Prebiotic Environmental Conditions Impact the Type of Iron‐Sulfur Cluster Formed
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Iron‐sulfur clusters are ancient cofactors that could have played a role in the prebiotic chemistry leading to the emergence of protometabolism. Previous research has shown that certain iron‐sulfur clusters can form from prebiotically plausible components, such as cysteine‐containing oligopeptides. However, it is unclear if these iron‐sulfur clusters could have survived in prebiotically plausible environments. To begin exploring this possibility, we tested the stability of iron‐sulfur clusters coordinated to a tripeptide and to N ‐acetyl‐L‐cysteine methyl ester in a variety of solutions meant to mimic prebiotically plausible environments. We also assessed the impact of individual chemical components on stability. We find that iron‐sulfur clusters form over a wide variety of conditions but that the type of iron‐sulfur cluster formed is strongly impacted by the chemical environment and the coordinating scaffold. These findings support the general hypothesis that iron‐sulfur clusters were present on the prebiotic Earth and that different types of iron‐sulfur cluster predominated in different environments.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 teacher head, 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".