MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

LET THERE BE LIGHT (BUT NOT TOO MUCH): MOLECULAR EVOLUTION OF LIGHT‐HARVESTING COMPLEXES

2000· article· en· W2123355446 on OpenAlexaff
B.R. Green

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Phycology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPhotosynthetic Processes and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyEndosymbiosisPhotoprotectionChloroplastPhylogenetic treeEvolutionary biologyLight-harvesting complexCarotenoidSUPERFAMILYGeneticsPhotosynthesisBotanyPlastidGenePhotosystem II

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The light‐harvesting antennas common to all photosynthetic eukaryotes belong to two protein familes: the Chl a‐binding core complex family (e.g. CP47, CP43), and the LHC superfamily, whose members bind a variety of Chls. The former are all chloroplast‐encoded and have high sequence similarity to their cyanobacterial homologs; the latter are all nucleus‐encoded and have a much more complex relationship with each other and their (presumed) cyanobacterial ancestors. Phylogenetic analysis of the LHC superfamily protein sequences show that they follow the endosymbiotic history of their hosts and suggest that the ancestral cyanobacterial genes were copied to the nucleus soon after the establishment of the primary endosymbiosis. Both families have members whose role appears to be related to photoprotection rather than light‐harvesting, suggesting that these families may have originated as stress‐response proteins. In support of this, all members of the LHC superfamily bind significant amounts of carotenoid, and much of the variation between them resides in the bewildering array of different carotenoids they bind. In fact, it has been suggested that this family originated as carotenoid‐binding proteins and only later acquired Chl (Gantt, E. 1998; Photosynthesis: Mechanisms & Effects I, pp. 239‐246).

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of PhycologySame topicPhotosynthetic Processes and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207