The minimum energy required to build a cell
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Understanding the energy requirements for cell synthesis accurately and comprehensively has been a longstanding challenge. We introduce a computational model that estimates the minimum energy necessary to build any cell from its constituent parts. This method combines omics and internal cell compositions from various sources to calculate the Gibbs Free Energy of biosynthesis independently of specific metabolic pathways. Our public tool, Synercell, can be used with other models for minumum species-specific energy estimations in any well-sequenced species. The energy for synthesising the genome, transcriptome, proteome, and lipid bilayer of four cell types: Escherichia coli , Saccharomyces cerevisiae , an average mammalian cell and JCVI-syn3A were estimated. Their modelled minimum synthesis energies at 298 K were $$9.54\times 10^{-11}$$ 9.54 × 10 - 11 J/cell, $$4.99\times 10^{-9}$$ 4.99 × 10 - 9 J/cell, $$3.71\times 10^{-7}$$ 3.71 × 10 - 7 J/cell and $$3.69\times 10^{-12}$$ 3.69 × 10 - 12 respectively. Gram-for-gram synthesis of lipid bilayers requires the most energy, followed by the proteome, genome, and transcriptome. The average per gram cost of biomass synthesis is in the 300s of J/g for all four cells. Implications for the generalisability of cell construction and applications to biogeosciences, cellular biology, biotechnology, and astrobiology are discussed.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".