Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2026 May 17.
Published in final edited form as: ACS Sens. 2026 Feb 6;11(2):909–922. doi: 10.1021/acssensors.5c01707

Figure 2.

Figure 2.

Evaluation of background signal of co-expressed MDF fluorophores. (A) Monitoring mScI3 FLT under co-expression with ShY, mNg, ShR individually or altogether in one system resulted in no significant change in mScI3 FLT in the 532 nm channel. (B) Comparison of mScI3 to a series of IRES constructs—mScarletI3-IRES-mNeongreen (SIN); ShadowR-IRES-mScarlet (RIS); ShadowY-IRES-mNeongreen (YIN)—that produce both a separate donor and acceptor from a single CDNA show similar no change in mScI3 FLT. (C) Similar experiments as in (A) but for the mNg donor show no change for two construct transfections; however, all four resulted in a significant reduction in FLT. (D) Comparison of mNg to IRES constructs show no significant change under all conditions, including all four fluorophores. Statistical comparisons of IRES to the co-transfection conditions is presented in Figure S3. Data represent mean ± SD of n = 3 biological replicates; significance determined by one-way ANOVA (ns = p > 0.05; ** = p < 0.01).