Physiological response of two different <i>Chlamydomonas reinhardtii</i> strains to light–dark rhythms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cells of a cell-wall deficient line (cw15-type) of Chlamydomonas reinhardtii and of the corresponding wild type were grown during repetitive light–dark cycles. In a direct comparison, both lines showed approximately the same relative biomass increase during light phase but the cw-line produced significantly more, and smaller, daughter cells. Throughout the light period the average cellular starch content, the cellular chlorophyll content, the cellular rate of dark respiration, and the cellular rate of photosynthesis of the cw-line was lower. Despite this, several non-cell volume related parameters like the development of starch content per cell volume were clearly different over time between the strains. Additionally, the chlorophyll-based photosynthesis rates were 2-fold higher in the mutant than in the wild-type cells, and the ratio of chlorophyll a to chlorophyll b as well as the light-saturation index were also consistently higher in the mutant cells. Differences in the starch content were also confirmed by single cell analyses using a sensitive SHG-based microscopy approach. In summary, the cw15-type mutant deviates from its genetic background in the entire cell physiology. Both lines should be used in further studies in comparative systems biology with focus on the detailed relation between cell volume increase, photosynthesis, starch metabolism, and daughter cell productivity.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".