Quantitative time domain analysis of lifetime‐based Förster resonant energy transfer measurements with fluorescent proteins: Static random isotropic fluorophore orientation distributions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Förster resonant energy transfer (FRET) measurements are widely used to obtain information about molecular interactions and conformations through the dependence of FRET efficiency on the proximity of donor and acceptor fluorophores. Fluorescence lifetime measurements can provide quantitative analysis of FRET efficiency and interacting population fraction. Many FRET experiments exploit the highly specific labelling of genetically expressed fluorescent proteins, applicable in live cells and organisms. Unfortunately, the typical assumption of fast randomization of fluorophore orientations in the analysis of fluorescence lifetime-based FRET readouts is not valid for fluorescent proteins due to their slow rotational mobility compared to their upper state lifetime. Here, previous analysis of effectively static isotropic distributions of fluorophore dipoles on FRET measurements is incorporated into new software for fitting donor emission decay profiles. Calculated FRET parameters, including molar population fractions, are compared for the analysis of simulated and experimental FRET data under the assumption of static and dynamic fluorophores and the intermediate regimes between fully dynamic and static fluorophores, and mixtures within FRET pairs, is explored. Finally, a method to correct the artefact resulting from fitting the emission from static FRET pairs with isotropic angular distributions to the (incorrect) typically assumed dynamic FRET decay model is presented.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".