Utilization of Glyphosate as Phosphate Source: Biochemistry and Genetics of Bacterial Carbon-Phosphorus Lyase
Bibliographic record
Abstract
After several decades of use of glyphosate, the active ingredient in weed killers such as Roundup, in fields, forests, and gardens, the biochemical pathway of transformation of glyphosate phosphorus to a useful phosphorus source for microorganisms has been disclosed. Glyphosate is a member of a large group of chemicals, phosphonic acids or phosphonates, which are characterized by a carbon-phosphorus bond. This is in contrast to the general phosphorus compounds utilized and metabolized by microorganisms. Here phosphorus is found as phosphoric acid or phosphate ion, phosphoric acid esters, or phosphoric acid anhydrides. The latter compounds contain phosphorus that is bound only to oxygen. Hydrolytic, oxidative, and radical-based mechanisms for carbon-phosphorus bond cleavage have been described. This review deals with the radical-based mechanism employed by the carbon-phosphorus lyase of the carbon-phosphorus lyase pathway, which involves reactions for activation of phosphonate, carbon-phosphorus bond cleavage, and further chemical transformation before a useful phosphate ion is generated in a series of seven or eight enzyme-catalyzed reactions. The phn genes, encoding the enzymes for this pathway, are widespread among bacterial species. The processes are described with emphasis on glyphosate as a substrate. Additionally, the catabolism of glyphosate is intimately connected with that of aminomethylphosphonate, which is also treated in this review. Results of physiological and genetic analyses are combined with those of bioinformatics analyses.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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.
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".