Identity and Substrate Specificity of Reductive Dehalogenases Expressed in Dehalococcoides-Containing Enrichment Cultures Maintained on Different Chlorinated Ethenes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many reductive dehalogenases (RDases) have been identified in organohalide-respiring microorganisms, and yet their substrates, specific activities, and conditions for expression are not well understood. We tested whether RDase expression varied depending on the substrate-exposure history of reductive dechlorinating communities. For this purpose, we used the enrichment culture KB-1 maintained on trichloroethene (TCE), as well as subcultures maintained on the intermediates cis-dichloroethene (cDCE) and vinyl chloride (VC). KB-1 contains a TCE-to-cDCE dechlorinating Geobacter and several Dehalococcoides strains that together harbor many of the known chloroethene reductases. Expressed RDases were identified using blue native polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis, enzyme assays in gel slices, and peptide sequencing. As anticipated but never previously quantified, the RDase from Geobacter was only detected transiently at the beginning of TCE dechlorination. The Dehalococcoides RDase VcrA and smaller amounts of TceA were expressed in the parent KB-1 culture during complete dechlorination of TCE to ethene regardless of time point or amended substrate. The Dehalococcoides RDase BvcA was only detected in enrichments maintained on cDCE as growth substrates, in roughly equal abundance to VcrA. Only VcrA was detected in subcultures enriched on VC. Enzyme assays revealed that 1,1-DCE, a substrate not used for culture enrichment, afforded the highest specific activity. trans-DCE was substantially dechlorinated only by extracts from cDCE enrichments expressing BvcA. RDase gene distribution indicated enrichment of different strains of Dehalococcoides as a function of electron acceptor TCE, cDCE, or VC. Each chloroethene reductase has distinct substrate preferences leading to strain selection in mixed communities.
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) | 0.000 | 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".