ArticleScientific reports2016
A mix-and-read drop-based in vitro two-hybrid method for screening high-affinity peptide binders.
Article in Scientific reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cell-Free Gene Expression: Methods and Applications.Chemical reviews · 2025Review
- Single-molecule fluorescence methods for protein biomarker analysis.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2023Review
- Microfluidic Printing-Based Method for the Multifactorial Study of Cell-Free Protein Networks.Analytical chemistry · 2022Article
- Microfluidic approaches for the analysis of protein-protein interactions in solution.Biophysical reviews · 2020Review
- Microfluidic single-cell analysis-Toward integration and total on-chip analysis.Biomicrofluidics · 2020Review
- Bottom-Up Construction of Complex Biomolecular Systems With Cell-Free Synthetic Biology.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2020Review
- Sensitive and predictable separation of microfluidic droplets by size using in-line passive filter.Biomicrofluidics · 2017Article
- Building protein networks in synthetic systems from the bottom-up.Biotechnology advancesReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Drop-based microfluidics have recently become a novel tool by providing a stable linkage between phenotype and genotype for high throughput screening. However, use of drop-based microfluidics for screening high-affinity peptide binders has not been demonstrated due to the lack of a sensitive functional assay that can detect single DNA molecules in drops. To address this sensitivity issue, we introduced in vitro two-hybrid system (IVT2H) into microfluidic drops and developed a streamlined mix-and-read drop-IVT2H method to screen a random DNA library. Drop-IVT2H was based on the correlation between the binding affinity of two interacting protein domains and transcriptional activation of a fluorescent reporter. A DNA library encoding potential peptide binders was encapsulated with IVT2H such that single DNA molecules were distributed in individual drops. We validated drop-IVT2H by screening a three-random-residue library derived from a high-affinity MDM2 inhibitor PMI. The current drop-IVT2H platform is ideally suited for affinity screening of small-to-medium-sized libraries (10(3)-10(6)). It can obtain hits within a single day while consuming minimal amounts of reagents. Drop-IVT2H simplifies and accelerates the drop-based microfluidics workflow for screening random DNA libraries, and represents a novel alternative method for protein engineering and in vitro directed protein evolution.
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.