MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Phenomenal Diversity of the Photosynthetic Apparatus Evolved in Aerobic Anoxygenic Phototrophs

2025· review· en· W4415564661 on OpenAlexafffund
Vladimir Yurkov, Katia Messner

Bibliographic record

VenueMicroorganisms · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicAnalytical Chemistry and Sensors
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAnoxygenic photosynthesisPhototrophPhotosynthesisPurple bacteriaGreen sulfur bacteriaBiosphere

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aerobic anoxygenic phototrophs (AAPs) are intrinsically paradoxical; these species use a pathway commonly found in oxygen-deprived environments called anoxygenic photosynthesis, as a supplementary energy source to their obligately aerobic respiration. At the surface, such a combination seems odd, but AAPs thrive in a plethora of environments and are phylogenetically broad, suggesting that this feature is advantageous and ecologically valuable. The range of habitats and taxonomy have been reviewed, yet the main element which unites the group, their anoxygenic photosynthesis, which is diverse in its components, has not received the deserved attention. The intricate light-capturing photosynthetic complex forms the site of photon-induced energy transfer and therefore, the core basis of the process. It has two parts: the reaction center and light harvesting complex(es). The variability in composition and overall usage of the apparatus is also reflected in the genome, specifically the photosynthetic gene cluster. In this review, what is known about the differences in structure, light wavelength absorption range, activity, and related genomic content and the insights into potential AAP evolution from anaerobic anoxygenic phototrophs will be discussed. The work provides an elegant summation of knowledge accumulated about the photosynthetic apparatus and prospects that can fill yet remaining gaps.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.591
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.225 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMicroorganismsSame topicAnalytical Chemistry and SensorsFrench-language works237,207