyanobacterial cells have sufficient acclimation potential to tolerate UVB when it is applied in a natural quantum ratio to growth photosynthetically active radiation (PAR). We grew Synechococcus under 50 (Low) or 300 (High) micromol PAR m(-2) x s(-1) and then exposed the cells to 0.125 (Low) or 0.75 (High) micromol UVB m(-2) x s(-1). The PAR:UVB quantum ratios were near natural for both the Low-PAR:Low-UVB and the High-PAR:High-UVB treatments, but UVB was in excess of typical aquatic PAR:UVB for Low-PAR:High-UVB treatments. The cellular light history determined the UVB responses of Synechococcus. High-PAR cells initially had fewer cpc transcripts encoding phycocyanin, lower phycocyanin content, and more psbAII/AIII transcripts encoding the D1:2 photosystem II (PSII) protein isoform. Higher PAR potentiated them to tolerate an appropriate UVB level without short-term inhibition of PSII or growth. Low-PAR cells rapidly altered psbAII/AIII and cpc gene expression and tolerated appropriate Low UVB. Low-PAR:High-UVB cells, in contrast, suffered short-term inhibition of PSII and growth. In all treatments UVB induced transient loss of cpc transcripts, possibly to free resources for psbAII/AIII expression, which is important for UVB resistance. The drop in cpc transcripts was not part of a general shock response because rbcL transcript pools were stable upon UVB exposure.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".