ArticleJournal of visualized experiments : JoVE2014
Discovering protein interactions and characterizing protein function using HaloTag technology.
Article in Journal of visualized experiments : JoVE, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- HaloPROTAC3 does not trigger the degradation of the halotagged parasitophorous vacuole membrane protein UIS4 during Plasmodium liver stage development.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Nanoscale gizmos - the novel fluorescent probes for monitoring protein activity.Biochemical engineering journal · 2018Review
- Targeted analysis of recombinant NF kappa B (RelA/p65) by denaturing and native top down mass spectrometry.Journal of proteomics · 2016Article
- HaloTag technology: a versatile platform for biomedical applications.Bioconjugate chemistry · 2015Review
- An effective Caenorhabditis elegans CRISPR training module for high school and undergraduate summer research experiences in molecular biology.Biochemistry and molecular biology education : a bimonthly publication of the International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular BiologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Research in proteomics has exploded in recent years with advances in mass spectrometry capabilities that have led to the characterization of numerous proteomes, including those from viruses, bacteria, and yeast. In comparison, analysis of the human proteome lags behind, partially due to the sheer number of proteins which must be studied, but also the complexity of networks and interactions these present. To specifically address the challenges of understanding the human proteome, we have developed HaloTag technology for protein isolation, particularly strong for isolation of multiprotein complexes and allowing more efficient capture of weak or transient interactions and/or proteins in low abundance. HaloTag is a genetically encoded protein fusion tag, designed for covalent, specific, and rapid immobilization or labelling of proteins with various ligands. Leveraging these properties, numerous applications for mammalian cells were developed to characterize protein function and here we present methodologies including: protein pull-downs used for discovery of novel interactions or functional assays, and cellular localization. We find significant advantages in the speed, specificity, and covalent capture of fusion proteins to surfaces for proteomic analysis as compared to other traditional non-covalent approaches. We demonstrate these and the broad utility of the technology using two important epigenetic proteins as examples, the human bromodomain protein BRD4, and histone deacetylase HDAC1. These examples demonstrate the power of this technology in enabling the discovery of novel interactions and characterizing cellular localization in eukaryotes, which will together further understanding of human functional proteomics.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.