Temperature-induced changes in Arabidopsis Rubisco activity and isoform expression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In many plant species, expression of the nuclear encoded Rubisco small subunit (SSu) varies with environmental changes, but the functional role of any changes in expression remains unclear. In this study, we investigated the impact of differential expression of Rubisco SSu isoforms on carbon assimilation in Arabidopsis. Using plants grown at contrasting temperatures (10 °C and 30 °C), we confirm the previously reported temperature response of the four RbcS genes and extend this to protein expression, finding that warm-grown plants produce Rubisco containing ~65% SSu-B and cold-grown plants produce Rubisco with ~65% SSu-A as a proportion of the total pool of subunits. We find that these changes in isoform concentration are associated with kinetic changes to Rubisco in vitro: warm-grown plants produce a Rubisco having greater CO2 affinity (i.e. higher SC/O and lower KC) but lower kcatCO2 at warm measurement temperatures. Although warm-grown plants produce 38% less Rubisco than cold-grown plants on a leaf area basis, warm-grown plants can maintain similar rates of photosynthesis to cold-grown plants at ambient CO2 and 30 °C, indicating that the carboxylation capacity of warm-grown Rubisco is enhanced at warmer measurement temperatures, and is able to compensate for the lower Rubisco content in warm-grown plants. This association between SSu isoform expression and maintenance of Rubisco activity at high temperature suggests that SSu isoform expression could impact the temperature response of C3 photosynthesis.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".