Thiosulfate oxidation and mixotrophic growth of Methylobacterium oryzae
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Thiosulfate oxidation and mixotrophic growth with succinate or methanol plus thiosulfate was examined in nutrient-limited mixotrophic condition for Methylobacterium oryzae CBMB20, which was recently characterized and reported as a novel species isolated from rice. Methylobacterium oryzae was able to utilize thiosulfate in the presence of sulfate. Thiosulfate oxidation increased the protein yield by 25% in mixotrophic medium containing 18.5 mmol.L-1 of sodium succinate and 20 mmol.L-1 of sodium thiosulfate on day 5. The respirometric study revealed that thiosulfate was the most preferable reduced inorganic sulfur source, followed by sulfur and sulfite. Thiosulfate was predominantly oxidized to sulfate and intermediate products of thiosulfate oxidation, such as tetrathionate, trithionate, polythionate, and sulfur, were not detected in spent medium. It indicated that bacterium use the non-S4 intermediate sulfur oxidation pathway for thiosulfate oxidation. Thiosulfate oxidation enzymes, such as rhodanese and sulfite oxidase activities appeared to be constitutively expressed, but activity increased during growth on thiosulfate. No thiosulfate oxidase (tetrathionate synthase) activity was detected.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".