CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 142Plant nutrient uptake and metabolismDiatoms and Algae ResearchAquatic Ecosystems and Phytoplankton Dynamics

RATE OF PHOSPHORUS UPTAKE BY PHAEODACTYLUM TRICORNUTUM

Open access
KUENZLER, EDWARD J., KETCHUM, BOSTWICK H.·1962·The Biological Bulletin
DOI 10.2307/1539510
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Portions of a phosphorus-deficient culture of Phaeodactylum tricornutum Bohlin were dispensed into fresh media containing phosphate concentrations from 8 to 80 µM. The instantaneous initial phosphate uptake rates were 12 to 24 x 10-17 mole/cell·min. The concentrations of phosphorus in the cells extended from a high of 66 x 10-15 mole/cell after 12 hours' exposure to phosphate-rich (32 and 80 µM) media to a low of 2 x 10-15 mole/cell when PO4 depletion of the medium limited further growth. In another experiment Phaeodactylum was prepared with varying intracellular P concentrations in media with very low PO4 concentrations. Radioactive phosphate was then added, the time course of P32 distribution was followed, and the rate of phosphate uptake was calculated. The initial rates ranged from 10-17 to 3 x 10-17 mole/cell·min. These were about one order of magnitude less than the uptake rates during the first two hours of the first experiment, even though the PO4 concentrations were two to four orders of magnitude lower. Radioisotope analysis showed that Phaeodactylum decreased the phosphate in the medium to as little as 7.2 x 10-10 M, a concentration much below the limit of sensitivity of the chemical analytical method.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/1539510

Cites

17 of 17 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In the laboratory, Phaeodactylum tricornutum reduced Pi concentrations from its surroundings to less than 7.2 × 10−10 M.

    “In the laboratory, Phaeodactylum tricornutum reduced Pi concentrations from its surroundings to less than 7.2 × 10−10 M [109].”

    From A Review of Phosphate Mineral Nucleation in Biology and Geobiology (2013) · cites this paper as [109]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 18 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
KUENZLER, E. J., & KETCHUM, B. H.
Affiliations
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (US)
Venue
The Biological Bulletin
Publisher
University of Chicago Press
Published
1962-08
Volume
123
Issue
1
Pages
134-145
ISSN
  • 0006-3185 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-8697
DOI
10.2307/1539510
OpenAlex
W2403433525
Cited by
142
References
18
Citations by year
2024: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 1
FWCI
4.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc-sa
Locations
  • Biological Bulletin (publishedVersion)
  • Biodiversity Heritage Library (Smithsonian Institution) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Plant nutrient uptake and metabolism
  • Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Biomaterials › Diatoms and Algae Research
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Chemistry › Aquatic Ecosystems and Phytoplankton Dynamics
Keywords
Phaeodactylum tricornutum, phosphate uptake, phosphorus deficiency, diatoms, phosphate uptake kinetics, intracellular phosphorus, phosphate limitation, phosphorus limitation, microalgae growth

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review