Genetically encoded fluorescent proteins (FPs), and biosensors based on them, provide new insights into how living cells and tissues function. Ultimately, the goal of the bioimaging community is to use these probes deep in tissues and even in entire organisms, and this will require two-photon laser scanning microscopy (TPLSM), with its greater tissue penetration, lower autofluorescence background, and minimum photodamage in the out-of-focus volume. However, the extremely high instantaneous light intensities of femtosecond pulses in the focal volume dramatically increase the probability of further stepwise resonant photon absorption, leading to highly excited, ionizable and reactive states, often resulting in fast bleaching of fluorescent proteins in TPLSM. Here, we show that the femtosecond multiphoton excitation of red FPs (DsRed2 and mFruits), both in solution and live cells, results in a chain of consecutive, partially reversible reactions, with individual rates driven by a high-order (3-5 photon) absorption. The first step of this process corresponds to a three- (DsRed2) or four-photon (mFruits) induced fast isomerization of the chromophore, yielding intermediate fluorescent forms, which then subsequently transform into nonfluorescent products. Our experimental data and model calculations are consistent with a mechanism in which ultrafast electron transfer from the chromophore to a neighboring positively charged amino acid residue triggers the first step of multiphoton chromophore transformations in DsRed2 and mFruits, consisting of decarboxylation of a nearby deprotonated glutamic acid residue.
Genetically encoded fluorescent proteins (FPs), and biosensors based on them, provide new insights into how living cells and tissues function. Ultimately, the goal of the bioimaging community is to use these probes deep in tissues and even in entire organisms, and this will require two-photon laser scanning microscopy (TPLSM), with its greater tissue penetration, lower autofluorescence background, and minimum photodamage in the out-of-focus volume. However, the extremely high instantaneous light intensities of femtosecond pulses in the focal volume dramatically increase the probability of further stepwise resonant photon absorption, leading to highly excited, ionizable and reactive states, often resulting in fast bleaching of fluorescent proteins in TPLSM. Here, we show that the femtosecond multiphoton excitation of red FPs (DsRed2 and mFruits), both in solution and live cells, results in a chain of consecutive, partially reversible reactions, with individual rates driven by a high-order (3-5 photon) absorption. The first step of this process corresponds to a three- (DsRed2) or four-photon (mFruits) induced fast isomerization of the chromophore, yielding intermediate fluorescent forms, which then subsequently transform into nonfluorescent products. Our experimental data and model calculations are consistent with a mechanism in which ultrafast electron transfer from the chromophore to a neighboring positively charged amino acid residue triggers the first step of multiphoton chromophore transformations in DsRed2 and mFruits, consisting of decarboxylation of a nearby deprotonated glutamic acid residue.
Genetically encoded fluorescent
proteins (FPs)[1] and biosensors make it
possible to optically record cell
signaling, migration, and death in living organisms, see, e.g., refs (2−4). Today, the most significant constraint to imaging
deep inside whole organisms is the strong scattering and absorption
of visible light by most of the tissues. Compared to wide-field and
confocal microscopy, two-photon laser scanning microscopy (TPLSM)[5,6] provides a deep-penetrating, high-resolution, low-background, and
low-damage solution for thick tissue imaging. Although TPLSM is becoming
the method of choice for interrogation of tissues, fast multiphoton
bleaching (MPB) inside the focal volume can be a serious limitation.[6] Here, we use the term multiphoton bleaching for
the complex chain of reactions that leads to irreversible loss of
original fluorescence upon laser excitation at a particular wavelength.
If one fluorescent form is transformed to another in an individual
step of the chain, then this process is called, herein, multiphoton
transformation (MPT). Although these processes are generally disadvantageous,
they can potentially be made advantageous for increasing the imaging
depth and/or contrast. This can be accomplished by focal multiphoton
activating/switching (or deactivating/bleaching) of an FP with one
wavelength and then detecting its two-photon excited fluorescence
(or its absence) with another wavelength.[7,8] In
this case, the total fluorescence signal of the photoactivated subset
of molecules depends on the laser intensity P stronger
than quadratically (i.e., F ∼ Pβ, β > 2) because the photoactivation (or
bleaching) reaction rate itself depends on the laser power nonlinearly.
Therefore the fundamental limit of penetration depth for the classical
two-photon imaging[9] can be broken, and
deeper imaging can be attained.[7,8]Red fluorescent
proteins (RFPs), such as DsRed and its monomeric
derivatives, are attractive for deep imaging because of their red-shifted
fluorescence, but they bleach quickly compared to EGFP under typical
TPLSM conditions, see Figure 1 and refs (4 and 10). Empirically, it has been demonstrated
that the multiphoton photobleaching rate k of dyes
and FPs (including RFPs) increases much more steeply with the increasing
laser intensity than the expected quadratic law, i.e., as k ∼ Pα with the
exponent α = 2.5–5.3.[11−16] It has been also observed that the bleaching rate of DsRed can be
significantly reduced by tuning the laser wavelength from 720–760
to 950–1100 nm.[10,13] TheMPB rate can also depend
on the biological environment, pulse duration, repetition rate, and
so forth.[17−19] Although MPB has been observed by several groups,
the underlying photophysics, particularly in RFPs, is not understood.
A faster-than-quadratic power dependence of the photobleaching rate
suggests an involvement of more than two photons in the process, but
fundamental questions remain unanswered: Is the process instantaneous
(three-, four-, or even more photon absorption) or stepwise, i.e.,
a sequential absorption of photon(s) after an initial simultaneous
two-photon transition? If the process is stepwise, then does it involve
a climbing upon higher singlet or triplet states? If it is a singlet–singlet
excitation, then is there any energetic relaxation involved between
the two-photon absorption (2PA) event and the additional photon(s)
absorption? Why is the power exponent of the intensity dependence
often a noninteger number? Is this because of a competition between
different-order processes (e.g., two- and three-photon absorption)
or because of saturation of one of the transitions?
Figure 1
(a) TPLSM imaging of HEK cells cotransfected with EGFP
(green)
and mCherry (red). The frames from top to bottom correspond to 0,
25, 50, and 125 s of raster scanning, with the rate of 2 frames/s.
(b) Temporal decay of the fluorescence signal of EGFP (green) and
mCherry (red). The biexponential fit to the latter is shown by a continuous
black line.
The photochemical
mechanisms are also not fully clarified. Recently,
Habuchi et al. showed that upon consecutive absorption of two 532
nm photons by DsRed protein its chromophore first photoconverts to
a much dimmer form (the so-called super red form) with red-shifted
absorption (574 nm) and fluorescence (595 nm).[20] Absorption, fluorescence, and vibrational spectroscopy,
as well as mass spectrometry, demonstrate that this transformation
corresponds to the cis-to-trans isomerization
of the chromophore coupled with theKolbe decarboxylation of the nearby
glutamate residue, most probably E215. Further irradiation results
in bleaching of the super red form and in the appearance of the blue
form, absorbing at ∼380 nm, which was tentatively assigned
to a protonated state of the chromophore.[20] TheKolbe mechanism of GFP decarboxylation studied earlier[21] assumed electron transfer from the deprotonated
E215 residue (we use the DsRed sequence numbering here and throughout)
to the electronically excited (neutral) chromophore, with subsequent
decarboxylation of E215 followed by back transfer of an electron plus
proton (or whole hydrogen atom) from the chromophore to the −CH2• radical of the transient E215 residue.
In the case of DsRed, it is unclear, however, if the anionic chromophore,
even in the electronically excited state, would have enough electron
affinity to accept the second electron (see ref (22)), and, because the chromophore
is initially deprotonated, the particular chemical group in the protein
that would serve as the electron and proton (or hydrogen atom) donor
for theE215 residue is not established. Further uncertainty to the
sequence of events of the MPT process is added by the fact that the
electron detachment energy of the DsRed chromophore in vacuum is quite
low, ∼3.27 eV[23] (which corresponds
to a 380 nm one-photon excitation or a 760 nm two-photon excitation).
Therefore, it is not clear if the first step of multiphoton-induced
transformation would be electron detachment or acceptance, which is
followed by theKolbe reaction in the latter case.Here, we
study MPT and MPB of four mutants of DsRed: a faster-maturing
mutant DsRed2,[24] whose optical properties
are virtually identical to DsRed, and the monomeric mFruit variants
mCherry,[25] mStrawberry,[25] and mPlum.[26] TheMPB kinetics
measurements were performed in three different experimental settings.
First, we used typical TPLSM conditions (NA = 0.8) and scanning mode
for theMPB measurement in humanembryonic kidney (HEK) cells coexpressing
mCherry and EGFP to qualitatively compare their relative bleaching
rates. In the second setup, we used purified proteins in buffer solution
and low-repetition rate (1 kHz) excitation with a Ti:Sa amplifier
to quantitatively characterize the bleaching dynamics and rates of
RFPs. In the third setup, we studied the power dependences of the
photobleaching rates in live E. coli colonies using the TPLSM setup (76 MHz repetition rate) in order
to compare the bleaching rates under high- and low-repetition rate
conditions as well as to investigate the role of the local surrounding
(buffer vs cell). To keep the other experimental conditions the same,
we used the 790 nm excitation wavelength in all three setups because
this is the working (fixed) wavelength of the Ti:Sa amplifier. Using
the experimental data, multiphoton excitation kinetics models, and
quantum calculations of the energetics of elementary reactions, we
were able to clarify the photophysical mechanism of the first step
of theMPB process and propose the mechanisms of the next consecutive
steps in RFP phototransformation and bleaching.
Results
Fast Multiphoton Bleaching of mCherry upon
TPLSM Imaging of HEK Cells Coexpressing mCherry and EGFP
Figure 1a shows the consecutive images of
a group of HEK cells coexpressing mCherry and EGFP under typical TPLSM
conditions (see Supporting Information for
technical details).(a) TPLSM imaging of HEK cells cotransfected with EGFP
(green)
and mCherry (red). The frames from top to bottom correspond to 0,
25, 50, and 125 s of raster scanning, with the rate of 2 frames/s.
(b) Temporal decay of the fluorescence signal of EGFP (green) and
mCherry (red). The biexponential fit to the latter is shown by a continuous
black line.The fluorescence signal
was collected simultaneously in the green
and red channels. One selected cell, marked by an arrow, likely received
the most power because of the optimum z-position
and, as a result, completely lost its red (mCherry) fluorescence after
∼100 s. On the other hand, the EGFP fluorescence of the same
cell decreased by only ∼20%. The temporal dependence of the
fluorescence in the red and green channels, both normalized to 1 at t = 0, is shown in Figure 1b. This
experiment demonstrates that mCherry bleaches much faster than EGFP
under the same experimental conditions. It is interesting to note
that the fluorescence decay of mCherry can be well-described by a
sum of two exponents with zero offset (see the full line in Figure 1b). The nature of this biexponential behavior is
studied in the next section.
Multiphoton Bleaching of
Purified Proteins
in Solution
Unraveling Kinetic Schemes
In these
experiments, we irradiate buffered solutions of RFPs with the Ti:Sa
amplifier laser system operated at 790 nm wavelength, 1 kHz repetition
rate, and 120 fs pulse duration, with a uniform distribution of the
power density across the sample (see the Supporting
Information for more details). We monitor the concentrations
of the initial and intermediate forms by recording time-dependent
fluorescence spectra during MPB. Figure 2 shows
the series of selected fluorescence spectra of DsRed2 and mFruits
during the irradiation process. Because the same laser is used for
both irradiation and interrogation, these 2PEF spectra reflect the
time-dependent evolution of the concentration of initial, as well
as photoconverted, fluorescent species, which can be excited by the
790 nm pulses.
Figure 2
Fluorescence spectral changes during multiphoton irradiation
of
RFPs. The average power density is P = 11.4 W/cm2. The top spectrum corresponds to irradiation time t = 0, and the bottom spectrum corresponds to the maximum
total irradiation time of 3039 s for DsRed2, 1667 s for mCherry, 611
s for mPlum, and 3583 s for mStrawberry. Intermediate spectra, from
top to bottom, correspond to several intermediate time points. Dashed
lines show spectral contributions from the initial (red) and intermediate
(blue) forms at the late stage of bleaching.
Fluorescence spectral changes during multiphoton irradiation
of
RFPs. The average power density is P = 11.4 W/cm2. The top spectrum corresponds to irradiation time t = 0, and the bottom spectrum corresponds to the maximum
total irradiation time of 3039 s for DsRed2, 1667 s for mCherry, 611
s for mPlum, and 3583 s for mStrawberry. Intermediate spectra, from
top to bottom, correspond to several intermediate time points. Dashed
lines show spectral contributions from the initial (red) and intermediate
(blue) forms at the late stage of bleaching.As can be seen, the decrease in the total intensity is accompanied
by a shift of the peak position to the blue in mFruits and to the
red in DsRed2. Qualitatively similar behavior was previously observed
for mPlum[27] and DsRed.[20] Spectral deconvolution with a few Gaussians, having the
same central frequencies and widths but different amplitudes for different
time points, shows that all of the spectra at every time point can
be well-described by two main contributions: the initial (unbleached)
form and a new, spectrally shifted intermediate form. The peak position
of the intermediate form varies much less within the series than that
of the initial form: from 588 nm in mStrawberry to 593 nm in mCherry,
596 nm in DsRed2, and 600 nm in mPlum. This new band, appearing in
the DsRed spectrum at 596 nm, was previously assigned to the trans anionic form of the chromophore (super red form).[20] Similarly, the fluorescence peak near 611 nm
was shown to correspond to the trans anionic form
of two other red FPs, possessing the same chromophore structure as
DsRed, i.e., eqFP611 and d2RFP630.[28] The
photoproducts with the same fluorescence spectra, peaking between
590 and 600 nm, can also be created by one-photon irradiation of mFruits
( Figure 8) and were also previously assigned to the trans isomers.[29−31] On the basis of these observations,
we attribute the peak near 590–600 nm (Figure 2) to the anionic trans isomer of the DsRed-like
chromophore in all RFPs studied here.Figure 3 shows the temporal changes of the
amplitudes of the initial (red symbols) and intermediate (blue symbols)
forms. The kinetics of the initial form can be well-described by a
biexponential decay with zero offset for all four proteins. This suggests
at least a two-step consecutive reaction with a reversible first step.
Figure 3
Decay
kinetics of the initial (red symbols) and intermediate (blue
symbols) forms. The solid continuous lines show the corresponding
fitting functions (see the text for details). The dashed blue line
represents the contribution of structure B and the
dotted blue line represents the contribution of structure C to the fluorescence of intermediate form in the case of
the mFruits (see the text for details).
Decay
kinetics of the initial (red symbols) and intermediate (blue
symbols) forms. The solid continuous lines show the corresponding
fitting functions (see the text for details). The dashed blue line
represents the contribution of structure B and thedotted blue line represents the contribution of structure C to the fluorescence of intermediate form in the case of
the mFruits (see the text for details).
DsRed2
In the case of DsRed2, the simplest reaction
scheme that consistently describes the kinetics of both the initial
and intermediate states is presented by eq 1Where A, B, and C are the concentrations
of the initial, intermediate,
and final forms, respectively; k1, k2, and k3 are the
corresponding rate constants. The solution of the corresponding system
of differential equations (shown only for A and B here) readswhereBecause the fluorescence signal F is proportional to the concentration of the corresponding
form, we use functions 2 and 3 to describe the experimental decay kinetics up to a constant
factor. We first obtained the rates k1 from the initial slope of the normalized (as F(0)
= 1) decay curves (method of initial rates). We then fitted the experimental
decay of the initial (A) form to a biexponential
decay F = a exp(−γ1t) + b exp(−γ2t) (red line in Figure 3a) and obtained γ1 = (3.2 ± 0.4) × 10–3 s–1 and γ2 = (4.0
± 0.4) × 10–4 s–1. Using k1 and solving eq 4, we
found k2 and k3. All of the rates are presented in Table 1 (second row).
Table 1
Multiphoton Bleaching Rates upon Irradiation
of the Buffer FP Solutions with a Ti:Sa Amplifiera
protein
k1, s–1
k1*, s–1
k2, s–1
k3, s–1
k4, s–1
DsRed2
1.4 × 10–3
1.4 × 10–3
9.8 × 10–4
6.5 × 10–4
mCherry
2.8 × 10–3
2.4 × 10–3
6.7 × 10–3
2.6 × 10–3
1.4 × 10–3
mPlum
3.5 × 10–3
3.2 × 10–3
3.4 × 10–3
4.0 × 10–3
1.5 × 10–3
mStrawberry
1.5 × 10–3
1.1 × 10–3
9.2 × 10–3
3.3 × 10–3
1.4 × 10–4
The rates
of the individual steps
of the kinetics eq 1 for DsRed2 and eq 5 for mFruits. k1* is
the rate of the first step, calculated according to the cross-sections
and quantum yields obtained in the experiment with the repetition
rate f = 76 MHz in E. coli bacteria but with laser parameters corresponding to the amplifier
experiment (vide infra). Experimental errors of the k values are ∼20%.
The rates
of the individual steps
of the kinetics eq 1 for DsRed2 and eq 5 for mFruits. k1* is
the rate of the first step, calculated according to the cross-sections
and quantum yields obtained in the experiment with the repetition
rate f = 76 MHz in E. coli bacteria but with laser parameters corresponding to the amplifier
experiment (vide infra). Experimental errors of the k values are ∼20%.Independent fitting of the kinetics of the intermediate
(B) form to the function F = c[exp(−γ2t) –
exp(−γ1t)], shown by a blue
line in Figure 3, results in γ1 = (3.2 ± 0.3)
× 10–3 s–1 and γ2 = (3.4 ± 0.3) × 10–4 s–1. Both values coincide, within experimental error margins, with the
corresponding values found from the decay of form A. This justifies eq 1 for DsRed2, where state B can be attributed to the anionic trans chromophore of the super red form. State C probably
corresponds to a protonated form of the chromophore, absorbing near
380 nm and nonfluorescent in the 560–630 nm window.[20,32] A similar scheme, but without theback reaction (k2 = 0), was used to quantitatively describe the DsRed
kinetics in ref (20). These authors used two-photon stepwise (1 + 1) excitation with
532 nm nanosecond pulses. The difference in the kinetic schemes used
here and those in ref (20) probably arises from the fact that the reverse B → A reaction in our case is also activated
by multiphoton stepwise absorption, which requires high instantaneous
peak power of femtosecond pulses. This is further supported by the
observation of biexponential decay (i.e., with reverse reaction) in
DsRed2 upon femtosecond excitation in TPLSM setup, see Figure 1 and ref (10).Note that the reaction scheme B ↔ A → C, where A, B, and C are the initial,
intermediate,
and final forms, respectively, can describe the observed kinetics
as well. According to ref (20), however, the B → C step is non-negligible, which makes us inclined to the scheme in
eq 1.
mFruits
We first
found that eq 1 could not consistently (i.e.,
with the same parameters, k1, k2, and k3) explain
the kinetics of both the A and B forms in mFruits. The minimum scheme
that satisfactorily described the decays needed an additional step C → D and is given in eq 5where B and C are
some intermediate forms and D is a final form.
The solution of the underlying differential equations (shown only
for A, B, and C) readswhereInterestingly, we also found that neither
eq 7 nor 8 can separately
describe the kinetics of the intermediate form (blue symbols in Figure 3b–d), but their linear combination can. To
obtain the rate constants, we first fitted the experimental decay
of the initial form to a biexponential decay of the form F = a exp(−γ1t) + b exp(−γ2t), cf. eq 6 (red line in Figure 3b–d), and found γ1 and γ2. We then fitted the kinetics of the intermediate form to
the following function (i.e., linear combination of eqs 7 and 8)where the γ1 and
γ2 values were fixed and equal to those found above,
and three
other parameters, μ, ν, and k4, were free. Here, the factors μ and ν represent the
relative contributions of forms B and C to the total fluorescence signal, respectively. The fitting curves
are shown by blue lines in Figure 3b–d
and, as one can see, describe the data quite well. Again, using the
independently obtained k1 values from
the initial slope, we found k2 and k3 from eq 9. All of these
rates are presented in Table 1, lines 3–5.
Knowing μ and ν, we show individual contributions from
the B (dashed line) and C (dotted
line) forms in Figure 3b–d.At
first glance, it is quite surprising that the fluorescence spectrum
of the intermediate form (590–600 nm), consisting of only one
isolated and narrow peak (Supporting Information Figure 9), contains contributions from two chemically different
forms (i.e., B and C) appearing
at the different stages of bleaching. One reasonable explanation is
that the B and C forms correspond,
respectively, to the trans-chromophore with deprotonated
and protonated (in the ground state) phenoxy group, which have different
absorption but identical fluorescence spectra. If the protonated form
undergoes fast excited-state proton transfer, similar to what has
recently been described for other RFPs, including mKeima,[33] LSSmKate, and LSSmCherry,[34] then its fluorescence spectrum will match perfectly with
that of the initially deprotonated form. This assumption is further
supported by the appearance of a characteristic absorption peak near
465 nm at the late stages of bleaching (Supporting
Information Figure 10), which has been assigned to a protonated
DsRed-like chromophore in a trans-conformation.[34] The ratio of deprotonated to protonated (absorbing
at 575 nm) forms in the absorption spectrum indicates that the anionic
form appears first (B) and then transforms to the
neutral one (C). Because both forms have overlapping
2PA spectra with similar cross-sections at 790 nm (cf. 2PA spectrum
of, e.g., TagRFP[35] with that of LSS-mKate2[36]), they contribute similarly to the fluorescence
signal at an intermediate bleaching stage (t ∼
1000 s) (Figure 3b–d). Therefore, in
contrast to DsRed, mFruits undergo an additional photoconversion step,
i.e., from an anionic to a neutral form in the process of MPB. The D form can be similar in nature as that of the C form in DsRed2 (see above).
Power
Dependence of the Rates of Individual
MPT Steps in mPlum
To gain further insight into the mechanisms
of MPB, we studied the dependence of individual MPT rates, involved
in eq 5, as a function of laser power. For these
experiments, we selected mPlum because it bleaches quickly even at
low power. The fluorescence signal was collected in the region of
630–680 nm, i.e., where the fluorescence of forms B and C is negligible (Figure 2). We first checked that the initial (unbleached) fluorescence depended
quadratically on power (Supporting Information Figure 11), implying that the simultaneous 2PA transition is not
saturated. Using the method of initial rates (see above), we obtained k1 as a function of power over a broad power
range. Figure 4a shows the dependence of k1 on the average power P in
a double-logarithmic scale. Describing the dependence with an empirical
power lawwe find α = 3.25, which means that a
four-photon process is involved in the A → B transformation. The noninteger value of α suggests
that either four photons, in total, are absorbed, but some of the
transitions are saturated, or that the four-photon process competes
with lower-order (two- or three-photon) processes.
Figure 4
Power dependence of the
(a) first step rate k1 and (b) reverse
step rate k2 and
second step rate k3 for mPlum in solution
upon irradiation with a Ti:Sa amplifier.
Power dependence of the
(a) first step rate k1 and (b) reverse
step rate k2 and
second step rate k3 for mPlum in solution
upon irradiation with a Ti:Sa amplifier.The power dependences of the next consecutive steps of eq 5 were measured in a high-power region (0.55–0.8
W), where it was possible to obtain enough dynamic range of the decay
in a reasonable amount of time. The decay curves were fitted with
a biexponential function, and rates k2 and k3 were obtained as described in
the previous section. The power dependences of k2 and k3 are shown in Figure 4b. Because k2 ∼ P5, the back (trans–cis) reaction is photoactivated and requires at least five
photons. The next, B → C,
reaction (leading to chromophore protonation) is also multiphoton-induced
and consumes at least four photons.
Dependence
of k1 on Pulse Duration for DsRed2 and
mPlum
Our next step was
to discriminate between the simultaneous (coherent) n-photon absorption (n > 2) and stepwise 2 + 1
or
2 + 1+1 processes, where the simultaneous two-photon absorption is
followed by the stepwise excited-state absorption of additional photons.
To this end, we investigated the dependence of k1 on the pulse duration. Becase, in a simultaneous process,
the absorption rate depends on the instantaneous intensity within
the pulse, one would expect a quadratic decrease of the bleaching
rate with the increase of pulse duration for the simultaneous three-photon
process and a cubic decrease for the simultaneous four-photon process.
In contrast, the linear decrease is expected for the stepwise case.
In our experiment, a 2-fold elongation of the pulse from 120 to 240
fs (while keeping the pulse energy unchanged) resulted in a 2-fold
decrease of the initial decay rate for DsRed2 and mPlum (Supporting Information Figure 12), justifying
the stepwise mechanisms. This result is not very surprising because
the simultaneous multiphoton absorption processes usually dominate
only if the intermediate states are virtual. In the systems considered
here, the excited states lying higher than the S1 state
make a quasi-continuum, thus always providing a real intermediate
state for the third and fourth photon absorption. Given the stepwise
mechanisms, we can make a further conclusion based on our result that
the energetic (vibrational) relaxation between the sequential absorption
events (in 2 + 1 or 2 + 1 + 1 processes) does not occur on the time
scale of ∼100–200 fs. Otherwise, the underlying molecular
cross sections would change for different pulse durations, which would
result in a change of the bleaching rate by a factor other than 2.
Therefore, if there is any relaxation, then it should be either much
faster than 100 fs or slower than 200 fs. The former would be quite
unusual, even for the macromolecular systems studied here. The latter
possibility will be studied in Section 2.4.5.
Multiphoton Bleaching of RFPs Expressed in
Live E. coli Bacteria
In this set of experiments,
we measured the fluorescence bleaching kinetics F(t) in live E. coli bacteria using the two-photon microscope setup with a high repetition
rate (76 MHz) (see the Supporting Information). Because of the strong nonuniformity of the laser intensity across
the focal volume and the non-mono-exponential character of the intrinsic
bleaching kinetics (see above), the observed decay curves could not
be described with a sum of a reasonable number of exponents (Supporting Information Figure 13). Therefore,
here, we use the method of initial rates to measure an effective rate K of the first, A → B, step as a function of laser power. The thus obtained value of K is a result of averaging of the local initial rates k1 over space across the focal volume. Figure 5 shows the dependence of both K and the initial fluorescence signal, F(0), on power
for DsRed2 and mFruits. Although F(0) increases nearly
quadratically, the photobleaching rate shows a much steeper dependence
on power. The power exponent of eq 11 varies
from α = 2.79 to 3.41. The value obtained for mPlum (α
= 3.20) is close to what was measured at 1 kHz excitation (cf. Figure 4a), suggesting that the order of the processes (number
of photons involved) does not depend on the repetition rate or on
the local protein environment (water vs cell). Because α is
always larger than 2, we can conclude that the three- or four-photon
excitation of higher excited states is responsible for multiphoton
transformations.
Figure 5
Dependence of the initial fluorescence signal F(0) (blue symbols) and initial photobleaching rate K (red symbols) on average laser power plotted on a double-logarithmic
scale. Both F(0) and K were fitted
with the empirical power law function Pα. The best fit values of α are depicted for each protein. Bleaching
was monitored in live E. coli colonies.
Dependence of the initial fluorescence signal F(0) (blue symbols) and initial photobleaching rate K (red symbols) on average laser power plotted on a double-logarithmic
scale. Both F(0) and K were fitted
with the empirical power law function Pα. The best fit values of α are depicted for each protein. Bleaching
was monitored in live E. coli colonies.
Phenomenological
Model of the First Step of
MPB
Why Is the Power Exponent α Noninteger?
The power exponent α of the intensity dependence of photobleaching
rates (Figure 5) in most cases is a noninteger
number. Physically, this can be explained either by a competition
between parallel two-, three-, four-, and so on photon-induced processes[37] or by saturation of a certain transition in
the multiphoton consecutive ladder process.[38,39] In the former case, the microscopic rate k1 is described by a sum of the rates of processes with different
photon orders[37]After integration of the individual contributions
in eq 12 over space and explicitly expressing
power dependences of the corresponding process, we arrive at the polynomial
functionwhere all of the coefficients a are positive. In the second
case, if
any of the consecutive transitions involved in an n-photon absorption process is saturated, then, as can be shown (Supporting Information), the corresponding rates k1( and K( can be described by an
analytical function, which can be approximated in the limiting cases
of the slight or moderately strong saturation by a polynomial function
of P, where some of the coefficients turn negative.
Therefore, careful analysis of the experimental power dependence of
the higher order (3–4 photons) MPT rate will allow one to distinguish
between the two cases. In any of the above mechanisms, the photochemical
reaction starting from the S1 state that becomes populated
after the initial 2PA step cannot be ruled out. We first calculate
the contribution K(2) in the whole power
range of Figure 5. By neglecting saturation
of the2PA transition (F(0) depends quadratically
on P), one can show (Supporting
Information) thatwhere σ2 is the two-photon
cross-section at the excitation wavelength, φ1 is
the quantum yield of the reaction starting from the lowest excited
state (S1), f is the pulse repetition
rate, h is Plank’s constant, ν is the
photon frequency, Δτ is the pulse duration, w0 is the laser beam width at the focal plane, and P is the average power. According to Kasha’s rule,
φ1 does not depend on the method of excitation (one-
or two-photon). To evaluate a2, we therefore
can use the values of φ1 previously determined in
one-photon bleaching experiments,[31] as
well as the known σ2 values[35] and laser parameters. We then calculated the a2P2 contribution and subtracted
it from the total rate K to obtain the power dependences
of the higher order (three- or four-photon) processes. Although K(2) turns out to be several times smaller than K in the whole power range, this correction still provides
more careful evaluations of K(3) and K(4) or of their combination. The results are
shown in Figure 6, where the insets present
the same plots on a double-logarithmic scale. For DsRed2, α
= 2.84, from which we conclude that, in total, three photons are involved
in photobleaching and the third-photon absorption is slightly saturated.
(The first, simultaneous 2PA transition is not saturated because the
initial fluorescence depends quadratically on power.) For mFruits,
the analysis shows that a combination of the nonsaturated third and
fourth power terms in eq 13 cannot explain the
observed power dependence (coefficient a4 turns negative), and we conclude that four photons are involved
and at least one of the subsequent excited-state transitions is moderately
strongly saturated.
Figure 6
Power dependence of the initial rate of photobleaching
less the
two-photon induced contribution (a2P2). Symbols represent the experimental data,
and continuous lines show fitting to eq 15 for
DsRed2 and eq 18 for mFruits (see the text for
explanations). The insets show the same plots on a double-logarithmic
scale. The best linear fits (straight lines) and their corresponding
slopes α are also shown.
We thus arrive at a mechanism where the
initial instantaneous 2PA is followed by an ultrafast (within ∼100
fs) absorption of one additional photon in DsRed2 and two additional
photons in mFruits. In all cases, at least one of the excited-state
transitions is saturated to a certain extent. To specify the molecular
mechanism of the first step, we estimate, in the next section, the
number of photons required for the multiphoton detachment of an electron
and discuss if this process might be responsible for the MPT in the
proteins under investigation.Power dependence of the initial rate of photobleaching
less the
two-photon induced contribution (a2P2). Symbols represent the experimental data,
and continuous lines show fitting to eq 15 for
DsRed2 and eq 18 for mFruits (see the text for
explanations). The insets show the same plots on a double-logarithmic
scale. The best linear fits (straight lines) and their corresponding
slopes α are also shown.
How Many Photons Are Needed to Photodetach
the Electron?
If there is enough total energy supplied to
a HOMO electron of the chromophore, then the electron eventually will
move away from the chromophore and from its local environment. Here,
we estimate how many photons are required to accomplish this work.
The total threshold photodetachment energy is DE = DE0 –
ESE, where DE0 is the gas phase detachment energy from
the chromophore, and ESE is the electrostatic interaction energy of
the chromophore with the rest of the protein before the electron was
detached. (We neglect the energies of the interaction of the neutral
chromophore and of the quasi-free electron with their surroundings
and with each other.) Ghosh et al. calculated the vertical detachment
energy, VDE0 = 3.27 eV, and adiabatic detachment energy,
ADE0 = 3.15 eV, for the model red chromophore in vacuum.[23] Our calculations of ESE (see the Supporting Information), employing the quantum-mechanical
cluster approach for the first layer of the chromophore’s surrounding[40] and the coarse grain point-charge simulation
of the remaining protein, resulted in the values shown in Table 2. All of the ESE values are negative, meaning that
the chromophore-bound electron is additionally stabilized by its protein
surrounding. Interestingly, the potential well created by the surrounding
is 1.7 V deeper in DsRed than in mFruits. This is due to one extra
positive charge in the nearest chromophore environment, i.e., a combination
of two positive and one negative charges: K83(+), K163(+), and E215(−)
in DsRed compared to all three neutral corresponding positions in
mFruits.[41,42] In the case of vertical photodetachment,
i.e., without any energetic relaxation between instantaneous 2PA and
additional photons absorption, the inequality n > VDE must hold, where n is
the
total number of photons absorbed. Because = 1.57 eV in our experiment, it is clear that for
DsRed2 at least five photons are required to detach the electron (see
Table 2). The experimentally observed power
dependence (α ≈ 2.8) of the DsRed2 bleaching rate (Figure 6a) suggests that the MPT reaction does not involve
electron photodetachment but rather proceeds through some other mechanism
involving a bound highly excited state of the chromophore. In the
case of mFruits, if the process of MPT would occur without relaxation,
then four photons would suffice to overcome the photodetachment energy.
However, if an energetic relaxation to the lowest vibrational level
of the S1 state occurred after an instantaneous absorption
of two photons, then a total of five photons would be required to
overcome the adiabatic barrier of detachment. Relaxation to a triplet
state will lead to even larger energy losses and even more stringent
requirements for the number of photons. Relating these data to the
bleaching power dependence (Figure 6), we conclude
that the reaction most probably proceeds through the vertical, i.e.,
without relaxation, four-photon electron detachment in mFruits, in
agreement with the experimental dependence of the bleaching rate on
pulse duration.
Table 2
Molecular Parameters Involved in Multiphoton
Bleaching of RFPsa
protein
ESE, eV
VDE, eV
ADE, eV
σ2b GM
σmn, cm2
σnc, cm2
φn
φ1c
DsRed2
–3.97
7.24
7.12
10
3.0 × 10–17
8.8 × 10–3
7.1 × 10–5
mCherry
–2.25
5.52
5.40
29
3.4 × 10–16
1.81 × 10–19
1.3 × 10–5
mPlum
–2.34
5.61
5.49
43
8.7 × 10–16
1.57 × 10–19
3.8 × 10–6
mStrawberry
–2.31
5.58
5.46
13
7.9 × 10–16
1.85 × 10–19
4.5 × 10–5
ESE
is the calculated electrostatic
interaction energy of the chromophore and surrounding protein; VDE
is the vertical electron detachment energy in protein; ADE is the
adiabatic electron detachment energy in protein; the definitions of
the molecular parameters are the same as those in Figure 7.
Ref (35).
Ref (31).
DsRed2: Parameters of
the Three-Photon Phototransformation
The first step of theMPB process in DsRed2 can be presented by
a three-level model shown in Figure 7a.
Figure 7
Energy level
diagrams used to model the MPT process. The first
step of MPB corresponds to a simultaneous 2PA, described by the cross
section σ2. After excitation of level m, the chromophore can relax nonradiatively (wavy blue arrow) to the
lowest excited state 1 and then relax back to the ground state 0 or
convert photochemically to a different structure with the quantum
yield φ1. Being excited to state m, the chromophore can be further promoted to a higher level, n, via excited-state transition with the one-photon cross
section σ. In DsRed2 (a), the
photochemical reaction starting from level n is characterized
by quantum efficiency φ. In mFruits
(b), the additional, fourth, step is the transition from the excited
state n into a level c belonging
to the continuum of quasi-free states with the corresponding effective
photodetachment cross section σ.
Energy level
diagrams used to model the MPT process. The first
step of MPB corresponds to a simultaneous 2PA, described by the cross
section σ2. After excitation of level m, the chromophore can relax nonradiatively (wavy blue arrow) to the
lowest excited state 1 and then relax back to the ground state 0 or
convert photochemically to a different structure with the quantum
yield φ1. Being excited to state m, the chromophore can be further promoted to a higher level, n, via excited-state transition with the one-photon cross
section σ. In DsRed2 (a), the
photochemical reaction starting from level n is characterized
by quantum efficiency φ. In mFruits
(b), the additional, fourth, step is the transition from the excited
state n into a level c belonging
to the continuum of quasi-free states with the corresponding effective
photodetachment cross section σ.The effective decay rate K(3) calculated
with the possibility of slight saturation in the m → n transition (Supporting
Information) readswhereandis the saturation power. For definitions of
the molecular parameters, see Figure 7. B and Ps were used as free parameters
to fit experimental data to eq 15, see Figure 6a. Substituting the laser parameters and σ2 (790 nm) = 10 GM (1GM = 10–50 cm4 s),[35] we find σ from thePs value, using eq 17, and φ from
the B value, using eq 16. The
results are shown in Table 2.ESE
is the calculated electrostatic
interaction energy of the chromophore and surrounding protein; VDE
is the vertical electron detachment energy in protein; ADE is the
adiabatic electron detachment energy in protein; the definitions of
the molecular parameters are the same as those in Figure 7.Ref (35).Ref (31).
mFruits:
Parameters of the Four-Photon Phototransformation
For mFruits,
we use the four-level model that, in addition to levels
0, m, and n, includes level c, belonging to a continuum (see Figure 7b). The resulting first step rate, when the m → n transition is close to saturation (but
not fully saturated), reads (Supporting Information)whereand Ps is given
by eq 17. Figure 6b–d
shows thefits of experimental data to eq 18. The fitting parameters Ps and B′, in combination with laser parameters, allow us
to obtain σ and σ, respectively (Table 2).
Are There Long-Lived States Involved in
the First Step of MPB?
Our next aim was to understand if
the additional photons of the 2 + 1 and 2 + 1 + 1 processes are absorbed
on the fast (i.e., singlet–singlet) or the longer (cf. triplet–triplet)
time scales. To discriminate between these possibilities, we compare
the nonlinear molecular absorption coefficients (i.e., combination
of cross sections) obtained at two different repetition rates: f = 1 kHz (1 ms between pulses) and 76 MHz (13 ns between
pulses). If there is a long-lived (13 ns < τ < 1 ms) intermediate
state, then it will accumulate under the 76 MHz excitation but not
upon 1 kHz excitation and therefore the observed nonlinear coefficients
will be different. Alternatively, if the excited singlet (S1, S, or S) works as an intermediate state, then the coefficients should be
similar. By knowing the molecular cross sections and quantum yields
contributing to the k1 rate from the high
repetition rate experiments (Table 2), we can
substitute these parameters into the expressions for the k1 rate but with the laser parameters corresponding to
the low repetition rate conditions (i.e., with amplifier excitation),
and we can compare the calculated values with those measured experimentally
in Section 2.2.1. One can show (Supporting Information) that in the three-level
system, i.e., in the DsRed2 case, with the possibility of saturation
of the m → n transition and under spatially
uniform illumination, as in the amplifier experimentSubstituting σ and φ obtained for DsRed2
in the 76 MHz experiment and the laser parameters corresponding to
the low repetition rate experiment into eq 20, we obtain k1(3) = 1.4 ×
10–3 s–1, which coincides with
the measured value (Table 1).For the
four-level system with possible saturation, one obtains (Supporting Information)The rates estimated from eq 21 for mFruits
also match well (within experimental errors) with those obtained using
the amplifier system (see Table 1). These results
suggest that the excited-state absorption proceeds through the singlet
manifold in the RFPs under study (similar to that of EGFP[16,17]). Another important conclusion is that the rate of the process does
not depend on the local environment (i.e., buffer vs E. coli cell).
Discussion
Although the full MPB process comprises a complex chain of reactions,
it appears that the rate of the first, A → B, step, k1, represents a good
qualitative metric for the long-term kinetics. Under the experimental
conditions of the amplifier setup, both k1 and the inverse half-time of the full decay show the following sequence
in the bleaching rates: mPlum > mCherry > mStrawberry ≈
DsRed2
(Supporting Information Figure 14). Therefore,
understanding of the detailed elementary mechanisms of the A → B transformation is crucial
for creating more photostable mutants.For DsRed2, the 2 + 1
phenomenological mechanism emerged from our
analysis. Because the binding energy of the valence π electron
in the anionic chromophore is quite low, VDE0 = 3.27 eV,[23] the simultaneous absorption of two 790 nm photons
(2 = 3.14 eV) excites a
bound π* state (m) slightly below the top of
the chromophore potential well. The third photon absorption provides
enough energy (3 = 4.71
eV) to remove the electron from the chromopohore valence state. In
that higher-energy state (n), the electron becomes
more delocalized, but it still remains close to the chromophore, bound
by the net attractive Coulomb potential of the positive amino acid
residues: K70, K83, R95, and K163 (see Section 2.4.2). The closest positive charge belongs to the protonated ε-amino
group of K70, found just ∼3.7 Å away from the geometrical
center of the chromophore (bridge carbon atom CB2), which contributes
most to the local Coulomb potential. The −NH3+ ion of this residue presents a closed-shell core that can
accept an electron to become the −NH3• radical.[43]In theKolbe decarboxylation
mechanism, the first step consists
of an electron transfer from the deprotonated glutamate group of a
nearby acidic residue (probably E215 in the case of DsRed) to the
chromophore.[20,21] This process is more probable
for the neutral, not anionic, chromophore, because the former has
larger electron affinity. Therefore, we can assume that the initial
multiphoton-induced electron transfer to the nearby positive residue
(e.g., K70) triggers this reaction by turning the chromophore into
a neutral radical form. The next step is theKolbe decarboxylation
of the oxidized E215 residueFinally, the −CH2• radical,
produced in this reaction, should recombine with either a hydrogen
atom or accept an electron and proton. Because thehydrogen atom or
proton can be transferred only on short distances, thehydrogen-donating
group should be in close contact with the decarboxylated residue.
In the DsRed2 protein, theE215 residue makes a close hydrogen-bonding
contact with the protonated ε-amino group of K70 (Figure 8, right). As mentioned above, the −NH3+ group of K70 turns into the ammonium radial −NH3• after electron transfer from the chromophore.
It is known that −NH3• in the
ground state is metastable with respect to the −NH3• → NH2 + H• reaction.[43,45,46] Because of the close distance between K70 and E215, the released
hydrogen may eventually recombine with the remaining −CH2• radical of E215.
Figure 8
Schematic diagram of
the mCherry (left) and DsRed (right) chromophore
environments.[41,44] Hydrogen bonds are presented
by dashed lines, charged groups are highlighted with color (blue,
positive; red, negative), and water molecules are designated as W.
Schematic diagram of
the mCherry (left) and DsRed (right) chromophore
environments.[41,44] Hydrogen bonds are presented
by dashed lines, charged groups are highlighted with color (blue,
positive; red, negative), and water molecules are designated as W.Spectrally, the bleaching process
is related to the chromophore
isomerization, with the trans isomer showing much
weaker fluorescence.[20] It is interesting
to note that upon multiphoton excitation the anionic trans isomer is produced with the quantum yield of φ = 8.8 × 10–3, which exceeds
the corresponding yield of one-photon cis–trans isomerization by 2 orders of magnitude (φ1 = 7.1
× 10–5, ref (31)), in agreement with previous qualitative observation.[20] Such acceleration of the process can be explained
by the fact that the multiphoton-triggered decarboxylation leads to
significant changes in the chromophore surrounding,[20] including the formation of extra free volume near the chromophore,
rearrangement of hydrogen bonds, and redistribution of electrostatic
potential.In mFruits, in contrast to DsRed2, theE215 residue
is protonated[41,42] and therefore cannot serve as
an electron donor in Kolbe reaction.
The closest deprotonated acidic residue to the chromophore is E148
(∼6.2 Å from the chromophore center) (Figure 8, left). The positively charged K70 residue is significantly
displaced compared to its position in DsRed[40] and now makes a hydrogen-bonding contact with E148. If the multiphoton
transformation is again coupled to Kolbe decarboxylation (of E148
now), we can assume that after the electron hopping from E148 to the
chromophore and decarboxylation of the former, thehydrogen atom from
the −NH3• radical of K70 can recombine
with the −CH2• radical of E148.
Our experimental results and quantum calculations suggest, however,
that, in contrast to DsRed, theMPB reaction starts only if the electron
is moved further from the closest surrounding of the chromophore (after
four-photon photodetachment). It is not clear what causes this difference.
We speculate that in mFruits, after its initial detachment, the electron
probably returns to K70 to produce the −NH3• radical. The initial electron removal from the closest
surrounding is probably needed because otherwise it can return to
the chromophore faster than the electron transfer in theKolbe reaction
(E148– + Chro → E148• +
Chro–) takes place. This may imply that theKolbe
reaction occurs in mFruits slower than in DsRed2, probably because,
among other reasons, of the longer distance from E148 to the chromophore
in mFruits (∼6.2 Å) than from E215 to the chromophore
in DsRed (∼4.9 Å). Similar to DsRed, the decarboxylation
of E148 significantly changes the local surrounding (by creating larger
free volume, rearranging hydrogen bonds, and changing electrostatic
potential), which can lead to fast chromophore isomerization.It is interesting that the back (A ← B) reaction is activated even by five photons, as shown
for mPlum. We may assume a similar, electron-transfer-mediated isomerization
reaction for the anionic chromophore in the trans position. Because the chromophore geometry is different, other stepping-stone
groups can come into play and therefore a fine balance of energetic
and kinetic conditions can require more photons to promote the back
reaction. The B → C step, corresponding to
the multiphoton-activated protonation of the chromophore’s
phenoxy group and observed only in mFruits, may include a fast electron
transfer to the remaining positively charged center, most probably
R95, with subsequent hydrogen atom ejection from it, according to
the reaction. Thehydrogen atom may then bind to the phenolate oxygen
of the chromophore radical and create a hydrogen-bonding contact with
the remaining NH2 group of R95 (cf. molecular structure
of PAmCherry[32]). The close contact would
allow excited-state proton transfer from the protonated chromophore
(C-structure) to R95, thus explaining its red-shifted fluorescence
(identical to that of the anionic B-structure).
Conclusions
On the long time-scale, the photobleaching process of RFPs comprises
a chain of consecutive steps, with the first being a photoreversible
step, A ↔ B, followed by
irreversible transitions, B → C → ..., to the nonfluorescent (upon 790 nm excitation) final
products. All individual phototransformation steps, including the
reverse A ← B reaction, are
induced by high-order (3–5) photon absorption. High nonlinearities
of these reactions can find use in the recently proposed methods of
deep imaging based on multiphoton activation.[7,8]In DsRed2, the intermediate form B can be spectrally
assigned to the anionic trans isomer of the chromophore.
In mFruits, there are two intermediate forms with the same fluorescence
but different absorption spectra, which we assign to the trans chromophore deprotonated (B) and protonated (C) at the phenoxy group, respectively.Our results
suggest that in the first elementary step of the A → B transformation the initial
instantaneous two-photon absorption step is followed by a sequential
absorption of additional one (in DsRed2) or two (mFruits) photons.
The comparison of the rate constants measured with different repetition
rates (1 kHz vs 76 MHz) indicates that the additional photons are
absorbed from the same femtosecond pulse and therefore correspond
to singlet–singlet transitions without involvement of longer-living
(e.g., triplet) states. Considering the order of the process (number
of photons involved) in combination with the reaction energetics (calculated
electron detachment energies for the chromophore in protein environment),
it appears that in DsRed2 the reaction proceeds from a bound state,
where the electron, originating from the HOMO of the chromophore,
is still bound to its closest environmental shell. In mFruits, the
first step of the reaction corresponds to the electron detachment
from the nearest surrounding of the chromophore. The dependence of
the rates on pulse duration and energetic considerations lead us to
the conclusion that little or no energy relaxation takes place between
sequential steps of multiphoton absorption during 100–200 fs.
Careful measurements of the power dependences of the rates supported
by the kinetics simulations with the rate equations of the three-
and four-level systems demonstrate that the empirical noninteger power
exponent can be better explained in terms of saturation of one of
the stepwise one-photon transitions than it can as a result of combination
of parallel process of different order (e.g., three- and four-photon
excitation). The saturation is slight in DsRed2, but it is moderately
strong in mFruits. We also show that the bleaching rates are very
similar in buffer solution and an E. coli cell environment, suggesting purely intramolecular mechanisms of
the A → B step.Some
particular details of the ultrafast photochemistry of this
step can further be suggested. In DsRed2, the third photon absorption
most probably corresponds to the charge-transfer transition from an
excited π* orbital of the anionic chromophore to a nearby positive
amino acid residue (K70). The transient radical state of the chromophore
tends to accept an electron, most probably from the deprotonated E215
amino acid residue, thus promoting the first step of the recently
established decarboxylation reaction[20] that
eventually leads to the cis–trans isomerization
of the chromophore. This latter process is strongly enhanced in the
case of multiphoton excitation, compared to linear excitation of the S1 level, which can be explained by the creation
of more space near the chromophore, rearrangement of the local hydrogen-bonding
network, and redistribution of local electrostatic potential after
decarboxylation reaction. In mFruits, lacking a negative charge at
theE215, theKolbe decarboxylation of another deprotonated residue,
E148, may trigger the cis–trans isomerization
of the chromophore, similar to that in DsRed. In contrast to DsRed2,
the first step of the multiphoton process probably involves the detachment
of an electron from the local electrostatic potential, created mostly
by two positive residues, K70 and R95.The mechanism described
here points to possibilities for improving
the photostability of red FPs by manipulating, through mutagenesis,
the key amino acids participating in multiphoton bleaching. In addition
to K70, K95, E148, and E215, there are other charged amino acids,
including D59, D81, K84, K83, and K163 (the last two are charged in
DsRed2 but are substituted to neutral residues in mFruits), whose
position displacement or substitution may alter the electrostatic
potential near the chromophore and therefore result in a change of
the energetics of the underlying electron-transfer reactions.
Authors: Yurii G Yanushevich; Dmitry B Staroverov; Alexander P Savitsky; Arkady F Fradkov; Nadya G Gurskaya; Maria E Bulina; Konstantin A Lukyanov; Sergey A Lukyanov Journal: FEBS Lett Date: 2002-01-30 Impact factor: 4.124
Authors: Xiaokun Shu; Nathan C Shaner; Corinne A Yarbrough; Roger Y Tsien; S James Remington Journal: Biochemistry Date: 2006-08-15 Impact factor: 3.162
Authors: Kiryl D Piatkevich; Vladimir N Malashkevich; Steven C Almo; Vladislav V Verkhusha Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2010-08-11 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Kiryl D Piatkevich; James Hulit; Oksana M Subach; Bin Wu; Arian Abdulla; Jeffrey E Segall; Vladislav V Verkhusha Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2010-03-08 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: S James Remington; Rebekka M Wachter; Daniel K Yarbrough; Bruce Branchaud; D C Anderson; Karen Kallio; Konstantin A Lukyanov Journal: Biochemistry Date: 2005-01-11 Impact factor: 3.162
Authors: David Huss; Bertrand Benazeraf; Allison Wallingford; Michael Filla; Jennifer Yang; Scott E Fraser; Rusty Lansford Journal: Development Date: 2015-07-24 Impact factor: 6.868
Authors: Rosana S Molina; Jonathan King; Jacob Franklin; Nathan Clack; Christopher McRaven; Vasily Goncharov; Daniel Flickinger; Karel Svoboda; Mikhail Drobizhev; Thomas E Hughes Journal: Biomed Opt Express Date: 2020-11-17 Impact factor: 3.732
Authors: Alexander Mikhaylov; Sophie de Reguardati; Jüri Pahapill; Patrik R Callis; Bern Kohler; Aleksander Rebane Journal: Biomed Opt Express Date: 2018-01-05 Impact factor: 3.732