Biosynthesis of D‐xylulose 5‐phosphate from D‐xylose and polyphosphate through a minimized two‐enzyme cascade
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".