4.1 Article

satFRET: estimation of Forster resonance energy transfer by acceptor saturation

Journal

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00249-008-0361-5

Keywords

FRET; CFP; YFP; Excited state saturation; Fluorescence; Confocal microscopy; Sensitised emission; Photobleaching

Categories

Funding

  1. DFG [HE 3492/2-1, SPP 1128]
  2. Medical Research Council [G0100152] Funding Source: researchfish
  3. MRC [G0100152] Funding Source: UKRI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We demonstrate theoretically and experimentally the quantification of Forster resonance energy transfer (FRET) by direct and systematic saturation of the excited state of acceptor molecules. This version of acceptor depletion methods for FRET estimation, denoted as satFRET is reversible and suitable for time-resolved measurements. The technique was investigated theoretically using the steady-state solution of the differential equation system of donor and acceptor molecular states. The influence of acceptor photobleaching during measurement was included in the model. Experimental verification was achieved with the FRET-pair Alexa 546-Alexa 633 loaded on particles in different stoichiometries and measured in a confocal microscope. Estimates of energy transfer efficiency by excited state saturation were compared to those obtained by measurements of sensitised emission and acceptor photobleaching. The results lead to a protocol that allows time-resolved FRET measurements of fixed and living cells on a conventional confocal microscope. This procedure was applied to fixed Chinese hamster ovary cells containing a cyan fluorescent protein and yellow fluorescent protein pair. The time resolution of the technique was demonstrated in a live T cell activation assay comparing the FRET efficiencies measured using a genetically encoded green and red fluorescent protein biosensor for GTP/GDP turnover to those measured by acceptor photobleaching of fixed cells.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available