Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32850976›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in molecular biosciences2020

Fluorolabeling of the PPTase-Related Chemical Tags: Comparative Study of Different Membrane Receptors and Different Fluorophores in the Labeling Reactions.

Rosy Amodeo, Domenica Convertino, Mariantonietta Calvello, Lorenzo Ceccarelli, Fulvio Bonsignore, Cosetta Ravelli, Antonino Cattaneo, Claudia Martini, Stefano Luin, Stefania Mitola and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in molecular biosciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Choosing the Probe for Single-Molecule Fluorescence Microscopy.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Review
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

12 authors.

Rosy AmodeoNEST, Scuola Normale Superiore, Pisa, Italy.
Domenica ConvertinoNEST, Scuola Normale Superiore, Pisa, Italy.
Mariantonietta CalvelloBio@SNS, Scuola Normale Superiore, Pisa, Italy.
Lorenzo CeccarelliCenter for Nanotechnology Innovation @NEST, Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia, Pisa, Italy.
Fulvio BonsignoreNEST, Scuola Normale Superiore, Pisa, Italy.
Cosetta RavelliDepartment of Molecular and Translational Medicine, University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy.
Antonino CattaneoBio@SNS, Scuola Normale Superiore, Pisa, Italy.
Claudia MartiniDipartimento di Farmacia, Università di Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
Stefano LuinNEST, Scuola Normale Superiore, Pisa, Italy.
Stefania MitolaDepartment of Molecular and Translational Medicine, University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy.
Giovanni SignoreNEST, Scuola Normale Superiore, Pisa, Italy.
Laura MarchettiCenter for Nanotechnology Innovation @NEST, Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia, Pisa, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The set-up of an advanced imaging experiment requires a careful selection of suitable labeling strategies and fluorophores for the tagging of the molecules of interest. Here we provide an experimental workflow to allow evaluation of fluorolabeling performance of the chemical tags target of phosphopantetheinyl transferase enzymes (PPTases), once inserted in the sequence of different proteins of interest. First, S6 peptide tag was fused to three different single-pass transmembrane proteins (the tyrosine receptor kinases TrkA and VEGFR2 and the tumor necrosis factor receptor p75NTR), providing evidence that all of them can be conveniently albeit differently labeled. Moreover, we chose the S6-tagged TrkA construct to test eight different organic fluorophores for the PPTase labeling of membrane receptors in living cells. We systematically compared their non-specific internalization when added to a S6-tag negative cell culture, the percentage of S6-TrkA expressing cells effectively labeled and the relative mean fluorescence intensity, their photostability upon conjugation, and ratio of specific (cellular) versus background (glass-adhered) signal. This allowed to identify which fluorophores are actually recommended for these labeling reactions. Finally, we compared the PPTase labeling of a purified, YBBR-tagged Nerve Growth Factor with two differently charged organic dyes. We detected some batch-to-batch variability in the labeling yield, regardless of the fluorophore used. However, upon purification of the fluorescent species and incubation with living primary DRG neurons, no significant difference could be appreciated in both internalization and axonal transport of the labeled neurotrophins.

Indexed as

chemical tagFluorescent Nerve Growth FactorfluorophorePPTase labelingSingle molecule labelingsurface receptor

Identifiers

PMID32850976
PMCPMC7426934

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.