MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205153289 · doi:10.3390/e24010094

The Effect of the Protein Synthesis Entropy Reduction on the Cell Size Regulation and Division Size of Unicellular Organisms

2022· article· en· W4205153289 on OpenAlexafffund
Mohammad Ali Razavi, Seyed Majid Saberi Fathi, Jack A. Tuszyński

Bibliographic record

VenueEntropy · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Thermodynamics and Statistical Mechanics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFerdowsi University of Mashhad
KeywordsCell sizeEntropy (arrow of time)Cell divisionProtein biosynthesisCytoplasmPolymerizationEntropy productionDivision (mathematics)Biological systemSecond law of thermodynamicsChemistryCellBiophysicsPhysicsThermodynamicsMathematicsBiologyBiochemistryCell biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The underlying mechanism determining the size of a particular cell is one of the fundamental unknowns in cell biology. Here, using a new approach that could be used for most of unicellular species, we show that the protein synthesis and cell size are interconnected biophysically and that protein synthesis may be the chief mechanism in establishing size limitations of unicellular organisms. This result is obtained based on the free energy balance equation of protein synthesis and the second law of thermodynamics. Our calculations show that protein synthesis involves a considerable amount of entropy reduction due to polymerization of amino acids depending on the cytoplasmic volume of the cell. The amount of entropy reduction will increase with cell growth and eventually makes the free energy variations of the protein synthesis positive (that is, forbidden thermodynamically). Within the limits of the second law of thermodynamics we propose a framework to estimate the optimal cell size at division.

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 score0.343
Threshold uncertainty score0.354

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 head0.002
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.184 · 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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEntropySame topicAdvanced Thermodynamics and Statistical MechanicsFrench-language works237,207