Taming the perils of photosynthesis by eukaryotes: constraints on endosymbiotic evolution in aquatic ecosystems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An ancestral eukaryote acquired photosynthesis by genetically integrating a cyanobacterial endosymbiont as the chloroplast. The chloroplast was then further integrated into many other eukaryotic lineages through secondary endosymbiotic events of unicellular eukaryotic algae. While photosynthesis enables autotrophy, it also generates reactive oxygen species that can cause oxidative stress. To mitigate the stress, photosynthetic eukaryotes employ various mechanisms, including regulating chloroplast light absorption and repairing or removing damaged chloroplasts by sensing light and photosynthetic status. Recent studies have shown that, besides algae and plants with innate chloroplasts, several lineages of numerous unicellular eukaryotes engage in acquired phototrophy by hosting algal endosymbionts or by transiently utilizing chloroplasts sequestrated from algal prey in aquatic ecosystems. In addition, it has become evident that unicellular organisms engaged in acquired phototrophy, as well as those that feed on algae, have also developed mechanisms to cope with photosynthetic oxidative stress. These mechanisms are limited but similar to those employed by algae and plants. Thus, there appear to be constraints on the evolution of those mechanisms, which likely began by incorporating photosynthetic cells before the establishment of chloroplasts by extending preexisting mechanisms to cope with oxidative stress originating from mitochondrial respiration and acquiring new mechanisms.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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".