The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Selective photolabeling of proteins using photoactivatable GFP
Abstract
Today's cell biologists rely on an assortment of advances in microscopy methods to study the inner workings of cells and tissues. Among these advances are fluorescent proteins which can be used to tag specifically and, in many cases, non-invasively proteins of interest within a living cell. Introduction of DNA encoding the fluorescently tagged protein of interest into a cell readily allows the visualization of the protein's localization and time-lapse imaging allows the movement of the structure or organelle to which the protein is localized to be observed. To monitor the movement of the protein within the population, researchers generally have to highlight a pool of molecules by perturbing the steady-state fluorescence. This perturbation has traditionally been performed by photobleaching the molecules within a selected region of the cell and monitoring the recovery of molecules into this region or the loss of molecules within other regions. Fluorescent proteins are now available, which allow a pool of molecules to be highlighted directly by photoactivation. Here, we discuss the technical aspects for using one of these recently developed photoactivatable fluorescent proteins, PA-GFP.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“In these cell types, free GFP fragments are only detectable in the presence of nonsaturating levels of lysosomotropic compounds (NH4Cl or CQ) or under conditions that attenuate lysosomal acidity; otherwise, the autophagic/degradative machinery appears to be too efficient to allow the accumulation of the proteolytic fragment (Figure 12B,C) [41,65,353].”
From Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition) 1 (2021) · cites this paper as [353]
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 17
- Politz, 1999, Trends Cell Biol., 9, 284, 10.1016/S0962-8924(99)01585-8 · DOI
- Lippincott-Schwartz, 2003, Nat. Cell Biol., 5, S7, 10.1038/ncb0103-7 · DOI
- Mitchison, 1998, 63, 10.1016/S0076-6879(98)91007-2 · DOI
- Patterson, 2002, Science, 297, 1873, 10.1126/science.1074952 · DOI
- Chattoraj, 1996, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 93, 8362, 10.1073/pnas.93.16.8362 · DOI
- Yokoe, 1996, Nat. Biotechnol., 14, 1252, 10.1038/nbt1096-1252 · DOI
- Elowitz, 1997, Curr. Biol., 7, 809, 10.1016/S0960-9822(06)00342-3 · DOI
- Sawin, 1997, Curr. Biol., 7, R606, 10.1016/S0960-9822(06)00313-7 · DOI
- Lukyanov, 2000, J. Biol. Chem., 275, 25879, 10.1074/jbc.C000338200 · DOI
- Chudakov, 2003, Nat. Biotechnol., 21, 191, 10.1038/nbt778 · DOI
- Marchant, 2001, Nat. Biotechnol., 19, 645, 10.1038/90249 · DOI
- Ando, 2002, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 99, 12651, 10.1073/pnas.202320599 · DOI
- Heim, 1994, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 91, 12501, 10.1073/pnas.91.26.12501 · DOI
- Ehrig, 1995, FEBS Lett., 367, 163, 10.1016/0014-5793(95)00557-P · DOI
- Tsien, 1998, Annu. Rev. Biochem., 67, 509, 10.1146/annurev.biochem.67.1.509 · DOI
- Campbell, 2002, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 99, 7877, 10.1073/pnas.082243699 · DOI
- Lippincott-Schwartz, 2003, Science, 300, 87, 10.1126/science.1082520 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (3rd edition).
Klionsky, D. J., Abdelmohsen, K., Abe, A., Abedin, M. J., Abeliovich, H., Acevedo Arozena, A., Adachi, H., Adams, C. M., Adams, P. D., Adeli, K., et al. (2016) · Autophagy · doi:10.1080/15548627.2015.1100356 · Cited by 5,894
Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy
Klionsky, D. J., Abdalla, F. C., Abeliovich, H., Abraham, R. T., Acevedo-Arozena, A., Adeli, K., Agholme, L., Agnello, M., Agostinis, P., Aguirre-Ghiso, J. A., et al. (2012) · Autophagy · doi:10.4161/auto.19496 · Cited by 3,996
Self-citationGuidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition) 1
Klionsky, D. J., Abdel-Aziz, A. K., Abdelfatah, S., Abdellatif, M., Abdoli, A., Abel, S., Abeliovich, H., Abildgaard, M. H., Abudu, Y. P., Acevedo-Arozena, A., et al. (2021) · Autophagy · doi:10.1080/15548627.2020.1797280 · Cited by 2,897
Defining mechanisms that regulate RNA polymerase II transcription in vivo
Fuda, N. J., Ardehali, M. B., & Lis, J. T. (2009) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature08449 · Cited by 576
A global view of protein expression in human cells, tissues, and organs
Pontén, F., Gry, M., Fagerberg, L., Lundberg, E., Asplund, A., Berglund, L., Oksvold, P., Björling, E., Hober, S., Kampf, C., et al. (2009) · Molecular Systems Biology · doi:10.1038/msb.2009.93 · Cited by 222
Metadata
- Authors
- Patterson, G. H., & Lippincott-Schwartz, J.
- Venue
- Methods
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2004-04
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 445-450
- ISSN
- 1046-2023
- Cited by
- 107
- References
- 0
- Language
- en
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