CONFOCALMICROSCOPY Archives

July 2009

CONFOCALMICROSCOPY@LISTS.UMN.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date:
Mon, 6 Jul 2009 11:22:13 -0700
Reply-To:
Confocal Microscopy List <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
"Thorn, Kurt" <[log in to unmask]>
MIME-Version:
1.0
In-Reply-To:
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
quoted-printable
Sender:
Confocal Microscopy List <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (28 lines)
If you're not fusing the fluorescent protein to an endogenous cellular protein, tdtomato is probably your protein of choice as it's the brightest red fluorescent protein available.  If you are using it in a fusion context, you probably would prefer to use mcherry as tdtomato can perturb protein function and lead to aggregation.

Kurt

________________________________________
From: Confocal Microscopy List [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Valeria Berno [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Monday, July 06, 2009 1:46 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: mcherry or Tdtomato?

Dear all,

I am writing this in behalf of a colleague planning to create a
transgenic mouse with a "red" fluorescent protein. He will express the
protein in the brain (under a quite weak promoter).

I was a little bit confuse from the literature in comparing mcherry and
dTomato......What it would be your advice on choosing one of them?

I clearly need brightness and possibly also a specific antibody for the
protein working in IF or IHC.

Sure of your all useful advices

thanks

Valeria

ATOM RSS1 RSS2