MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1984030399 · doi:10.1117/12.761423

Teal fluorescent proteins: characterization of a reversibly photoswitchable variant

2008· article· en· W1984030399 on OpenAlexaff
Hui‐wang Ai, Robert E. Campbell

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAdvanced Fluorescence Microscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFörster resonance energy transferCyanFluorescenceFluorescent proteinPhotoisomerizationCharacterization (materials science)Yellow fluorescent proteinMonomerNanotechnologyChemistryGreen fluorescent proteinComputer scienceBiophysicsMaterials scienceBiologyPolymerPhysicsBiochemistryOpticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fluorescent proteins (FPs) emerged in the mid 1990s as a powerful tool for life science research. Cyan FPs (CFPs), widely used in multicolor imaging or as a fluorescence resonance energy transfer (FRET) donor to yellow FPs (YFPs), were considerably less optimal than other FPs because of some relatively poor photophysical properties. We recently initiated an effort to create improved or alternate versions of CFPs. To address the limitations of CFPs, an alternative known as monomeric teal FP1 (mTFP1) was engineered from the naturally tetrameric <i>Clavularia </i>CFP, by screening either rationally designed or random libraries of variants. mTFP1 has proven to be a particularly useful new member of the FP 'toolbox' by facilitating multicolor live cell imaging. During the directed evolution process of mTFP1, it was noticed that some earlier variants underwent fast and reversible photoisomerization. Some of the initial characterization of one particular mutant, designated as mTFP0.7, is described in this manuscript.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.392
Threshold uncertainty score0.889

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.215 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicAdvanced Fluorescence Microscopy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207