MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412775502 · doi:10.1101/2025.07.30.667606

Phenotypic heterogeneity in a batch culture of <i>Chlamydomonas reinhardtii</i> with different light tolerances

2025· preprint· en· W4412775502 on OpenAlexafffund
Dion G. Durnford

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGene Regulatory Network Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsChlamydomonas reinhardtiiPhenotypeChlamydomonasBiologyGeneticsEvolutionary biologyComputational biologyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Genetic diversity of populations is essential for generating phenotypic variation to allow a flexible response to a shift in environmental conditions. Therefore, in populations of genetically identical individuals grown in the lab, you would predict that phenotypic heterogeneity would be small. However, we isolated two subpopulations of genetically identical individuals from an exponentially growing batch culture of the microalga Chlamydomonas reinhardtii using Percoll step-gradients. The culture fractionated into a low-density, Top fraction and a high-density, Bottom fraction. These subpopulations displayed several phenotypic differences, including size, protein content, the amount of chlorophyll per cell, and photosynthetic performance. Because of the variation in pigment content and photosynthetic performance, we tested the hypothesis that there are differences in their tolerance to light stress. Following high-light stress, the Bottom subpopulation was more resistant to photodamage, had a greater capacity for light dissipation, and had a minimal photoacclimation response to high light, compared to the Top subpopulation. The Bottom population also had a greater resistance to exogenously induced singlet oxygen stress mediated by rose bengal. We hypothesize that these subpopulations are derived from stochastic mechanism where the Bottom subpopulation has activated a general high-light stress response pathway as part of a “bet-hedging” strategy that could give it a fitness advantage with a shift towards a light-stress environment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.202 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicGene Regulatory Network AnalysisFrench-language works237,207