Mechanism of CO<sub>2</sub> acquisition in an acid‐tolerant <i>Chlamydomonas</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The acid-tolerant green alga Chlamydomonas (UTCC 121) grows in media ranging in pH from 2.5 to 7.0. Determination of the overall internal pH of the cells, using (14)C-benzoic acid (BA) or [2-(14)C]-5,5-dimethyloxazolidine-2,4-dione (DMO), showed that the cells maintain a neutral pH (6.6 to 7.2) over an external pH range of 3.0-7.0. The cells express an external carbonic anhydrase (CA) when grown in media above pH 5.5, and CA increases to a maximum at pH 7.0. Removal of external CA by trypsin digestion or by acetazolamide (AZA) inhibition indicated that CA was essential for photosynthesis at pH 7.0 and that the cells had no capacity for direct bicarbonate uptake. Monitoring of CO(2) uptake and O(2) evolution by mass spectrometry during photosynthesis did not provide any evidence of active CO(2) uptake. The CO(2) compensation concentration of the cells ranged from 9.4 microM at pH 4.5 to 16.2 microM at pH 7.0. An examination of the kinetics of ribulose 1.5-bisphosphate carboxylase/oxygenase (Rubisco), in homogenates of cells grown at pH 7.0, showed that the K(m) (CO(2)) was 16.3 microM. These data indicate that the pH between the cell interior and the external medium was large enough at acid pH to allow the accumulation of inorganic carbon (Ci) by the diffusive uptake of CO(2), and the expression of external CA at neutral pH values would maintain an equilibrium CO(2) concentration at the cell surface. This species does not possess a CO(2)-concentrating mechanism because the whole cell affinity for Ci appears to be determined by the low K(m) (CO(2)) Rubisco of the alga.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".