{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.016331658291457288, 'fraction_numerical': 0.005025125628140704, 'mean_word_length': 5.423387096774194, '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}}
Functional Consequences of the Organization of the Photosynthetic Apparatus in Rhodobacter sphaeroides

The purpose of this study was to gain information on the functional consequences of the supramolecular organization of the photosynthetic apparatus in the bacterium Rhodobacter sphaeroides. Isolated complexes of the reaction center (RC) with its core antenna ring (light-harvesting complex 1 (LH1)) were studied in their dimeric (native) form or as monomers with respect to excitation transfer and distribution of the quinone pool. Similar issues were examined in chromatophore membranes. The relationship between the fluorescence yield and the amount of closed centers is indicative of a very efficient excitation transfer between the two monomers in isolated dimeric complexes. A similar dependence was observed in chromatophores, suggesting that excitation transfer in vivo from a closed RC ·LH1 unit is also essentially directed to its partner in the dimer. The isolated complexes were found to retain 25–30% of the endogenous quinone acceptor pool, and the distribution of this pool among the complexes suggests a cooperative character for the association of quinones with the protein complexes. In chromatophores, the decrease in the amount of photoreducible quinones when inhibiting a fraction of the centers implies a confinement of the quinone pool over small domains, including one to six reaction centers. We suggest that the crowding of membrane proteins may not be the sole reason for quinone confinement and that a quinone-rich region is formed around the RC ·LH1 complexes.