Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2013 Sep 12.
Published in final edited form as: J Am Chem Soc. 2012 Aug 27;134(36):14789–14799. doi: 10.1021/ja3034137

Table 1.

Comparison of spectral and photochemical properties of the purified PSmOrange2, PSmOrange and mOrange proteins.

Protein mOrange PSmOrange PSmOrange2
Orange form Far-red form Orange form Far-red form Orange form Far-red form
Absorbance (nm) 546 631 548 634 546 619
Emission (nm) 562 662 565 662 561 651
Extinction coefficient (M−1 cm−1) 71,000 17,200 113,300 32,700 51,000 18,900
Quantum yield 0.69 0.19 0.51 0.28 0.61 0.38
Brightness relative to common EGFP (%) 148 10 176 28 95 23
pKa 6.5 a ND 6.2 ± 0.1 5.6 ± 0.1 6.6 ± 0.1 5.4 ± 0.1
Photoswitching half- time, t0.5 (s) b 12 ± 6 13.5 ± 1.5 4.2 ± 1.1
Photoswitching contrast (fold) c 2,800 ± 200 10,700 ± 500 96,000 ± 3,800
Maturation half-time at 37°C (h) 2.5 1.6 3.5
Photobleaching t0.5(s) d (0.65 ± 0.39) (17 ± 4) 103 ± 10 (15 ± 5) 1302 ± 120 (49 ± 8) 86 ± 2 (12± 4) 667 ± 25 (20± 1)
a

Data from 22.

b

Determined at 1,050 W cm−2 at the sample.

c

Determined as the product of the far-red fluorescence increase and the orange fluorescence decrease after photoswitching.

d

Determined at 133 (or 1,130 for the data in brackets) W cm−2 for the orange form and 103 (or 870 for the data in brackets) W cm−2 for the far-red form at a sample. The raw data were normalized to the spectral output of the lamp, transmission profile of the filter and dichroic mirror, absorbance spectra and quantum yields of the proteins, as described 45. ND, not determined. Errors, SD.