MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Complex II from phototrophic purple bacterium <i>Rhodoferax fermentans</i> displays rhodoquinol‐fumarate reductase activity

2003· article· en· W2088038765 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Biochemistry · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicEnzyme Structure and Function
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFumarate reductaseReductasePhototrophBiochemistryBacteriaChemistryRedoxBiologyStereochemistryEnzymeSuccinate dehydrogenase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It has long been accepted that bacterial quinol-fumarate reductase (QFR) generally uses a low-redox-potential naphthoquinone, menaquinone (MK), as the electron donor, whereas mitochondrial QFR from facultative and anaerobic eukaryotes uses a low-redox-potential benzoquinone, rhodoquinone (RQ), as the substrate. In the present study, we purified novel complex II from the RQ-containing phototrophic purple bacterium, Rhodoferax fermentans that exhibited high rhodoquinol-fumarate reductase activity in addition to succinate-ubiquinone reductase activity. SDS/PAGE indicated that the purified R. fermentans complex II comprises four subunits of 64.0, 28.6, 18.7 and 17.5 kDa and contains 1.3 nmol heme per mg protein. Phylogenetic analysis and comparison of the deduced amino acid sequences of R. fermentans complex II with pro/eukaryotic complex II indicate that the structure and the evolutional origins of R. fermentans complex II are closer to bacterial SQR than to mitochondrial rhodoquinol-fumarate reductase. The results strongly indicate that R. fermentans complex II and mitochondrial QFR might have evolved independently, although they both utilize RQ for fumarate reduction.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0030.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.205 · 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