Anoxygenic phototroph of the Chloroflexota uses a type I reaction centre
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Scientific exploration of phototrophic bacteria over nearly 200 years has revealed large phylogenetic gaps between known phototrophic groups that limit understanding of how phototrophy evolved and diversified 1,2 . Here, through Boreal Shield lake water incubations, we cultivated an anoxygenic phototrophic bacterium from a previously unknown order within the Chloroflexota phylum that represents a highly novel transition form in the evolution of photosynthesis. Unlike all other known phototrophs, this bacterium uses a type I reaction centre (RCI) for light energy conversion yet belongs to the same bacterial phylum as organisms that use a type II reaction centre (RCII) for phototrophy. Using physiological, phylogenomic and environmental metatranscriptomic data, we demonstrate active RCI-utilizing metabolism by the strain alongside usage of chlorosomes 3 and bacteriochlorophylls 4 related to those of RCII-utilizing Chloroflexota members. Despite using different reaction centres, our phylogenomic data provide strong evidence that RCI-utilizing and RCII-utilizing Chloroflexia members inherited phototrophy from a most recent common phototrophic ancestor. The Chloroflexota phylum preserves an evolutionary record of the use of contrasting phototrophic modes among genetically related bacteria, giving new context for exploring the diversification of phototrophy on Earth.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".