MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2021534342 · doi:10.1139/b09-063

High stability ferric chelates result in decreased iron uptake by the green alga<i>Chlorella kessleri</i>owing to decreased ferric reductase activity and chelation of ferrous iron

2009· article· en· W2021534342 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Harold G. Weger, Jackie Lam, Nikki L. Wirtz, Crystal N. Walker, Ron G. Treble

Bibliographic record

VenueBotany · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPhotosynthetic Processes and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFerrousChelationFerricChlorellaReductaseChemistryAlgaeNuclear chemistryBiologyBiochemistryInorganic chemistryBotanyEnzymeOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cells of the green alga Chlorella kessleri Fott et Nováková use a reductive mechanism for iron acquisition. Iron-limited cells acquired iron more rapidly from a chelator with a lower stability constant for Fe 3+ (hydroxyethylethylenediaminetriacetic acid (HEDTA)) than from a chelator with a higher stability constant (N,N′-di[2-hydroxybenzyl)ethylenediamine-N,N′-diacetic acid (HBED)). Furthermore, iron uptake rates decreased with increasing chelator concentrations at constant iron concentration. The negative effects of elevated HBED levels on iron uptake could be partly alleviated by the addition of Ga 3+ , which suggests that iron-free chelator has a negative effect on iron acquisition by competing for Fe 2+ with the ferrous transport system. Furthermore, ferric reductase activity progressively decreased with increasing concentrations of both chelators (in the iron-free form). This effect was not alleviated by Ga 3+ addition and was apparently caused by the direct inhibition of the reductase. Overall, we conclude that chelators with high stability constants for Fe 3+ decrease iron acquisition rates by Strategy I organisms via three separate mechanisms.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.844

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.224 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBotanySame topicPhotosynthetic Processes and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207