Microscopy of single F<sub>o</sub>F<sub>1</sub>‐ATP synthases— The unraveling of motors, gears, and controls
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Optical microscopy of single F(1) -ATPase and F(o) F(1) -ATP synthases started 15 years ago. Direct demonstration of ATP-driven subunit rotation by videomicroscopy became the new exciting tool to analyze the conformational changes of this enzyme during catalysis. Stimulated by these experiments, technical improvements for higher time resolution, better angular resolution, and reduced viscous drag were developed rapidly. Optics and single-molecule enzymology were entangled to benefit both biochemists and microscopists. Today, several single-molecule microscopy methods are established including controls for the precise nanomanipulation of individual enzymes in vitro. Förster resonance energy transfer, which has been used for simultaneous monitoring of conformational changes of different parts of this rotary motor, is one of them and may become the tool for the analysis of single F(o) F(1) -ATP synthases in membranes of living cells. Here, breakthrough experiments are critically reviewed and challenges are discussed for the future microscopy of single ATP synthesizing enzymes at work.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
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".