Table 2. Comparison of sensors with different fluorescent proteins.
| Sensor Name | In vivo Dynamic Range(Rmax/Rmin) (Mean±SEM) | Percent Saturation at Rest [(R-RTPEN)/(RZn-RTPEN)x100% | Rrest | Rmax-Rmin |
| NLSZapSM2 | 1.14±0.003 | 91% ±3% | 0.89 | 0.11 |
| NESZapSM2 | 1.13±0.01 | 67±5% | 1.05 | 0.15 |
| NLSZapSR2 | 1.18±0.004 | 48±3% | 0.55 | 0.1 |
| NESZapSR2 | 1.21±0.01 | 38±2% | 0.52 | 0.1 |
| NLSZapOC2 | 1.11±0.01 | 22±2% | 0.88 | 0.12 |
| NESZapOC2 | 1.13±0.01 | 20±2% | 0.74 | 0.13 |
| NLSZapOK2 | 1.1±0.01 | 32±4% | 0.93 | 0.06 |
| NESZapOK2 | 1.09±0.004 | 35±2% | 1.09 | 0.08 |
| NLSZapCmR1 | 1.15±0.01 | 92±2 | 1.02 | 0.15 |
| NESZapCmR1 | 1.17±0.04 | 88±7 | 1.07 | 0.18 |
| NLSZapCmR1.1 | 1.44±0.5 | 22±6 | 1.22 | 0.4 |
| NESZapCmR1.1 | 1.52±0.03 | 17±1 | 1.43 | 0.6 |
| NLSZapCmR2 | 1.38±0.02 | 24±1 | 1.38 | 0.4 |
| NESZapCmR2 | 1.39±0.02 | 17±1 | 1.28 | 0.5 |
*
Each experiment was performed in triplicate and a minimum of 3–4 cells per field of view were observed.