Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2012 Jun 1.
Published in final edited form as: Exp Biol Med (Maywood). 2011 May 23;236(6):681–691. doi: 10.1258/ebm.2011.011009

Figure 5.

Figure 5

FRET response to DTT treatment for purified constructs. (a) CY-RL7, CyPet-RL7-YPet and mCyPet-RL7-mYPet. Values given are the average of three experiments ± SD. Differences of calculated FRET efficiencies between untreated (0 mmol/L DTT) and DTT-treated probes CY-RL7, and mCyPet-RL7-mYPet were statistically significant (P < 0.05). Significant differences were not observed for the CyPet-RL7-YPet construct (snow bars; P > 0.05). (b) CY-P14, CyPet-P14-YPet and mCyPet-P14-mYPet. Values given are the average of three experiments ± SD. Significant differences were not observed between the treated and control constructs (P > 0.05). (c) CY-RL7, ECFP-RL7-YPet and ECFP-RL7-mYPet. Values given are the average of six experiments for CY-RL7 and two experiments for others ± SD. DTT, dithiothreitol; FRET, Förster resonance energy transfer