The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Sensitivity of CFP/YFP and GFP/mCherry pairs to donor photobleaching on FRET determination by fluorescence lifetime imaging microscopy in living cells
Abstract
Fluorescent protein‐based FRET is a powerful method for visualizing protein–protein interactions and biochemical reactions in living cells. It can be difficult, however, to avoid photobleaching when observing fluorescent cells under the microscope, especially those expressing CFP. We compared the sensitivity of two protein‐based FRET pairs to light‐induced fluorescence changes in the donor, on FRET determination by fluorescence lifetime imaging microscopy (FLIM). Thanks to the very low excitation light levels of the time‐ and space‐correlated single photon counting (TSCSPC) method, FLIM acquisitions were achieved without donor photobleaching. Here, we show that photobleaching of CFP by a mercury lamp under the microscope induced a decrease in the mean fluorescence lifetime, which interfered with FRET determination between CFP and YFP. Importantly, the range of light‐induced variation of the mean fluorescence lifetime of CFP was not proportional to the decrease in the steady state fluorescence intensity and varied from cell to cell. The choice of the CFP/YFP pair therefore requires that the cells be observed and analyzed at very low light levels during the whole FRET experiment. In contrast, the GFP/mCherry pair provided an accurate FRET measurement by FLIM, even if some GFP photobleaching took place. We thus demonstrate that CFP can be an unreliable donor for FRET determination in living cells, due to its photosensitivity properties. We demonstrate that the GFP/mCherry pair is better suited for FRET measurement by FLIM in living cells than the CFP/YFP pair. Microsc. Res. Tech., 2006. © 2006 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Shaner, N. C., Campbell, R. E., Steinbach, P. A., Giepmans, B. N. G., Palmer, A. E., & Tsien, R. Y. (2004) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt1037 · Cited by 4,619
Cited by
Intramolecular and Intermolecular Interactions of Protein Kinase B Define Its Activation In Vivo
Calleja, V., Alcor, D., Laguerre, M., Park, J., Vojnovic, B., Hemmings, B. A., Downward, J., Parker, P. J., & Larijani, B. (2007) · PLoS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0050095 · Cited by 301
Single Cell Optical Imaging and Spectroscopy
Stender, A. S., Marchuk, K., Liu, C., Sander, S., Meyer, M. W., Smith, E. A., Neupane, B., Wang, G., Li, J., Cheng, J.-X., et al. (2013) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/cr300336e · Cited by 292
Disrupting the transmembrane domain interface between PMP22 and MPZ causes peripheral neuropathy
(2024) · doi:10.1016/j.isci.2024.110989 · Cited by 15
Metadata
- Authors
- Tramier, M., Zahid, M., Mevel, J., Masse, M., & Coppey‐Moisan, M.
- Venue
- Microscopy Research and Technique
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2006-08-29
- Volume
- 69
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 933-939
- ISSN
- 1059-910X (ISSN-L)
- 1097-0029
- OpenAlex
- W2050226576
- Cited by
- 183
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 9.45
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Sensitivity of CFP/YFP and GFP/mCherry pairs to donor photobleaching on FRET determination by fluorescence lifetime imaging microscopy in living cells. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/jemt.20370
- The paper
- Tramier, M., Zahid, M., Mevel, J., Masse, M., & Coppey‐Moisan, M. (2006). Sensitivity of CFP/YFP and GFP/mCherry pairs to donor photobleaching on FRET determination by fluorescence lifetime imaging microscopy in living cells. Microscopy Research and Technique. https://doi.org/10.1002/jemt.20370
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.