Accurate measurements of protein interactions in cells <i>via</i> improved spatial image cross-correlation spectroscopy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The sensitive detection of protein interactions in living cells is an important first step toward understanding each of the multitude of cellular processes that are regulated by such interactions. Spatial image cross-correlation spectroscopy (ICCS) is one method used to measure protein-protein interactions from the analysis of two-channel fluorescence microscopy images. In spatial ICCS, cross-correlation of fluctuations in fluorescence intensity recorded as images from two independent wavelength detection channels in a fluorescence microscope is used to determine the average number of interacting particles in the imaged region. Even in situations where the particle number density is relatively high, ICCS provides an accurate measure of molecular interactions. However, it was shown previously that the method suffers from relatively high detection limits of interacting particles (approximately 20%) and can be perturbed by heterogeneous spatial distributions of the fluorescent particles within the images. Here, we demonstrate new approaches to circumvent some of the limitations of ICCS. Spatial scrambling of pixel blocks within fluorescence images was investigated as a way of extending the detection of spatial ICCS to measure lower interaction fractions as well as colocalization within cells. We also show that 'mean-intensity-padding' of regions of interest within fluorescence images is a feasible method of applying ICCS to arbitrarily selected areas of the cell with boundaries or edge morphologies that would be impossible to analyze with conventional ICCS. Using these newly developed strategies we were able to measure the fraction of actin that interacts with alpha-actinin in the leading edge of a migrating cell.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".