| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Department of Molecular Physiology & Biophysics, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee, 37232
Correspondence: Address reprint requests and inquiries to David W. Piston, Tel.: 615-322-7030; Fax:615-322-7236; E-mail: dave.piston{at}vanderbilt.edu.
 |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
 TOP ABSTRACT ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
Measurement of intracellular processes and protein-protein interactions in living cells relies extensively on green fluorescent protein-based bioassays. Many of these assays incorporate measurement of Förster resonance energy transfer (FRET) between cyan (CFP) and yellow fluorescent proteins (YFP) (1
). Given the inherent sensitivity of FRET measurements to distance and orientation (2, 3), the changes in energy transfer are difficult to measure between FRET partners with broadly overlapping spectra, such as fluorescent proteins. Cross-talk excitation of the donor YFPs also leads to "false positive" indication of FRET, and serves as a barrier for adaptation of CFP:YFP FRET-based assays to high-throughput assays. Although numerous corrective algorithms and methods have been developed to handle this problem (4), these methods are generally difficult to apply and can introduce additional error into the measurement of FRET. These methods also require extensive controls, which gives rise to additional data-handling and storage issues when adapted to a high-throughput approach. Thus, an optimal solution would require collection of a minimal set of images and corrective processing to determine the presence of FRET.
To devise a simple method for detecting CFP:YFP FRET and to eliminate the observance of false positive results stemming from cross-talk excitation of YFP, we have taken advantage of the large size and slow rotational diffusion of fluorescent proteins. Fluorescence emission from fluorescent proteins is highly polarized, as indicated by steady-state anisotropy values of 
0.296 for the monomeric variant of Cerulean (mCerulean) (5–7) (Fig. 1). Sensitized emission from an acceptor fluorescent protein (mVenus) (8) conjoined to mCerulean is depolarized (r = 0.145 at 525 nm). Because anisotropy is typically measured to an accuracy of >0.001 in cuvettes, and 0.01 in a microscope, this approach offers a dynamic range from 15 to >150. In comparison, fluorescence lifetime imaging of the same FRET pair shows changes of 0.6 ns with resolution of 0.1 ns for a dynamic range of <10.
|
We were able to adapt fluorescence polarization microscopy (9) for measurement of FRET using either a wide-field or laser scanning approach. As a cautionary note, adaptation of fluorescence microscopes for polarized light microscopy is not always straightforward due to the impact of existing optics on fluorescence polarization. Vertically polarized excitation of the donor was used in combination with capture of both horizontal (VH) and vertical polarizations (VV). Anisotropy (r) images were then calculated using the equation:
 |
, 10). Wide-field and laser scanning fluorescence polarization microscopy was used to image COS7 cells expressing mCerulean, cotransfected mCerulean and mVenus, or a linked mVenus:mCerulean FRET pairing (Fig. 2). The polarization of sensitized emission was examined (520–550 nm for wide field; 515–540 nm for laser scanning) under conditions of vertically polarized donor excitation (425–445 nm for wide field; 800 nm for laser scanning two-photon excitation). Bleed-through emission of the donor mCerulean fluorescence is highly polarized, and thus gives a high anisotropy value using both approaches. Anisotropy values from two-photon excitation is slightly higher and results from more highly polarized excitation that is inherent to two-photon absorption. Cotransfection of mCerulean with the mVenus acceptor did not affect fluorescence polarization. Even under conditions of direct excitation of the mVenus, the fluorescence would remain highly polarized. We observe a reduction in fluorescence anisotropy only in the presence of FRET from linked mVenus and mCerulean.
|
, 11). Thus, measurement of polarized sensitized emission has been overlooked as a simple and high-contrast method for determining the presence of FRET. This approach works best when donor fluorescence is highly polarized, as is the case for FRET between fluorescent proteins. In addition, this method of FRET detection is particularly resistant to errors that produce false positives in other assays, including changes in acceptor concentration and inner filtration effects. Therefore, this method is particularly well suited for adaptation for high-throughput screening. |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTACKNOWLEDGEMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
This work was supported by the U.S. National Institutes of Health (grant Nos. DK53434, CA86283, and GM072048), the U.S. National Science Foundation (grant No. BBI-9871063), and the U.S. Department of Defense Medical Free-Electron Laser program (grant No. F49620-01-1-0429).
Submitted on October 29, 2004; accepted for publication November 24, 2004.
|
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTACKNOWLEDGEMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
2 Förster, T. 1948. Zwischenmolekulare energiewanderung und fluoreszenz. Ann. Phys. 6:54–75.
3 Clegg, R. M. 1992. Fluorescence resonance energy transfer and nucleic acids. Methods Enzymol. 211:353–388.[Medline]
4 Jares-Erijman, E. A., and T. M. Jovin. 2003. FRET imaging. Nat. Biotechnol. 21:1387–1395.[CrossRef][Medline]
5 Cerulean and Venus proteins were modified to contain the A206K mutation. The linked variant contains mVenus and mCerulean separated by the linker sequence SGLRSPPVAT.
6 Rizzo, M. A., G. H. Springer, B. Granada, and D. W. Piston. 2004. An improved cyan fluorescent protein variant useful for FRET. Nat. Biotechnol. 22:445–449.[CrossRef][Medline]
7 Zacharias, D. A., J. D. Violin, A. C. Newton, and R. Y. Tsien. 2002. Partitioning of lipid-modified monomeric GFPs into membrane microdomains of live cells. Science. 296:913–916.
8 Nagai, T., K. Ibata, E. S. Park, M. Kubota, K. Mikoshiba, and A. Miyawaki. 2002. A variant of yellow fluorescent protein with fast and efficient maturation for cell-biological applications. Nat. Biotechnol. 20:87–90.[CrossRef][Medline]
9 Blackman, S. M., C. E. Cobb, A. H. Beth, and D. W. Piston. 1996. The orientation of eosin-5-maleimide on human erythrocyte band 3 measured by fluorescence polarization microscopy. Biophys. J. 71:194–208.
10 The g-factors that were used for wide-field and laser scanning image processing were 1 and 0.75, respectively.
11 Mattheyses, A. L., A. D. Hoppe, and D. Axelrod. 2004. Polarized fluorescence resonance energy transfer microscopy. Biophys. J. 87:2787–2797.
This article has been cited by other articles:
 |
|
 |
|
  S. S. Vogel, C. Thaler, and S. V. Koushik Fanciful FRET Sci. Signal., April 18, 2006; 2006(331): re2 - re2. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
). FRET between mCerulean and mVenus results in increased mCerulean (475 nm) anisotropy from a decreased fluorescence lifetime, and depolarized sensitized emission from mVenus (525 nm). Analysis of recombinantly generated proteins was performed as previously described (6