MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2111146654 · doi:10.1104/pp.112.203067

Photosystem II Photoinactivation, Repair, and Protection in Marine Centric Diatoms 

2012· article· en· W2111146654 on OpenAlexaff
Hongyan Wu, Suzanne Roy, Mériem Alami, Beverley R. Green, Douglas A. Campbell

Bibliographic record

VenuePLANT PHYSIOLOGY · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPhotosynthetic Processes and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à RimouskiUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThalassiosira pseudonanaPhotosystem IIPhotosynthesisDiatomQuenching (fluorescence)BiophysicsPhotosystemPhotosystem IChemistryBotanyBiologyPhytoplanktonFluorescenceEcologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Diatoms are important contributors to aquatic primary production, and can dominate phytoplankton communities under variable light regimes. We grew two marine diatoms, the small Thalassiosira pseudonana and the large Coscinodiscus radiatus, across a range of temperatures and treated them with a light challenge to understand their exploitation of variable light environments. In the smaller T. pseudonana, photosystem II (PSII) photoinactivation outran the clearance of PSII protein subunits, particularly in cells grown at sub- or supraoptimal temperatures. In turn the absorption cross section serving PSII photochemistry was down-regulated in T. pseudonana through induction of a sustained phase of nonphotochemical quenching that relaxed only slowly over 30 min of subsequent low-light incubation. In contrast, in the larger diatom C. radiatus, PSII subunit turnover was sufficient to counteract a lower intrinsic susceptibility to photoinactivation, and C. radiatus thus did not need to induce sustained nonphotochemical quenching under the high-light treatment. T. pseudonana thus incurs an opportunity cost of sustained photosynthetic down-regulation after the end of an upward light shift, whereas the larger C. radiatus can maintain a balanced PSII repair cycle under comparable conditions.

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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.427

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations89
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLANT PHYSIOLOGYSame topicPhotosynthetic Processes and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207