Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12770904›Full record

ArticleBiophysical journal2003

FRET or no FRET: a quantitative comparison.

Claude Berney, Gaudenz Danuser

Abstract readComparative StudyEvaluation StudyValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Biophysical journal, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 233 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
233citing 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

233 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Direct Quantification of Protein-Protein Interactions in Living Bacterial Cells.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

173 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

2 authors.

Claude BerneyBioMicroMetrics Group, Laboratory for Biomechanics, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, CH-8952 Schlieren, Switzerland. berney@biomech.mavt.ethz.ch
Gaudenz Danuser

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Fluorescence resonance energy transfer (FRET) is a technique used to measure the interaction between two molecules labeled with two different fluorophores (the donor and the acceptor) by the transfer of energy from the excited donor to the acceptor. In biological applications, this technique has become popular to qualitatively map protein-protein interactions, and in biophysical projects it is used as a quantitative measure for distances between a single donor and acceptor molecule. Numerous approaches can be found in the literature to quantify and map FRET, but the measures they provide are often difficult to interpret. We propose here a quantitative comparison of these methods by using a surface FRET system with controlled amounts of donor and acceptor fluorophores and controlled distances between them. We support the system with a Monte Carlo simulation of FRET, which provides reference values for the FRET efficiency under various experimental conditions. We validate a representative set of FRET efficiencies and indices calculated from the different methods with different experimental settings. Finally, we test their sensitivity and draw conclusions for the preparation of FRET experiments in more complex and less-controlled systems.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsArtifactsFluorescent DyesBiotinFluorescence Resonance Energy TransferMonte Carlo MethodProtein BindingQuality ControlReference StandardsReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and SpecificityStreptavidinBiotinFluorescent DyesStreptavidin

Identifiers

PMID12770904
PMCPMC1302980

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.