Possible role of reactive chlorine in microbial antagonism and organic matter chlorination in terrestrial environments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Several studies have demonstrated that extensive formation of organically bound chlorine occurs both in soil and in decaying plant material. Previous studies suggest that enzymatic formation of reactive chlorine outside cells is a major source. However, the ecological role of microbial-induced extracellular chlorination processes remains unclear. In the present paper, we assess whether or not the literature supports the hypothesis that extracellular chlorination is involved in direct antagonism against competitors for the same resources. Our review shows that it is by no means rare that biotic processes create conditions that render biocidal concentrations of reactive chlorine compounds, which suggest that extracellular production of reactive chlorine may have an important role in antagonistic microbial interactions. To test the validity, we searched the UniprotPK database for microorganisms that are known to produce haloperoxidases. It appeared that many of the identified haloperoxidases from terrestrial environments are originating from organisms that are associated with living plants or decomposing plant material. The results of the in silico screening were supported by various field and laboratory studies on natural chlorination. Hence, the ability to produce reactive chlorine seems to be especially common in environments that are known for antibiotic-mediated competition for resources (interference competition). Yet, the ability to produce haloperoxidases is also recorded, for example, for plant endosymbionts and parasites, and there is little or no empirical evidence that suggests that these organisms are antagonistic.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".