MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166943969 · doi:10.1093/pcp/pci054

Isolation of a Novel Carotenoid-rich Protein in Cyanophora paradoxa that is Immunologically Related to the Light-harvesting Complexes of Photosynthetic Eukaryotes

2005· article· en· W2166943969 on OpenAlexaff
Heather M. Rissler, Dion G. Durnford

Bibliographic record

VenuePlant and Cell Physiology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPhotosynthetic Processes and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCarotenoidThylakoidZeaxanthinPeridininPlastidLight-harvesting complexBiologyChlorophyllBotanyPhotosynthesisBiochemistryChloroplastChemistryFucoxanthinLuteinGenePhotosystem II

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Novel eukaryotic chlorophyll-carotenoid proteins have evolved at least twice following the origin of the plastid and include the widely distributed integral membrane light-harvesting complexes (LHCs) and the dinoflagellate-specific soluble peridinin-chlorophyll proteins. In the glaucophytes, homologs of these proteins are reportedly absent. We have identified a novel carotenoid-rich protein (CRP) in the glaucophyte Cyanophora paradoxa that is 28 kDa and immunologically related to the family of LHCs. CRP is associated with the thylakoid membrane, though it can be removed by stringent washes, suggesting that there are probably significant structural differences between CRP and the LHCs. CRP co-localizes with a zeaxanthin-rich thylakoid membrane fraction that also contains beta-carotene, chlorophyll and an unidentified carotenoid. Despite this, we found no evidence for carotenoid-chlorophyll energy transfer in the isolated complex, suggesting that light harvesting may not be a primary function. The presence of CRP in C. paradoxa is evidence for the evolution of a novel pigment-binding protein in the glaucophytes.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.402

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations15
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlant and Cell PhysiologySame topicPhotosynthetic Processes and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207