Skip to main content
. 2013 Mar 28;8(3):e59812. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0059812

Table 1. Comparison of microtubule dynamic instability measured by EGFP-tubulin or 2G4-GFP expression in LLCPK cells.

Dynamic Instability Parameters 2G4-GFP EGFP-Tub EGFP-Tub [20] EGFP-Tub [18]
Growth Rate (µm/min) 8.5±4.8 10.0±5.0 11.5±7.4 8.5±5.8
Shortening Rate (µm/min) 12.0±9.4 16.9±9.9 13.1±8.4 11.3±7.9
Catastrophe Frequency (s−1) .027±.004 .05±.01 .026±.024 .053±.003
Rescue Frequency (s−1) .086±0.13 .106±.024 .175±.104 .086±.005
Percent Time in growth, shorteningand pause 63.7, 19.3, 27 54.2, 26.6, 19.2 15, 11.5, 73.5 40.4, 26, 36.5
Dynamicity (µm/min) 8.2±5.6 9.34±5.5 4±3.5 5.3±2.7

Parameters of dynamic instability measured using EGFP-α-tubulin (EGFP-Tub) as a tracer, expressed at about 10% of total a-tubulin levels, compared to that measured using 2G4-GFP bound to the external surface of microtubules. Published data sets derived from LLCPK cells expressing EGFP-α-tubulin are also included for comparison. Cells measured in reference [18] also expressed CFP.