Evaluation of Pulsed-FRAP and Conventional-FRAP for Determination of Protein Mobility in Prokaryotic Cells
2011

Evaluating Protein Mobility in Bacteria

Sample size: 20 publication Evidence: moderate

Author Information

Author(s): Mika Jacek T. Krasnikov, Victor van den Bogaart, Geert de Haan, Foppe Poolman

Primary Institution: University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands

Hypothesis

Are the differences in reported diffusion coefficients for GFP in E. coli due to methodological differences or biological variation?

Conclusion

The variation in diffusion coefficients for GFP in live cells is primarily due to experimental conditions and biological variation, not methodological differences.

Supporting Evidence

  • Both pulsed-FRAP and conventional-FRAP yield similar diffusion coefficients for GFP in E. coli.
  • The study found that the diffusion coefficients are affected by osmotic conditions.
  • Experimental conditions and biological variations are significant factors in the reported diffusion coefficients.

Takeaway

Scientists studied how proteins move inside bacteria and found that different methods give similar results, but the conditions under which the bacteria are grown can change how fast the proteins move.

Methodology

The study compared pulsed-FRAP and conventional-FRAP techniques to measure the diffusion of GFP in E. coli under various osmotic conditions.

Limitations

The study may not account for all biological variations and the specific conditions of bacterial growth.

Participant Demographics

Escherichia coli K-12 strain MG1655

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.1371/journal.pone.0025664

Want to read the original?

Access the complete publication on the publisher's website

View Original Publication