MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3207188447 · doi:10.1111/nph.17818

The crucial roles of mitochondria in supporting C<sub>4</sub> photosynthesis

2021· review· en· W3207188447 on OpenAlexaff
Yuzhen Fan, Shinichi Asao, Robert T. Furbank, Susanne von Caemmerer, David A. Day, Guillaume Tcherkez, Tammy L. Sage, Rowan F. Sage, Owen K. Atkin

Bibliographic record

VenueNew Phytologist · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPhotosynthetic Processes and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersAustralian Research CouncilCentre of Excellence in Plant Energy Biology, Australian Research CouncilAustralian National University
KeywordsPhotosynthesisMitochondrionNAD+ kinaseBiologyRespirationBiochemistryMetabolismElectron transport chainChloroplastC4 photosynthesisBotanyEnzymeGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary C4 photosynthesis involves a series of biochemical and anatomical traits that significantly improve plant productivity under conditions that reduce the efficiency of C3 photosynthesis. We explore how evolution of the three classical biochemical types of C4 photosynthesis (NADP‐ME, NAD‐ME and PCK types) has affected the functions and properties of mitochondria. Mitochondria in C4 NAD‐ME and PCK types play a direct role in decarboxylation of metabolites for C4 photosynthesis. Mitochondria in C4 PCK type also provide ATP for C4 metabolism, although this role for ATP provision is not seen in NAD‐ME type. Such involvement has increased mitochondrial abundance/size and associated enzymatic capacity, led to changes in mitochondrial location and ultrastructure, and altered the role of mitochondria in cellular carbon metabolism in the NAD‐ME and PCK types. By contrast, these changes in mitochondrial properties are absent in the C4 NADP‐ME type and C3 leaves, where mitochondria play no direct role in photosynthesis. From an eco‐physiological perspective, rates of leaf respiration in darkness vary considerably among C4 species but does not differ systematically among the three C4 types. This review outlines further mitochondrial research in key areas central to the engineering of the C4 pathway into C3 plants and to the understanding of variation in rates of C4 dark respiration.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations31
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew PhytologistSame topicPhotosynthetic Processes and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207