Methyl sulfides as intermediates in the anaerobic oxidation of methane
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While it is clear that microbial consortia containing Archaea and sulfate-reducing bacteria (SRB) can mediate the anaerobic oxidation of methane (AOM), the interplay between these microorganisms remains unknown. The leading explanation of the AOM metabolism is 'reverse methanogenesis' by which a methanogenesis substrate is produced and transferred between species. Conceptually, the reversal of methanogenesis requires low H(2) concentrations for energetic favourability. We used (13)C-labelled CH(4) as a tracer to test the effects of elevated H(2) pressures on incubations of active AOM sediments from both the Eel River basin and Hydrate Ridge. In the presence of H(2), we observed a minimal reduction in the rate of CH(4) oxidation, and conclude H(2) does not play an interspecies role in AOM. Based on these results, as well as previous work, we propose a new model for substrate transfer in AOM. In this model, methyl sulfides produced by the Archaea from both CH(4) oxidation and CO(2) reduction are transferred to the SRB. Metabolically, CH(4) oxidation provides electrons for the energy-yielding reduction of CO(2) to a methyl group ('methylogenesis'). Methylogenesis is a dominantly reductive pathway utilizing most methanogenesis enzymes in their forward direction. Incubations of seep sediments demonstrate, as would be expected from this model, that methanethiol inhibits AOM and that CO can be substituted for CH(4) as the electron donor for methylogenesis.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".