From proto-Kranz to C4 Kranz: building the bridge to C4 photosynthesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this review, we examine how the specialized "Kranz" anatomy of C4 photosynthesis evolved from C3 ancestors. Kranz anatomy refers to the wreath-like structural traits that compartmentalize the biochemistry of C4 photosynthesis and enables the concentration of CO2 around Rubisco. A simplified version of Kranz anatomy is also present in the species that utilize C2 photosynthesis, where a photorespiratory glycine shuttle concentrates CO2 into an inner bundle-sheath-like compartment surrounding the vascular tissue. C2 Kranz is considered to be an intermediate stage in the evolutionary development of C4 Kranz, based on the intermediate branching position of C2 species in 14 evolutionary lineages of C4 photosynthesis. In the best-supported model of C4 evolution, Kranz anatomy in C2 species evolved from C3 ancestors with enlarged bundle sheath cells and high vein density. Four independent lineages have been identified where C3 sister species of C2 plants exhibit an increase in organelle numbers in the bundle sheath and enlarged bundle sheath cells. Notably, in all of these species, there is a pronounced shift of mitochondria to the inner bundle sheath wall, forming an incipient version of the C2 type of Kranz anatomy. This incipient version of C2 Kranz anatomy is termed proto-Kranz, and is proposed to scavenge photorespiratory CO2. By doing so, it may provide fitness benefits in hot environments, and thus represent a critical first stage of the evolution of both the C2 and C4 forms of Kranz anatomy.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".