MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2895714848 · doi:10.1101/435891

Understanding the Ca <sup>2+</sup> -dependent Fluorescence Change in Red Genetically Encoded Ca <sup>2+</sup> Indicators

2018· preprint· en· W2895714848 on OpenAlexafffund
Rosana S. Molina, Yong Qian, Jiahui Wu, Yi Shen, Robert E. Campbell, Thomas E. Hughes, Mikhail Drobizhev

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2018
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAdvanced Fluorescence Microscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of HealthNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFondation Brain Canada
KeywordsFluorescenceChemistryCalmodulinConformational changeChromophoreGreen fluorescent proteinExcitationBiophysicsPhotochemistryStereochemistryCalciumBiochemistryPhysicsOpticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Genetically encoded Ca 2+ indicators (GECIs) are widely used to illuminate dynamic Ca 2+ signaling activity in living cells and tissues. Various fluorescence colors of GECIs are available, including red. Red GECIs are promising because longer wavelengths of light scatter less in tissue, making it possible to image deeper. They are engineered from a circularly permuted red fluorescent protein fused to a Ca 2+ sensing domain, calmodulin and a calmodulin-binding peptide. A conformational change in the sensing domain upon binding Ca 2+ causes a change in the fluorescence intensity of the fluorescent protein. Three factors could contribute to this change in fluorescence: 1) a shift in the protonation state of the chromophore, 2) a change in fluorescence quantum yield, and 3) a change in the extinction coefficient for one-photon excitation or the two-photon cross section for two-photon excitation. We conducted a systematic study of the photophysical properties of a select cohort of red GECIs in their Ca 2+ -free and Ca 2+ -saturated states to determine which factors are most important for the Ca 2+ -dependent change in fluorescence. In total, we analyzed nine red GECIs, including jRGECO1a, K-GECO1, jRCaMP1a, R-GECO1, R-GECO1.2, CAR-GECO1, O-GECO1, REX-GECO1, and a new variant termed jREX-GECO1. We found that these red GECIs could be separated into three classes that each rely on a particular set of factors. Furthermore, in some cases the magnitude of the change in fluorescence was different depending on one-photon excitation or two-photon excitation by up to a factor of two.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
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 score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.234 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicAdvanced Fluorescence Microscopy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207