ArticlePloS one2019
Live applications of norbormide-based fluorescent probes in Drosophila melanogaster.
Article in PloS one, 2019. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Enigma of Norbormide, aCells · 2024Review
- Exploiting the Potential ofBiomedicines · 2021Review
- Norbormide-Based Probes and Their Application for Mitochondrial Imaging in Drosophila Melanogaster.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2021Article
- The Selective Rat Toxicant Norbormide Blocks KFrontiers in pharmacology · 2019Article
- Naringenin AmelioratesFrontiers in neuroscience · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this study we investigated the performance of two norbormide (NRB)-derived fluorescent probes, NRBMC009 (green) and NRBZLW0047 (red), on dissected, living larvae of Drosophila, to verify their potential application in live cell imaging confocal microscopy. To this end, larval tissues were exposed to NRB probes alone or in combination with other commercial dyes or GFP-tagged protein markers. Both probes were rapidly internalized by most tissues (except the central nervous system) allowing each organ in the microscope field to be readily distinguished at low magnification. At the cellular level, the probes showed a very similar distribution (except for fat bodies), defined by loss of signal in the nucleus and plasma membrane, and a preferential localization to endoplasmic reticulum (ER) and mitochondria. They also recognized ER and mitochondrial phenotypes in the skeletal muscles of fruit fly models that had loss of function mutations in the atlastin and mitofusin genes, suggesting NRBMC009 and NRBZLW0047 as potentially useful screening tools for characterizing ER and mitochondria morphological alterations. Feeding of larvae and adult Drosophilae with the NRB-derived dyes led to staining of the gut and its epithelial cells, revealing a potential role in food intake assays. In addition, when flies were exposed to either dye over their entire life cycle no apparent functional or morphological abnormalities were detected. Rapid internalization, a bright signal, a compatibility with other available fluorescent probes and GFP-tagged protein markers, and a lack of toxicity make NRBZLW0047 and, particularly, NRBMC009 highly performing fluorescent probes for live cell microscopy studies and food intake assays in Drosophila.
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.