4.7 Review

Visualization of in vivo protein-protein interactions in plants

期刊

JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL BOTANY
卷 73, 期 12, 页码 3866-3880

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/jxb/erac139

关键词

BiFC; FRET; FRET-APB; FRET-FLIM; in planta; in vivo; protein-protein interaction (PPI); splitLuc

资金

  1. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) [STA 1212/4-1]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This review provides a comprehensive and critical overview of techniques used to measure protein-protein interactions in living plants, with a focus on in vivo imaging techniques. By comparing different methods and discussing their benefits and potential pitfalls, it facilitates the selection of appropriate techniques and gives a comprehensive overview of how to measure in vivo protein-protein interactions in plants.
Molecular processes depend on the concerted and dynamic interactions of proteins, either by one-on-one interactions of the same or different proteins or by the assembly of larger protein complexes consisting of many different proteins. Here, not only the protein-protein interaction (PPI) itself, but also the localization and activity of the protein of interest (POI) within the cell is essential. Therefore, in all cell biological experiments, preserving the spatio-temporal state of one POI relative to another is key to understanding the underlying complex and dynamic regulatory mechanisms in vivo. In this review, we examine some of the applicable techniques to measure PPIs in planta as well as recent combinatorial advances of PPI methods to measure the formation of higher order complexes with an emphasis on in vivo imaging techniques. We compare the different methods and discuss their benefits and potential pitfalls to facilitate the selection of appropriate techniques by providing a comprehensive overview of how to measure in vivo PPIs in plants. This review aims to provide a comprehensive and critical overview of techniques used to measure protein-protein interactions in living plants.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据