Cargando…
Evaluation of Pulsed-FRAP and Conventional-FRAP for Determination of Protein Mobility in Prokaryotic Cells
BACKGROUND: Macromolecule mobility is often quantified with Fluorescence Recovery After Photobleaching (FRAP). Throughout literature a wide range of diffusion coefficients for GFP in the cytoplasm of Escherichia coli (3 to 14 µm(2)/s) is reported using FRAP-based approaches. In this study, we have e...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2011
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3182251/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21980523 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0025664 |
_version_ | 1782212894816993280 |
---|---|
author | Mika, Jacek T. Krasnikov, Victor van den Bogaart, Geert de Haan, Foppe Poolman, Bert |
author_facet | Mika, Jacek T. Krasnikov, Victor van den Bogaart, Geert de Haan, Foppe Poolman, Bert |
author_sort | Mika, Jacek T. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Macromolecule mobility is often quantified with Fluorescence Recovery After Photobleaching (FRAP). Throughout literature a wide range of diffusion coefficients for GFP in the cytoplasm of Escherichia coli (3 to 14 µm(2)/s) is reported using FRAP-based approaches. In this study, we have evaluated two of these methods: pulsed-FRAP and “conventional”-FRAP. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: To address the question whether the apparent discrepancy in the diffusion data stems from methodological differences or biological variation, we have implemented and compared the two techniques on bacteria grown and handled in the same way. The GFP diffusion coefficients obtained under normal osmotic conditions and upon osmotic upshift were very similar for the different techniques. CONCLUSIONS: Our analyses indicate that the wide range of values reported for the diffusion coefficient of GFP in live cells are due to experimental conditions and/or biological variation rather than methodological differences. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3182251 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2011 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-31822512011-10-06 Evaluation of Pulsed-FRAP and Conventional-FRAP for Determination of Protein Mobility in Prokaryotic Cells Mika, Jacek T. Krasnikov, Victor van den Bogaart, Geert de Haan, Foppe Poolman, Bert PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: Macromolecule mobility is often quantified with Fluorescence Recovery After Photobleaching (FRAP). Throughout literature a wide range of diffusion coefficients for GFP in the cytoplasm of Escherichia coli (3 to 14 µm(2)/s) is reported using FRAP-based approaches. In this study, we have evaluated two of these methods: pulsed-FRAP and “conventional”-FRAP. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: To address the question whether the apparent discrepancy in the diffusion data stems from methodological differences or biological variation, we have implemented and compared the two techniques on bacteria grown and handled in the same way. The GFP diffusion coefficients obtained under normal osmotic conditions and upon osmotic upshift were very similar for the different techniques. CONCLUSIONS: Our analyses indicate that the wide range of values reported for the diffusion coefficient of GFP in live cells are due to experimental conditions and/or biological variation rather than methodological differences. Public Library of Science 2011-09-28 /pmc/articles/PMC3182251/ /pubmed/21980523 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0025664 Text en Mika et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Mika, Jacek T. Krasnikov, Victor van den Bogaart, Geert de Haan, Foppe Poolman, Bert Evaluation of Pulsed-FRAP and Conventional-FRAP for Determination of Protein Mobility in Prokaryotic Cells |
title | Evaluation of Pulsed-FRAP and Conventional-FRAP for Determination of Protein Mobility in Prokaryotic Cells |
title_full | Evaluation of Pulsed-FRAP and Conventional-FRAP for Determination of Protein Mobility in Prokaryotic Cells |
title_fullStr | Evaluation of Pulsed-FRAP and Conventional-FRAP for Determination of Protein Mobility in Prokaryotic Cells |
title_full_unstemmed | Evaluation of Pulsed-FRAP and Conventional-FRAP for Determination of Protein Mobility in Prokaryotic Cells |
title_short | Evaluation of Pulsed-FRAP and Conventional-FRAP for Determination of Protein Mobility in Prokaryotic Cells |
title_sort | evaluation of pulsed-frap and conventional-frap for determination of protein mobility in prokaryotic cells |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3182251/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21980523 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0025664 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT mikajacekt evaluationofpulsedfrapandconventionalfrapfordeterminationofproteinmobilityinprokaryoticcells AT krasnikovvictor evaluationofpulsedfrapandconventionalfrapfordeterminationofproteinmobilityinprokaryoticcells AT vandenbogaartgeert evaluationofpulsedfrapandconventionalfrapfordeterminationofproteinmobilityinprokaryoticcells AT dehaanfoppe evaluationofpulsedfrapandconventionalfrapfordeterminationofproteinmobilityinprokaryoticcells AT poolmanbert evaluationofpulsedfrapandconventionalfrapfordeterminationofproteinmobilityinprokaryoticcells |