MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2461540424 · doi:10.1007/978-1-60761-925-3_18

Photosystem II Reconstitution into Proteoliposomes and Methodologies for Structure–Function Characterization

2010· article· en· W2461540424 on OpenAlexafffund
David L. Joly, Sridharan Govindachary, M. Fragata

Bibliographic record

VenueMethods in molecular biology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPhotosynthetic Processes and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPhotosystem IILiposomeChemistryThylakoidVesicleBiophysicsLipid bilayerCharacterization (materials science)BilayerMembraneBiochemistryPhotosynthesisBiologyMaterials scienceChloroplastNanotechnology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter discusses the photosystem II (PSII) reconstitution into proteoliposomes. In the first part of the chapter, protocols are outlined for the preparation of lipid bilayer vesicles (liposomes) constituted of individual thylakoid lipids or their mixtures, for the preparation of PSII particles, and for the incorporation of the PSII particles into the liposomes. In the second part of the chapter, methodologies are described for the structure-function characterization of the PSII-lipid complexes (proteoliposomes). This includes the sodium dodecylsulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis determination of the PSII proteins, the measurement of oxygen-evolving activity of PSII in the proteoliposomes, the study of structural changes of the PSII proteins upon their incorporation into the lipid bilayers by Fourier transform infrared (FT-IR) spectroscopy, and the characterization of the PSII activity by fluorescence induction.

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)0.000
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.343 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMethods in molecular biology→Same topicPhotosynthetic Processes and Mechanisms→French-language works237,207→