Filter
Associated Lab
- Aguilera Castrejon Lab (15) Apply Aguilera Castrejon Lab filter
- Ahrens Lab (56) Apply Ahrens Lab filter
- Aso Lab (39) Apply Aso Lab filter
- Baker Lab (38) Apply Baker Lab filter
- Betzig Lab (110) Apply Betzig Lab filter
- Beyene Lab (10) Apply Beyene Lab filter
- Bock Lab (17) Apply Bock Lab filter
- Branson Lab (48) Apply Branson Lab filter
- Card Lab (40) Apply Card Lab filter
- Cardona Lab (63) Apply Cardona Lab filter
- Chklovskii Lab (13) Apply Chklovskii Lab filter
- Clapham Lab (12) 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 (46) Apply Dudman Lab filter
- Eddy/Rivas Lab (30) Apply Eddy/Rivas Lab filter
- Egnor Lab (11) Apply Egnor Lab filter
- Espinosa Medina Lab (16) Apply Espinosa Medina Lab filter
- Feliciano Lab (6) Apply Feliciano Lab filter
- Fetter Lab (41) Apply Fetter Lab filter
- Fitzgerald Lab (28) Apply Fitzgerald Lab filter
- Freeman Lab (15) Apply Freeman Lab filter
- Funke Lab (34) Apply Funke Lab filter
- Gonen Lab (91) Apply Gonen Lab filter
- Grigorieff Lab (62) Apply Grigorieff Lab filter
- Harris Lab (58) Apply Harris Lab filter
- Heberlein Lab (94) Apply Heberlein Lab filter
- Hermundstad Lab (22) Apply Hermundstad Lab filter
- Hess Lab (72) Apply Hess Lab filter
- Ilanges Lab (1) Apply Ilanges Lab filter
- Jayaraman Lab (44) 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 (75) Apply Keller Lab filter
- Koay Lab (16) Apply Koay Lab filter
- Lavis Lab (136) Apply Lavis Lab filter
- Lee (Albert) Lab (34) Apply Lee (Albert) Lab filter
- Leonardo Lab (23) Apply Leonardo Lab filter
- Li Lab (25) Apply Li Lab filter
- Lippincott-Schwartz Lab (161) Apply Lippincott-Schwartz Lab filter
- Liu (Yin) Lab (5) Apply Liu (Yin) Lab filter
- Liu (Zhe) Lab (59) Apply Liu (Zhe) Lab filter
- Looger Lab (137) 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 (4) Apply O'Shea Lab filter
- Otopalik Lab (13) Apply Otopalik Lab filter
- Pachitariu Lab (41) Apply Pachitariu Lab filter
- Pastalkova Lab (18) Apply Pastalkova Lab filter
- Pavlopoulos Lab (19) Apply Pavlopoulos Lab filter
- Pedram Lab (14) Apply Pedram Lab filter
- Podgorski Lab (16) Apply Podgorski Lab filter
- Reiser Lab (49) Apply Reiser Lab filter
- Riddiford Lab (44) Apply Riddiford Lab filter
- Romani Lab (40) Apply Romani Lab filter
- Rubin Lab (139) Apply Rubin Lab filter
- Saalfeld Lab (60) Apply Saalfeld Lab filter
- Satou Lab (16) Apply Satou Lab filter
- Scheffer Lab (36) Apply Scheffer Lab filter
- Schreiter Lab (62) Apply Schreiter Lab filter
- Sgro Lab (20) Apply Sgro Lab filter
- Shroff Lab (23) Apply Shroff Lab filter
- Simpson Lab (23) Apply Simpson Lab filter
- Singer Lab (80) Apply Singer Lab filter
- Spruston Lab (91) Apply Spruston Lab filter
- Stern Lab (152) Apply Stern Lab filter
- Sternson Lab (54) Apply Sternson Lab filter
- Stringer Lab (29) Apply Stringer Lab filter
- Svoboda Lab (135) Apply Svoboda Lab filter
- Tebo Lab (31) Apply Tebo Lab filter
- Tervo Lab (9) Apply Tervo Lab filter
- Tillberg Lab (17) Apply Tillberg Lab filter
- Tjian Lab (64) Apply Tjian Lab filter
- Truman Lab (88) Apply Truman Lab filter
- Turaga Lab (46) Apply Turaga Lab filter
- Turner Lab (35) Apply Turner Lab filter
- Vale Lab (6) Apply Vale Lab filter
- Voigts Lab (2) Apply Voigts Lab filter
- Wang (Meng) Lab (9) Apply Wang (Meng) Lab filter
- Wang (Shaohe) Lab (24) 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 (5) Apply CellMap filter
- COSEM (3) Apply COSEM filter
- Fly Descending Interneuron (10) Apply Fly Descending Interneuron filter
- Fly Functional Connectome (14) Apply Fly Functional Connectome filter
- Fly Olympiad (5) Apply Fly Olympiad filter
- FlyEM (51) Apply FlyEM filter
- FlyLight (46) Apply FlyLight filter
- GENIE (40) Apply GENIE filter
- Integrative Imaging (1) Apply Integrative Imaging filter
- Larval Olympiad (2) Apply Larval Olympiad filter
- MouseLight (16) Apply MouseLight filter
- NeuroSeq (1) Apply NeuroSeq filter
- ThalamoSeq (1) Apply ThalamoSeq filter
- Tool Translation Team (T3) (24) Apply Tool Translation Team (T3) filter
- Transcription Imaging (49) Apply Transcription Imaging filter
Publication Date
- 2024 (145) Apply 2024 filter
- 2023 (175) Apply 2023 filter
- 2022 (192) Apply 2022 filter
- 2021 (193) 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
3924 Publications
Showing 3011-3020 of 3924 resultsAutomatic alignment (registration) of 3D images of adult fruit fly brains is often influenced by the significant displacement of the relative locations of the two optic lobes (OLs) and the center brain (CB). In one of our ongoing efforts to produce a better image alignment pipeline of adult fruit fly brains, we consider separating CB and OLs and align them independently. This paper reports our automatic method to segregate CB and OLs, in particular under conditions where the signal to noise ratio (SNR) is low, the variation of the image intensity is big, and the relative displacement of OLs and CB is substantial. We design an algorithm to find a minimum-cost 3D surface in a 3D image stack to best separate an OL (of one side, either left or right) from CB. This surface is defined as an aggregation of the respective minimum-cost curves detected in each individual 2D image slice. Each curve is defined by a list of control points that best segregate OL and CB. To obtain the locations of these control points, we derive an energy function that includes an image energy term defined by local pixel intensities and two internal energy terms that constrain the curve’s smoothness and length. Gradient descent method is used to optimize this energy function. To improve both the speed and robustness of the method, for each stack, the locations of optimized control points in a slice are taken as the initialization prior for the next slice. We have tested this approach on simulated and real 3D fly brain image stacks and demonstrated that this method can reasonably segregate OLs from CBs despite the aforementioned difficulties.
Tracking crowded cells or other targets in biology is often a challenging task due to poor signal-to-noise ratio, mutual occlusion, large displacements, little discernibility, and the ability of cells to divide. We here present an open source implementation of conservation tracking (Schiegg et al., IEEE international conference on computer vision (ICCV). IEEE, New York, pp 2928-2935, 2013) in the ilastik software framework. This robust tracking-by-assignment algorithm explicitly makes allowance for false positive detections, undersegmentation, and cell division. We give an overview over the underlying algorithm and parameters, and explain the use for a light sheet microscopy sequence of a Drosophila embryo. Equipped with this knowledge, users will be able to track targets of interest in their own data.
A ubiquitous feature of the vertebrate anatomy is the segregation of the brain into white and gray matter. Assuming that evolution maximized brain functionality, what is the reason for such segregation? To answer this question, we posit that brain functionality requires high interconnectivity and short conduction delays. Based on this assumption we searched for the optimal brain architecture by comparing different candidate designs. We found that the optimal design depends on the number of neurons, interneuronal connectivity, and axon diameter. In particular, the requirement to connect neurons with many fast axons drives the segregation of the brain into white and gray matter. These results provide a possible explanation for the structure of various regions of the vertebrate brain, such as the mammalian neocortex and neostriatum, the avian telencephalon, and the spinal cord.
During mitosis in Saccharomyces cerevisiae, senescence factors such as extrachromosomal ribosomal DNA circles (ERCs) are retained in the mother cell and excluded from the bud/daughter cell. Shcheprova et al. proposed a model suggesting segregation of ERCs through their association with nuclear pore complexes (NPCs) and retention of preexisting NPCs in the mother cell during mitosis. However, this model is inconsistent with previous data and we demonstrate here that NPCs do efficiently migrate from the mother into the bud. Therefore, binding to NPCs does not seem to explain the retention of ERCs in the mother cell.
Small molecules are important tools to measure and modulate intracellular signaling pathways. A longstanding limitation for using chemical compounds in complex tissues has been the inability to target bioactive small molecules to a specific cell class. Here, we describe a generalizable esterase-ester pair capable of targeted delivery of small molecules to living cells and tissue with cellular specificity. We used fluorogenic molecules to rapidly identify a small ester masking motif that is stable to endogenous esterases, but is efficiently removed by an exogenous esterase. This strategy allows facile targeting of dyes and drugs in complex biological environments to label specific cell types, illuminate gap junction connectivity, and pharmacologically perturb distinct subsets of cells. We expect this approach to have general utility for the specific delivery of many small molecules to defined cellular populations.
Locomotor systems generate diverse motor patterns to produce the movements underlying behavior, requiring that motor neurons be recruited at various phases of the locomotor cycle. Reciprocal inhibition produces alternating motor patterns; however, the mechanisms that generate other phasic relationships between intrasegmental motor pools are unknown. Here, we investigate one such motor pattern in the Drosophila larva, using a multidisciplinary approach including electrophysiology and ssTEM-based circuit reconstruction. We find that two motor pools that are sequentially recruited during locomotion have identical excitable properties. In contrast, they receive input from divergent premotor circuits. We find that this motor pattern is not orchestrated by differential excitatory input but by a GABAergic interneuron acting as a delay line to the later-recruited motor pool. Our findings show how a motor pattern is generated as a function of the modular organization of locomotor networks through segregation of inhibition, a potentially general mechanism for sequential motor patterns.
Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are the most prescribed treatment for individuals experiencing major depressive disorder (MDD). The therapeutic mechanisms that take place before, during, or after SSRIs bind the serotonin transporter (SERT) are poorly understood, partially because no studies exist of the cellular and subcellular pharmacokinetic properties of SSRIs in living cells. We studied escitalopram and fluoxetine using new intensity- based drug-sensing fluorescent reporters (“iDrugSnFRs”) targeted to the plasma membrane (PM), cytoplasm, or endoplasmic reticulum (ER) of cultured neurons and mammalian cell lines. We also employed chemical detection of drug within cells and phospholipid membranes. The drugs attain equilibrium in neuronal cytoplasm and ER, at approximately the same concentration as the externally applied solution, with time constants of a few s (escitalopram) or 200-300 s (fluoxetine). Simultaneously, the drugs accumulate within lipid membranes by ≥ 18-fold (escitalopram) or 180-fold (fluoxetine), and possibly by much larger factors. Both drugs leave cytoplasm, lumen, and membranes just as quickly during washout. We synthesized membrane-impermeant quaternary amine derivatives of the two SSRIs. The quaternary derivatives are substantially excluded from membrane, cytoplasm, and ER for > 2.4 h. They inhibit SERT transport-associated currents 6- or 11-fold less potently than the SSRIs (escitalopram or fluoxetine derivative, respectively), providing useful probes for distinguishing compartmentalized SSRI effects. Although our measurements are orders of magnitude faster than the “therapeutic lag” of SSRIs, these data suggest that SSRI-SERT interactions within organelles or membranes may play roles during either the therapeutic effects or the “antidepressant discontinuation syndrome”.
Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are the most prescribed treatment for individuals experiencing major depressive disorder (MDD). The therapeutic mechanisms that take place before, during, or after SSRIs bind the serotonin transporter (SERT) are poorly understood, partially because no studies exist of the cellular and subcellular pharmacokinetic properties of SSRIs in living cells. We studied escitalopram and fluoxetine using new intensity-based drug-sensing fluorescent reporters ("iDrugSnFRs") targeted to the plasma membrane (PM), cytoplasm, or endoplasmic reticulum (ER) of cultured neurons and mammalian cell lines. We also employed chemical detection of drug within cells and phospholipid membranes. The drugs attain equilibrium in neuronal cytoplasm and ER, at approximately the same concentration as the externally applied solution, with time constants of a few s (escitalopram) or 200-300 s (fluoxetine). Simultaneously, the drugs accumulate within lipid membranes by ≥ 18-fold (escitalopram) or 180-fold (fluoxetine), and possibly by much larger factors. Both drugs leave cytoplasm, lumen, and membranes just as quickly during washout. We synthesized membrane-impermeant quaternary amine derivatives of the two SSRIs. The quaternary derivatives are substantially excluded from membrane, cytoplasm, and ER for > 2.4 h. They inhibit SERT transport-associated currents 6- or 11-fold less potently than the SSRIs (escitalopram or fluoxetine derivative, respectively), providing useful probes for distinguishing compartmentalized SSRI effects. Although our measurements are orders of magnitude faster than the "therapeutic lag" of SSRIs, these data suggest that SSRI-SERT interactions within organelles or membranes may play roles during either the therapeutic effects or the "antidepressant discontinuation syndrome".Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors stabilize mood in several disorders. In general, these drugs bind to the serotonin (5-hydroxytryptamine) transporter (SERT), which clears serotonin from CNS and peripheral tissues. SERT ligands are effective and relatively safe; primary care practitioners often prescribe them. However, they have several side effects and require 2 to 6 weeks of continuous administration until they act effectively. How they work remains perplexing, contrasting with earlier assumptions that the therapeutic mechanism involves SERT inhibition followed by increased extracellular serotonin levels. This study establishes that two SERT ligands, fluoxetine and escitalopram, enter neurons within minutes, while simultaneously accumulating in many membranes. Such knowledge will motivate future research, hopefully revealing where and how SERT ligands "engage" their therapeutic target(s).
Fluorescence microscopy and fluorescent protein (FP)-tagged GLUT4 molecule have been great tools to characterize GLUT4 localization and dynamics inside the cell. However, it was difficult to distinguish GLUT4 storage vesicles (GSVs) from other intracellular compartments containing GLUT4 in live cells. Here, we describe the use of IRAP-pHluorin and total internal reflection fluorescence (TIRF) microscopy to selectively visualize GSVs and Rab proteins that associate with GSVs. This assay is also valuable to further defining GSV identity by unraveling other GSV-associated proteins.