The Intracellular Distribution of Folate Derivatives in Pea Leaves
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract After hydrolysis of polyglutamate derivatives, leaf extracts of pea (Pisum sativum L.) seedlings were examined for individual folates using high Performance liquid chromatography and microbiological assays employing Lactobacillus rhamnosus and Pediococcus acidilactici. 14-day seedlings contained 0.17±0.01 nmol folate mg -1 protein that was predominantly methylated and associated with the cytosolic fraction. Percoll gradient-purified mitochondria and chloroplasts contained 11.0±2.3% and 8.4±0.6% of cellular folate, respectively. Mitochondrial folates (0.47±0.11 nmol folate mg -1 protein) were predominately (90%) formylated and unsubstituted. In contrast, chloroplasts contained a less concentrated (0.02±0.001 nmol folate mg -1 protein) folate pool consisting of approximately 30% methylated folate. The total folate content of pea leaves increased by 40% when dark-grown (etiolated) 9-day seedlings were exposed to light for 48 hours. During this light treatment, the mitochondrial folate pool, on a per mg protein basis, increased 10-fold. This light treatment also changed the composition of the mitochondrial folate pool with a shift occurring from methylated to formylated and unsubstituted derivatives. These changes in the folates of greening tissues are discussed in relation to the metabolism of glycine and serine that accompanies photorespiration in leaf tissues.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".