MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2098763126 · doi:10.1002/bit.25718

Biosynthesis of D‐xylulose 5‐phosphate from D‐xylose and polyphosphate through a minimized two‐enzyme cascade

2015· article· en· W2098763126 on OpenAlexaff
Jae‐Eung Kim, Y.‐H. Percival Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueBiotechnology and Bioengineering · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEnzyme Catalysis and Immobilization
Canadian institutionsFPInnovations
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolyphosphateXyloseBiochemistryEnzymeXylose isomeraseChemistrySugar phosphatesBiosynthesisThermotoga maritimaPhosphateFermentationEscherichia coli

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sugar phosphates cannot be produced easily by microbial fermentation because negatively-charged compounds cannot be secreted across intact cell membrane. D-xylulose 5-phosphate (Xu5P), a very expensive sugar phosphate, was synthesized from D-xylose and polyphosphate catalyzed by enzyme cascades in one pot. The synthetic enzymatic pathway comprised of xylose isomerase and xylulokinase was designed to produce Xu5P, along with a third enzyme, polyphosphate kinase, responsible for in site ATP regeneration. Due to the promiscuous activity of the ATP-based xylulokinase from a hyperthermophilic bacterium Thermotoga maritima on polyphosphate, the number of enzymes in the pathway was minimized to two without polyphosphate kinase. The reactions catalyzed by the two-enzyme and three-enzyme pathways were compared for Xu5P production, and the reaction conditions were optimized by examining effects of reaction temperature, enzyme ratio and substrate concentration. The optimized two-enzyme system produced 32 mM Xu5P from 50 mM xylose and polyphosphate after 36 h at 45°C. Biosynthesis of less costly Xu5P from D-xylose and polyphosphate could be highly feasible via this minimized two-enzyme pathway.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.685

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations36
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiotechnology and BioengineeringSame topicEnzyme Catalysis and ImmobilizationFrench-language works237,207