scholarly journals Green fluorescent protein as a signal for protein-protein interactions

2008 ◽  
Vol 6 (11) ◽  
pp. 2344-2349 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sang-Hyun Park ◽  
Ronald T. Raines
Keyword(s):  
Green Fluorescent Protein ◽  
Protein Interactions ◽  
Fluorescent Protein ◽  
Protein Protein Interactions ◽  
Green Fluorescent

scholarly journals Application of a Chimeric Green Fluorescent Protein to Study Protein-Protein Interactions

BioTechniques ◽  
1997 ◽  
Vol 23 (5) ◽  
pp. 864-872 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. Garamszegi ◽  
Z.P. Garamszegi ◽  
M.S. Rogers ◽  
S.J. De-Marco ◽  
E.E. Strehler
Keyword(s):  
Green Fluorescent Protein ◽  
Protein Interactions ◽  
Fluorescent Protein ◽  
Protein Protein Interactions ◽  
Green Fluorescent

Detecting Protein−Protein Interactions with a Green Fluorescent Protein Fragment Reassembly Trap:  Scope and Mechanism

2005 ◽  
Vol 127 (1) ◽  
pp. 146-157 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas J. Magliery ◽  
Christopher G. M. Wilson ◽  
Weilan Pan ◽  
Dennis Mishler ◽  
Indraneel Ghosh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Green Fluorescent Protein ◽  
Protein Interactions ◽  
Fluorescent Protein ◽  
Protein Protein Interactions ◽  
Protein Fragment ◽  
Green Fluorescent

scholarly journals In Vivo Quantitative Estimation of DNA-Dependent Interaction of Sox2 and Oct4 Using BirA-Catalyzed Site-Specific Biotinylation

Biomolecules ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 142 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arman Kulyyassov ◽  
Vasily Ogryzko
Keyword(s):  
Transcription Factors ◽  
Protein Interactions ◽  
Fluorescent Protein ◽  
Quantitative Estimation ◽  
Multiple Reaction Monitoring ◽  
Negative Control ◽  
Protein Protein Interactions ◽  
Close Proximity ◽  
Green Fluorescent

Protein–protein interactions of core pluripotency transcription factors play an important role during cell reprogramming. Cell identity is controlled by a trio of transcription factors: Sox2, Oct4, and Nanog. Thus, methods that help to quantify protein–protein interactions may be useful for understanding the mechanisms of pluripotency at the molecular level. Here, a detailed protocol for the detection and quantitative analysis of in vivo protein–protein proximity of Sox2 and Oct4 using the proximity-utilizing biotinylation (PUB) method is described. The method is based on the coexpression of two proteins of interest fused to a biotin acceptor peptide (BAP)in one case and a biotin ligase enzyme (BirA) in the other. The proximity between the two proteins leads to more efficient biotinylation of the BAP, which can be either detected by Western blotting or quantified using proteomics approaches, such as a multiple reaction monitoring (MRM) analysis. Coexpression of the fusion proteins BAP-X and BirA-Y revealed strong biotinylation of the target proteins when X and Y were, alternatively, the pluripotency transcription factors Sox2 and Oct4, compared with the negative control where X or Y was green fluorescent protein (GFP), which strongly suggests that Sox2 and Oct4 come in close proximity to each other and interact.

scholarly journals Intracellular Targeting of Gag Proteins of the Drosophila Telomeric Retrotransposons

2003 ◽  
Vol 77 (11) ◽  
pp. 6376-6384 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Rashkova ◽  
A. Athanasiadis ◽  
M.-L. Pardue
Keyword(s):  
Protein Interactions ◽  
Fluorescent Protein ◽  
Cluster Formation ◽  
Intracellular Localization ◽  
Ltr Retrotransposons ◽  
Protein Protein Interactions ◽  
Gag Proteins ◽  
Intracellular Targeting ◽  
Identify Amino Acid ◽  
Green Fluorescent

ABSTRACT Drosophila has two non-long-terminal-repeat (non-LTR) retrotransposons that are unique because they have a defined role in chromosome maintenance. These elements, HeT-A and TART, extend chromosome ends by successive transpositions, producing long arrays of head-to-tail repeat sequences. These arrays appear to be analogous to the arrays produced by telomerase on chromosomes of other organisms. While other non-LTR retrotransposons transpose to many chromosomal sites, HeT-A and TART transpose only to chromosome ends. Although HeT-A and TART belong to different subfamilies of non-LTR retrotransposons, they encode very similar Gag proteins, which suggests that Gag proteins are involved in their unique transposition targeting. We have recently shown that both Gags localize efficiently to nuclei where HeT-A Gag forms structures associated with telomeres. TART Gag does not associate with telomeres unless HeT-A Gag is present, suggesting a symbiotic relationship in which HeT-A Gag provides telomeric targeting. We now report studies to identify amino acid regions responsible for different aspects of the intracellular targeting of these proteins. Green fluorescent protein-tagged deletion derivatives were expressed in cultured Drosophila cells. The intracellular localization of these proteins shows the following. (i) Several regions that direct subcellular localizations or cluster formation are found in both Gags and are located in equivalent regions of the two proteins. (ii) Regions important for telomere association are present only in HeT-A Gag. These are present at several places in the protein, are not redundant, and cannot be complemented in trans. (iii) Regions containing zinc knuckle and major homology region motifs, characteristic of retroviral Gags, are involved in protein-protein interactions of the telomeric Gags, as they are in retroviral Gags.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document