MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Ribosome Composition Maximizes Cellular Growth Rates in <i>E. coli</i>

2020· article· en· W3041989173 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Sarah Kostinski, Shlomi Reuveni

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBacterial Genetics and Biotechnology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersTel Aviv UniversityAzrieli FoundationIsrael Science Foundation
KeywordsComposition (language)RibosomePhysicsComputer scienceBiologyRNAGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bacterial ribosomes are composed of one-third protein and two-thirds RNA by mass. The predominance of RNA is often attributed to a primordial RNA world, but why exactly two-thirds remains a long-standing mystery. Here we present a quantitative analysis, based on the kinetics of ribosome self-replication, demonstrating that the 1∶2 protein-to-RNA mass ratio uniquely maximizes cellular growth rates in E. coli. A previously unrecognized growth law, and an invariant of bacterial growth, also follow from our analysis. The growth law reveals that the ratio between the number of ribosomes and the number of polymerases making ribosomal RNA is proportional to the cellular doubling time. The invariant is conserved across growth conditions and specifies how key microscopic parameters in the cell, such as transcription and translation rates, are coupled to cellular physiology. Quantitative predictions from the growth law and invariant are shown to be in excellent agreement with E. coli data despite having no fitting parameters. Our analysis can be readily extended to other bacteria once data become available.

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 score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.518

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.241
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 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

Citations42
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review LettersSame topicBacterial Genetics and BiotechnologyFrench-language works237,207