{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.030620467365028204, 'fraction_numerical': 0.009669621273166801, 'mean_word_length': 5.861878453038674, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Chemiosmosis principle versus murburn concept: Why do cells need oxygen? Deducing the underpinnings of aerobic respiration by mechanistic predictability

The long-standing explanation for cellular respiration (mitochondrial oxidative phosphorylation, mOxPhos) in textbooks is proton-centric and involves the elements of Rotary ATP synthesis, Chemiosmosis principle, Proton pumps and Electron transport chain (in short, the RCPE model). Addressing certain lacunae in the RCPE model, an alternative scheme based on murburn concept was proposed in 2017 (Manoj, 2017). The new proposal is oxygen-centric in essence, and it advocates constructive roles for diffusible reactive oxygen species (DROS) in electron transfer reactions and ATP-synthesis. By the end of 2018, significant arguments and experimental evidences (in vitro, in situ, and in silico) had accumulated supporting the new mechanism. Herein, the authors compare the predictive capabilities of the two models. Theoretical concepts and expectations are detailed to differentiate the two models, and the correlations are cross-checked with the available data/information. Experimental strategies are further charted to delineate and demarcate the two hypotheses’ relevance in mOxPhos.