Parameters of the Protein Energy Landscapes of Several Light-Harvesting Complexes Probed via Spectral Hole Growth Kinetics Measurements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The parameters of barrier distributions on the protein energy landscape in the excited electronic state of the pigment/protein system have been determined by means of spectral hole burning for the lowest-energy pigments of CP43 core antenna complex and CP29 minor antenna complex of spinach Photosystem II (PS II) as well as of trimeric and monomeric LHCII complexes transiently associated with the pea Photosystem I (PS I) pool. All of these complexes exhibit sixty to several hundred times lower spectral hole burning yields as compared with molecular glassy solids previously probed by means of the hole growth kinetics measurements. Therefore, the entities (groups of atoms), which participate in conformational changes in protein, appear to be significantly larger and heavier than those in molecular glasses. No evidence of a small (∼1 cm(-1)) spectral shift tier of the spectral diffusion dynamics has been observed. Therefore, our data most likely reflect the true barrier distributions of the intact protein and not those related to the interface or surrounding host. Possible applications of the barrier distributions as well as the assignments of low-energy states of CP29 and LHCII are discussed in light of the above results.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".