ArticleBiophysical journal1998
Interferometric fringe fluorescence photobleaching recovery interrogates entire cell surfaces.
Article in Biophysical journal, 1998. 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, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Recent applications of fluorescence recovery after photobleaching (FRAP) to membrane bio-macromolecules.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2010Review
- High probe intensity photobleaching measurement of lateral diffusion in cell membranes.Journal of fluorescence · 2005Article
- Anomalous subdiffusion in fluorescence photobleaching recovery: a Monte Carlo study.Biophysical journal · 2001Article
- Translational diffusion of globular proteins in the cytoplasm of cultured muscle cells.Biophysical journal · 2000Article
- FRAP, FLIM, and FRET: Detection and analysis of cellular dynamics on a molecular scale using fluorescence microscopy.Molecular reproduction and developmentReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Fluorescence photobleaching recovery (FPR) measurements of cell surface protein lateral diffusion typically employ an interrogated spot of 0.5 microm 1/e2 radius. The effective spot area represents only 1/500 of the total surface of an 8-microm cell. An FPR measurement of a protein expressed as 50,000 copies per cell reflects the dynamics of 100 molecules. This limits the precision and reproducibility of FPR measurements. We describe a method for interferometric fringe pattern FPR that permits simultaneous interrogation of the entire cell's surface. Fringe patterns are generated interferometrically within the optical path of an FPR system. Methods for interpreting fluorescence recovery kinetics on cells and for determining the protein mobile fraction are presented. With fringe FPR, the murine major histocompatibility complex class II antigen I-Ak expressed on M12.C3.F6 cells has 100-fold improved fluorescence signals relative to spot FPR, with corresponding improvements in signal-to-noise ratios of recovery traces. Diffusion coefficients (+/- standard deviation) of (2.1 +/- 0.4) x 10(-10) and (1.8 +/- 1.0) x 10(-10) cm2 s-1 with corresponding mobile fractions of I-Ak of 66.1 +/- 7.8% and 63.4 +/- 18.0% were obtained by fringe and spot methods, respectively. The improved reproducibility of fringe over spot results is less than signal improvements predict. There may thus be substantial variation from cell to cell in protein dynamics, and this method may permit the assessment of such variation.
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.