MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The evolution of C<sub>4</sub>photosynthesis

2003· review· en· W2097616658 on OpenAlexaff
Rowan F. Sage

Bibliographic record

VenueNew Phytologist · 2003
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPhotosynthetic Processes and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotorespirationPhotosynthesisBiologyC4 photosynthesisRuBisCOBotanySalinityEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary C4photosynthesis is a series of anatomical and biochemical modifications that concentrate CO2around the carboxylating enzyme Rubisco, thereby increasing photosynthetic efficiency in conditions promoting high rates of photorespiration. The C4pathway independently evolved over 45 times in 19 families of angiosperms, and thus represents one of the most convergent of evolutionary phenomena. Most origins of C4photosynthesis occurred in the dicots, with at least 30 lineages. C4photosynthesis first arose in grasses, probably during the Oligocene epoch (24–35 million yr ago). The earliest C4dicots are likely members of the Chenopodiaceae dating back 15–21 million yr; however, most C4dicot lineages are estimated to have appeared relatively recently, perhaps less than 5 million yr ago. C4photosynthesis in the dicots originated in arid regions of low latitude, implicating combined effects of heat, drought and/or salinity as important conditions promoting C4evolution. Low atmospheric CO2is a significant contributing factor, because it is required for high rates of photorespiration. Consistently, the appearance of C4plants in the evolutionary record coincides with periods of increasing global aridification and declining atmospheric CO2. Gene duplication followed by neo‐ and nonfunctionalization are the leading mechanisms for creating C4genomes, with selection for carbon conservation traits under conditions promoting high photorespiration being the ultimate factor behind the origin of C4photosynthesis. Contents Summary 341 I. Introduction 342 II. What is C4photosynthesis? 343 III. Why did C4photosynthesis evolve? 347 IV. Evolutionary lineages of C4photosynthesis 348 V. Where did C4photosynthesis evolve? 350 VI. How did C4photosynthesis evolve? 352 VII. Molecular evolution of C4photosynthesis 361 VIII. When did C4photosynthesis evolve 362 IX. The rise of C4photosynthesis in relation to climate and CO2 363 X. Final thoughts: the future evolution of C4photosynthesis 365 Acknowledgements 365 References 365

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations1,345
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew PhytologistSame topicPhotosynthetic Processes and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207