Immunolocalization and distribution of form ii rubisco in the pyrenoid and chloroplast stroma of <i>amphidinium carterae</i> and form i rubisco in the symbiont‐derived plastids of <i>peridinium foliaceum</i> (dinophyceae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chloroplasts of peridinin‐containing dinoflagellates have recently been shown to contain Form II Rubisco, which consists of large subunits only and is coded by nuclear genes. We have used immunoelectron microscopy to determine the distribution of Form II and Form I Rubisco in dinoflagellates. In sections of Amphidinium carterae Hulburt, the pyrenoid was intensely labeled and the rest of the chloroplast moderately labeled by antisera to Form II Rubisco from the purple non‐sulfur bacterium Rhodospirillum rubrum and the symbiotic dinoflagellate Symbiodinium sp. No labeling was observed when sections were exposed to antiserum against Form I Rubisco of the haptophyte alga Isochrysis galbana. In contrast, cell sections of the dinoflagellate Peridinium foliaceum (Stein) Biecheler, whose chloroplasts belong to a diatom endosymbiont, showed no labeling with the two antisera against Form II Rubisco, but heavy pyrenoid labeling was present after treatment with antiserum against Form I Rubisco of I. galbana. The same immunolabeling results were obtained with the free‐living diatom Phaeodactylum tricornutum Bohlin. Volumetric analysis of the distribution of Form II Rubisco in the chloroplast of A. carterae showed that, in cells grown under moderate photon irradiance, 72.9% of the plastid's Rubisco was localized in the pyrenoid, whereas in cells grown under low irradiance only 37.0% of the Rubisco was found in the pyrenoid. This light‐induced concentration of Rubisco in the pyrenoid suggests that a CO2–concentrating mechanism may elevate CO2 within the pyrenoid, favoring the efficient fixation of CO2 by pyrenoid Rubisco.
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".