Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23213345›Full record

ArticleCurrent chemical genomics2012

HaloTag, a Platform Technology for Protein Analysis.

Marjeta Urh, Martin Rosenberg

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current chemical genomics, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing 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

26 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Journal of microscopy · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. In Vitro Assays: Friends or Foes of Cell-Penetrating Peptides.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. A bi-functional IL-6-HaloTagJournal of biological methods · 2017
    Article
  17. IL-6-HaloTagJournal of biological methods · 2017
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
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.

Marjeta UrhPromega Corporation, Madison, WI, USA.
Martin Rosenberg

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Understanding protein function and interaction is central to the elucidation of biological processes. Systematic analysis of protein interactions have shown that the eukaryotic proteome is highly interconnected and that biological function frequently depends on the orchestrated action of many proteins. Perturbation of these functions or interactions can lead to various disease states and pharmacologic intervention can result in corrective therapies. The fact that proteins rarely act in isolation, but rather comprise complex machines that stably and/or transiently interact with many different partners at different times, demands the need for robust tools that allow comprehensive global analyses of these events. Here we describe a powerful protein fusion technology, the HaloTag platform, and how it enables the study of many facets of protein biology by offering a broad choice of applications. We review the development of the key aspects of the technology and it's performance in both in vitro and in vivo applications. In particular, we focus on HaloTag's multifunctional utility in protein imaging, protein isolation and display, and in the study of protein complexes and interactions. We demonstrate it's potential to help elucidate important facets of proteomic biology across complex biological systems at the biochemical, cell-based and whole animal level.

Indexed as

HaloTag technologyprotein fusion tagsprotein imagingprotein interactionsprotein purification.

Identifiers

PMID23213345
PMCPMC3480824

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.