The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Why green fluorescent fusion proteins have not been observed in the vacuoles of higher plants
Open accessAbstract
Summary: Green fluorescent protein (GFP) makes it possible for organelles and protein transport pathways to be visualized in living cells. However, GFP fluorescence has not yet been observed in the vacuoles of any organs of higher plants. We found that the fluorescence of a vacuole‐targeted GFP was stably observed in the vacuoles of transgenic Arabidopsis plants under dark conditions, and that the fluorescence rapidly disappeared under light conditions. The vacuolar GFP was rapidly degraded within 1 h in the light, especially blue light. An inhibitor of vacuolar type H + ‐ATPase, concanamycin A, and an inhibitor of papain‐type cysteine proteinase, E‐64d, abolished both the light‐dependent disappearance of GFP fluorescence and GFP degradation in the vacuoles. An in vitro assay showed that bacterially expressed GFP was degraded by extracts of Arabidopsis cultured‐cell protoplasts at an acidic pH in the light. These results suggest that blue light induced a conformational change in GFP, and the resulting GFP in the vacuole was easily degraded by vacuolar papain‐type cysteine proteinase(s) under the acidic pH. The light‐dependent degradation accounts for the failure to observe GFP fluorescence in the vacuoles of plant organs. Our results show that stable GFP‐fluoresced vacuoles are achieved by transferring the plants from the light into the dark before inspection with a fluorescent microscope. This might eliminate a large hurdle in studies of the vacuolar‐targeting machinery and the organ‐ and stage‐specific differentiation of endomembrane systems in plants.
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
Cited by
Nelson, B. K., Cai, X., & Nebenführ, A. (2007) · The Plant Journal · doi:10.1111/j.1365-313x.2007.03212.x · Cited by 2,083
Autophagic Nutrient Recycling in Arabidopsis Directed by the ATG8 and ATG12 Conjugation Pathways
Thompson, A. R., Doelling, J. H., Suttangkakul, A., & Vierstra, R. D. (2005) · Plant Physiology · doi:10.1104/pp.105.060673 · Cited by 574
Barberon, M., Zelazny, E., Robert, S., Conéjéro, G., Curie, C., Friml, J., & Vert, G. (2011) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1100659108 · Cited by 473
Takano, J., Miwa, K., Yuan, L., von Wirén, N., & Fujiwara, T. (2005) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0502060102 · Cited by 428
Diatoms, Biomineralization Processes, and Genomics
Hildebrand, M. (2008) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/cr078253z · Cited by 400
Metadata
- Authors
- Tamura, K., Shimada, T., Ono, E., Tanaka, Y., Nagatani, A., Higashi, S., Watanabe, M., Nishimura, M., & Hara‐Nishimura, I.
- Venue
- The Plant Journal
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2003-07-22
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 545-555
- ISSN
- 0960-7412 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-313X
- OpenAlex
- W1998141700
- Cited by
- 233
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 3.01
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: Why green fluorescent fusion proteins have not been observed in the vacuoles of higher plants. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1365-313x.2003.01822.x
- The paper
- Tamura, K., Shimada, T., Ono, E., Tanaka, Y., Nagatani, A., Higashi, S., Watanabe, M., Nishimura, M., & Hara‐Nishimura, I. (2003). Why green fluorescent fusion proteins have not been observed in the vacuoles of higher plants. The Plant Journal. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-313x.2003.01822.x
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.