A genome‐scale metabolic reconstruction of soybean and <i>Bradyrhizobium diazoefficiens</i> reveals the cost–benefit of nitrogen fixation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Nitrogen‐fixing symbioses allow legumes to thrive in nitrogen‐poor soils at the cost of diverting some photoassimilate to their microsymbionts. Effort is being made to bioengineer nitrogen fixation into nonleguminous crops. This requires a quantitative understanding of its energetic costs and the links between metabolic variations and symbiotic efficiency. A whole‐plant metabolic model for soybean ( Glycine max ) with its associated microsymbiont Bradyrhizobium diazoefficiens was developed and applied to predict the cost–benefit of nitrogen fixation with varying soil nitrogen availability. The model predicted a nitrogen‐fixation cost of c. 4.13 g C g − 1 N, which when implemented into a crop scale model, translated to a grain yield reduction of 27% compared with a non‐nodulating plant receiving its nitrogen from the soil. Considering the lower nitrogen content of cereals, the yield cost to a hypothetical N‐fixing cereal is predicted to be less than half that of soybean. Soybean growth was predicted to be c. 5% greater when the nodule nitrogen export products were amides versus ureides. This is the first metabolic reconstruction in a tropical crop species that simulates the entire plant and nodule metabolism. Going forward, this model will serve as a tool to investigate carbon use efficiency and key mechanisms within N‐fixing symbiosis in a tropical species forming determinate nodules.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".