Association of Fluorescent Protein Pairs and Its Significant Impact on Fluorescence and Energy Transfer
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fluorescent proteins (FPs) are commonly used in pairs to monitor dynamic biomolecular events through changes in proximity via distance dependent processes such as Förster resonance energy transfer (FRET). The impact of FP association is assessed by predicting dimerization sites in silico and stabilizing the dimers by bio-orthogonal covalent linkages. In each tested case dimerization changes inherent fluorescence, including FRET. GFP homodimers demonstrate synergistic behavior with the dimer being brighter than the sum of the monomers. The homodimer structure reveals the chromophores are close with favorable transition dipole alignments and a highly solvated interface. Heterodimerization (GFP with Venus) results in a complex with ≈87% FRET efficiency, significantly below the 99.7% efficiency predicted. A similar efficiency is observed when the wild-type FPs are fused to a naturally occurring protein-protein interface system. GFP complexation with mCherry results in loss of mCherry fluorescence. Thus, simple assumptions used when monitoring interactions between proteins via FP FRET may not always hold true, especially under conditions whereby the protein-protein interactions promote FP interaction.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it