Filter
Associated Lab
- Aguilera Castrejon Lab (16) Apply Aguilera Castrejon Lab filter
- Ahrens Lab (64) Apply Ahrens Lab filter
- Aso Lab (40) Apply Aso Lab filter
- Baker Lab (38) Apply Baker Lab filter
- Betzig Lab (113) Apply Betzig Lab filter
- Beyene Lab (13) Apply Beyene Lab filter
- Bock Lab (17) Apply Bock Lab filter
- Branson Lab (52) Apply Branson Lab filter
- Card Lab (42) Apply Card Lab filter
- Cardona Lab (64) Apply Cardona Lab filter
- Chklovskii Lab (13) Apply Chklovskii Lab filter
- Clapham Lab (15) Apply Clapham Lab filter
- Cui Lab (19) Apply Cui Lab filter
- Darshan Lab (12) Apply Darshan Lab filter
- Dennis Lab (1) Apply Dennis Lab filter
- Dickson Lab (46) Apply Dickson Lab filter
- Druckmann Lab (25) Apply Druckmann Lab filter
- Dudman Lab (50) Apply Dudman Lab filter
- Eddy/Rivas Lab (30) Apply Eddy/Rivas Lab filter
- Egnor Lab (11) Apply Egnor Lab filter
- Espinosa Medina Lab (19) Apply Espinosa Medina Lab filter
- Feliciano Lab (7) Apply Feliciano Lab filter
- Fetter Lab (41) Apply Fetter Lab filter
- Fitzgerald Lab (29) Apply Fitzgerald Lab filter
- Freeman Lab (15) Apply Freeman Lab filter
- Funke Lab (38) Apply Funke Lab filter
- Gonen Lab (91) Apply Gonen Lab filter
- Grigorieff Lab (62) Apply Grigorieff Lab filter
- Harris Lab (63) Apply Harris Lab filter
- Heberlein Lab (94) Apply Heberlein Lab filter
- Hermundstad Lab (26) Apply Hermundstad Lab filter
- Hess Lab (77) Apply Hess Lab filter
- Ilanges Lab (2) Apply Ilanges Lab filter
- Jayaraman Lab (46) Apply Jayaraman Lab filter
- Ji Lab (33) Apply Ji Lab filter
- Johnson Lab (6) Apply Johnson Lab filter
- Kainmueller Lab (19) Apply Kainmueller Lab filter
- Karpova Lab (14) Apply Karpova Lab filter
- Keleman Lab (13) Apply Keleman Lab filter
- Keller Lab (76) Apply Keller Lab filter
- Koay Lab (18) Apply Koay Lab filter
- Lavis Lab (149) Apply Lavis Lab filter
- Lee (Albert) Lab (34) Apply Lee (Albert) Lab filter
- Leonardo Lab (23) Apply Leonardo Lab filter
- Li Lab (28) Apply Li Lab filter
- Lippincott-Schwartz Lab (169) Apply Lippincott-Schwartz Lab filter
- Liu (Yin) Lab (6) Apply Liu (Yin) Lab filter
- Liu (Zhe) Lab (63) Apply Liu (Zhe) Lab filter
- Looger Lab (138) Apply Looger Lab filter
- Magee Lab (49) Apply Magee Lab filter
- Menon Lab (18) Apply Menon Lab filter
- Murphy Lab (13) Apply Murphy Lab filter
- O'Shea Lab (7) Apply O'Shea Lab filter
- Otopalik Lab (13) Apply Otopalik Lab filter
- Pachitariu Lab (48) Apply Pachitariu Lab filter
- Pastalkova Lab (18) Apply Pastalkova Lab filter
- Pavlopoulos Lab (19) Apply Pavlopoulos Lab filter
- Pedram Lab (15) Apply Pedram Lab filter
- Podgorski Lab (16) Apply Podgorski Lab filter
- Reiser Lab (51) Apply Reiser Lab filter
- Riddiford Lab (44) Apply Riddiford Lab filter
- Romani Lab (43) Apply Romani Lab filter
- Rubin Lab (143) Apply Rubin Lab filter
- Saalfeld Lab (63) Apply Saalfeld Lab filter
- Satou Lab (16) Apply Satou Lab filter
- Scheffer Lab (36) Apply Scheffer Lab filter
- Schreiter Lab (67) Apply Schreiter Lab filter
- Sgro Lab (21) Apply Sgro Lab filter
- Shroff Lab (31) Apply Shroff Lab filter
- Simpson Lab (23) Apply Simpson Lab filter
- Singer Lab (80) Apply Singer Lab filter
- Spruston Lab (93) Apply Spruston Lab filter
- Stern Lab (156) Apply Stern Lab filter
- Sternson Lab (54) Apply Sternson Lab filter
- Stringer Lab (35) Apply Stringer Lab filter
- Svoboda Lab (135) Apply Svoboda Lab filter
- Tebo Lab (33) Apply Tebo Lab filter
- Tervo Lab (9) Apply Tervo Lab filter
- Tillberg Lab (21) Apply Tillberg Lab filter
- Tjian Lab (64) Apply Tjian Lab filter
- Truman Lab (88) Apply Truman Lab filter
- Turaga Lab (51) Apply Turaga Lab filter
- Turner Lab (38) Apply Turner Lab filter
- Vale Lab (7) Apply Vale Lab filter
- Voigts Lab (3) Apply Voigts Lab filter
- Wang (Meng) Lab (21) Apply Wang (Meng) Lab filter
- Wang (Shaohe) Lab (25) Apply Wang (Shaohe) Lab filter
- Wu Lab (9) Apply Wu Lab filter
- Zlatic Lab (28) Apply Zlatic Lab filter
- Zuker Lab (25) Apply Zuker Lab filter
Associated Project Team
- CellMap (12) Apply CellMap filter
- COSEM (3) Apply COSEM filter
- FIB-SEM Technology (3) Apply FIB-SEM Technology filter
- Fly Descending Interneuron (11) Apply Fly Descending Interneuron filter
- Fly Functional Connectome (14) Apply Fly Functional Connectome filter
- Fly Olympiad (5) Apply Fly Olympiad filter
- FlyEM (53) Apply FlyEM filter
- FlyLight (49) Apply FlyLight filter
- GENIE (46) Apply GENIE filter
- Integrative Imaging (4) Apply Integrative Imaging filter
- Larval Olympiad (2) Apply Larval Olympiad filter
- MouseLight (18) Apply MouseLight filter
- NeuroSeq (1) Apply NeuroSeq filter
- ThalamoSeq (1) Apply ThalamoSeq filter
- Tool Translation Team (T3) (26) Apply Tool Translation Team (T3) filter
- Transcription Imaging (49) Apply Transcription Imaging filter
Publication Date
- 2025 (119) Apply 2025 filter
- 2024 (217) Apply 2024 filter
- 2023 (160) Apply 2023 filter
- 2022 (193) Apply 2022 filter
- 2021 (194) Apply 2021 filter
- 2020 (196) Apply 2020 filter
- 2019 (202) Apply 2019 filter
- 2018 (232) Apply 2018 filter
- 2017 (217) Apply 2017 filter
- 2016 (209) Apply 2016 filter
- 2015 (252) Apply 2015 filter
- 2014 (236) Apply 2014 filter
- 2013 (194) Apply 2013 filter
- 2012 (190) Apply 2012 filter
- 2011 (190) Apply 2011 filter
- 2010 (161) Apply 2010 filter
- 2009 (158) Apply 2009 filter
- 2008 (140) Apply 2008 filter
- 2007 (106) Apply 2007 filter
- 2006 (92) Apply 2006 filter
- 2005 (67) Apply 2005 filter
- 2004 (57) Apply 2004 filter
- 2003 (58) Apply 2003 filter
- 2002 (39) Apply 2002 filter
- 2001 (28) Apply 2001 filter
- 2000 (29) Apply 2000 filter
- 1999 (14) Apply 1999 filter
- 1998 (18) Apply 1998 filter
- 1997 (16) Apply 1997 filter
- 1996 (10) Apply 1996 filter
- 1995 (18) Apply 1995 filter
- 1994 (12) Apply 1994 filter
- 1993 (10) Apply 1993 filter
- 1992 (6) Apply 1992 filter
- 1991 (11) Apply 1991 filter
- 1990 (11) Apply 1990 filter
- 1989 (6) Apply 1989 filter
- 1988 (1) Apply 1988 filter
- 1987 (7) Apply 1987 filter
- 1986 (4) Apply 1986 filter
- 1985 (5) Apply 1985 filter
- 1984 (2) Apply 1984 filter
- 1983 (2) Apply 1983 filter
- 1982 (3) Apply 1982 filter
- 1981 (3) Apply 1981 filter
- 1980 (1) Apply 1980 filter
- 1979 (1) Apply 1979 filter
- 1976 (2) Apply 1976 filter
- 1973 (1) Apply 1973 filter
- 1970 (1) Apply 1970 filter
- 1967 (1) Apply 1967 filter
Type of Publication
4102 Publications
Showing 3471-3480 of 4102 resultsVisualization of specific molecules and their interactions in real time and space is essential to delineate how cellular dynamics and the signaling circuit are orchestrated. Spatial regulation of conformational dynamics and structural plasticity of protein interactions is required to rewire signaling circuitry in response to extracellular cues. We introduce a method for optically imaging intracellular protein interactions at nanometer spatial resolution in live cells, using photoactivatable complementary fluorescent (PACF) proteins. Subsets of complementary fluorescent protein molecules were activated, localized, and then bleached; this was followed by the assembly of superresolution images from aggregate position of sum interactive molecules. Using PACF, we obtained precise localization of dynamic microtubule plus-end hub protein EB1 dimers and their distinct distributions at the leading edges and in the cell bodies of migrating cells. We further delineated the structure-function relationship of EB1 by generating EB1-PACF dimers (EB1(wt):EB1(wt), EB1(wt):EB1(mt), and EB1(mt):EB1(mt)) and imaging their precise localizations in culture cells. Surprisingly, our analyses revealed critical role of a previously uncharacterized EB1 linker region in tracking microtubule plus ends in live cells. Thus PACF provides a unique approach to delineating spatial dynamics of homo- or heterodimerized proteins at the nanometer scale and establishes a platform to report the precise regulation of protein interactions in space and time in live cells.
Superresolution imaging is a rapidly emerging new field of microscopy that dramatically improves the spatial resolution of light microscopy by over an order of magnitude (approximately 10-20-nm resolution), allowing biological processes to be described at the molecular scale. Here, we discuss a form of superresolution microscopy based on the controlled activation and sampling of sparse subsets of photoconvertible fluorescent molecules. In this single-molecule-based imaging approach, a wide variety of probes have proved valuable, ranging from genetically encodable photoactivatable fluorescent proteins to photoswitchable cyanine dyes. These have been used in diverse applications of superresolution imaging: from three-dimensional, multicolor molecule localization to tracking of nanometric structures and molecules in living cells. Single-molecule-based superresolution imaging thus offers exciting possibilities for obtaining molecular-scale information on biological events occurring at variable timescales.
For more than 100 years, the ultimate resolution of a light microscope (∼ 200 nm) has been constrained by the fundamental physical phenomenon of diffraction, as described by Ernst Abbe in 1873. While this limitation is just as applicable to today's light microscopes, it is the combination of high-end optics, clever methods of sample illumination, and computational techniques that has enabled researchers to access information at an order of magnitude greater resolution than once thought possible. This combination, broadly termed superresolution microscopy, has been increasingly practical for many labs to implement from both a hardware and software standpoint, but, as with many cutting-edge techniques, it also comes with limitations. One of the current drawbacks to superresolution microscopy is the limited number of probes and conditions that have been suitable for imaging. Here, a technique termed bleaching/blinking-assisted localization microscopy (BaLM) makes use of the inherent blinking and bleaching properties of almost all fluorophores as a means to generate superresolution images.
Arrays of actin filaments (F-actin) near the apical surface of epithelial cells (medioapical arrays) contribute to apical constriction and morphogenesis throughout phylogeny. Here, superresolution approaches (grazing incidence structured illumination, GI-SIM, and lattice light sheet, LLSM) microscopy resolve individual, fluorescently labeled F-actin and bipolar myosin filaments that drive amnioserosa cell shape changes during dorsal closure in . In expanded cells, F-actin and myosin form loose, apically domed meshworks at the plasma membrane. The arrays condense as cells contract, drawing the domes into the plane of the junctional belts. As condensation continues, individual filaments are no longer uniformly apparent. As cells expand, arrays of actomyosin are again resolved-some F-actin turnover likely occurs, but a large fraction of existing filaments rearrange. In morphologically isotropic cells, actin filaments are randomly oriented and during contraction are drawn together but remain essentially randomly oriented. In anisotropic cells, largely parallel actin filaments are drawn closer to one another. Our images offer unparalleled resolution of F-actin in embryonic tissue, show that medioapical arrays are tightly apposed to the plasma membrane and are continuous with meshworks of lamellar F-actin. Medioapical arrays thereby constitute modified cell cortex. In concert with other tagged array components, superresolution imaging of live specimens will offer new understanding of cortical architecture and function.
We address the problem of labeling individual datapoints given some knowledge about (small) subsets or groups of them. The knowledge we have for a group is the likelihood value for each group member to satisfy a certain model. This problem is equivalent to hypergraph labeling problem where each datapoint corresponds to a node and the each subset correspond to a hyperedge with likelihood value as its weight. We propose a novel method to model the label dependence using an Undirected Graphical Model and reduce the problem of hypergraph labeling into an inference problem. This paper describes the structure and necessary components of such model and proposes useful cost functions. We discuss the behavior of proposed algorithm with different forms of the cost functions, identify suitable algorithms for inference and analyze required properties when it is theoretically guaranteed to have exact solution. Examples of several real world problems are shown as applications of the proposed method.
Convolutional networks have achieved a great deal of success in high-level vision problems such as object recognition. Here we show that they can also be used as a general method for low-level image processing. As an example of our approach, convolutional networks are trained using gradient learning to solve the problem of restoring noisy or degraded images. For our training data, we have used electron microscopic images of neural circuitry with ground truth restorations provided by human experts. On this dataset, Markov random field (MRF), conditional random field (CRF), and anisotropic diffusion algorithms perform about the same as simple thresholding, but superior performance is obtained with a convolutional network containing over 34,000 adjustable parameters. When restored by this convolutional network, the images are clean enough to be used for segmentation, whereas the other approaches fail in this respect. We do not believe that convolutional networks are fundamentally superior to MRFs as a representation for image processing algorithms. On the contrary, the two approaches are closely related. But in practice, it is possible to train complex convolutional networks, while even simple MRF models are hindered by problems with Bayesian learning and inference procedures. Our results suggest that high model complexity is the single most important factor for good performance, and this is possible with convolutional networks.
Sum-frequency vibrational spectroscopy was used to obtain the first surface vibrational spectra of shear-deposited highly oriented poly(tetrafluoroethylene) (PTFE, Teflon) thin films. The surface PTFE chains appeared to lie along the shearing direction. Vibrational modes observed at 1142 and 1204 cm-1 were found to have the E1 symmetry, in support of some earlier analysis in the long-lasting controversy over the assignment of these modes.
BACKGROUND: Previous studies suggest that mechanical feedback could coordinate morphogenetic events in embryos. Furthermore, embryonic tissues have complex structure and composition and undergo large deformations during morphogenesis. Hence we expect highly non-linear and loading-rate dependent tissue mechanical properties in embryos. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We used micro-aspiration to test whether a simple linear viscoelastic model was sufficient to describe the mechanical behavior of gastrula stage Xenopus laevis embryonic tissue in vivo. We tested whether these embryonic tissues change their mechanical properties in response to mechanical stimuli but found no evidence of changes in the viscoelastic properties of the tissue in response to stress or stress application rate. We used this model to test hypotheses about the pattern of force generation during electrically induced tissue contractions. The dependence of contractions on suction pressure was most consistent with apical tension, and was inconsistent with isotropic contraction. Finally, stiffer clutches generated stronger contractions, suggesting that force generation and stiffness may be coupled in the embryo. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: The mechanical behavior of a complex, active embryonic tissue can be surprisingly well described by a simple linear viscoelastic model with power law creep compliance, even at high deformations. We found no evidence of mechanical feedback in this system. Together these results show that very simple mechanical models can be useful in describing embryo mechanics.