Evidence map›Paper›PMID 10049342›Full record

ArticleBiophysical journal1999

Resolution of fluorescence correlation measurements.

U Meseth, T Wohland, R Rigler, H Vogel

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Biophysical journal, 1999. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 104 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
104citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

104 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Defining the Neuropathological Aggresome acrossThe journal of physical chemistry. B · 2021
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

44 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

U MesethDepartment of Chemistry, LCPPM, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, CH-1015 Lausanne, Switzerland.
T Wohland
R Rigler
H Vogel

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The resolution limit of fluorescence correlation spectroscopy for two-component solutions is investigated theoretically and experimentally. The autocorrelation function for two different particles in solution were computed, statistical noise was added, and the resulting curve was fitted with a least squares fit. These simulations show that the ability to distinguish between two different molecular species in solution depends strongly on the number of photons detected from each particle, their difference in size, and the concentration of each component in solution. To distinguish two components, their diffusion times must differ by at least a factor of 1.6 for comparable quantum yields and a high fluorescence signal. Experiments were conducted with Rhodamine 6G and Rhodamine-labeled bovine serum albumin. The experimental results support the simulations. In addition, they show that even with a high fluorescence signal but significantly different quantum yields, the diffusion times must differ by a factor much bigger than 1.6 to distinguish the two components. Depending on the quantum yields and the difference in size, there exists a concentration threshold for the less abundant component below which it is not possible to determine with statistical means alone that two particles are in solution.

Indexed as

AnimalsBiophysical PhenomenaBiophysicsCattleDiffusionFluorescent DyesModels, TheoreticalPhotochemistryRhodaminesSerum Albumin, BovineSpectrometry, FluorescenceFluorescent Dyesrhodamine 6GRhodaminesSerum Albumin, Bovine

Identifiers

PMID10049342
PMCPMC1300138

What OpenQuestion holds

Texttitle and abstract
measurements read1
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.