ArticleProceedings of SPIE--the International Society for Optical Engineering2020
Comparison of spectral FRET microscopy approaches for single-cell analysis.
Article in Proceedings of SPIE--the International Society for Optical Engineering, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Förster resonance energy transfer (FRET) is a valuable tool for measuring molecular distances and the effects of biological processes such as cyclic nucleotide messenger signaling and protein localization. Most FRET techniques require two fluorescent proteins with overlapping excitation/emission spectral pairing to maximize detection sensitivity and FRET efficiency. FRET microscopy often utilizes differing peak intensities of the selected fluorophores measured through different optical filter sets to estimate the FRET index or efficiency. Microscopy platforms used to make these measurements include wide-field, laser scanning confocal, and fluorescence lifetime imaging. Each platform has associated advantages and disadvantages, such as speed, sensitivity, specificity, out-of-focus fluorescence, and Z-resolution. In this study, we report comparisons among multiple microscopy and spectral filtering platforms such as standard 2-filter FRET, emission-scanning hyperspectral imaging, and excitation-scanning hyperspectral imaging. Samples of human embryonic kidney (HEK293) cells were grown on laminin-coated 28 mm round gridded glass coverslips (10816, Ibidi, Fitchburg, Wisconsin) and transfected with adenovirus encoding a cAMP-sensing FRET probe composed of a FRET donor (Turquoise) and acceptor (Venus). Additionally, 3 FRET "controls" with fixed linker lengths between Turquoise and Venus proteins were used for inter-platform validation. Grid locations were logged, recorded with light micrographs, and used to ensure that whole-cell FRET was compared on a cell-by-cell basis among the different microscopy platforms. FRET efficiencies were also calculated and compared for each method. Preliminary results indicate that hyperspectral methods increase the signal-to-noise ratio compared to a standard 2-filter approach.
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.