• We are sorry, but NCBI web applications do not support your browser and may not function properly. More information
Logo of hfspjLink to Publisher's site
HFSP J. Aug 2009; 3(4): 255–264.
Published online May 22, 2009. doi:  10.2976/1.3132954
PMCID: PMC2799987

Photochemical tools to study dynamic biological processes


Light-responsive biologically active compounds offer the possibility to study the dynamics of biological processes. Phototriggers and photoswitches have been designed, providing the capability to rapidly cause the initiation of wide range of dynamic biological phenomena. We will discuss, in this article, recent developments in the field of light-triggered chemical tools, specially how two-photon excitation, “caged” fluorophores, and the photoregulation of protein activities in combination with time-resolved x-ray techniques should break new grounds in the understanding of dynamic biological processes.

A prerequisite to study the dynamics of biological processes is to achieve a spatiotemporal control of the studied phenomenon. This requires putting this process under the control of a conditional trigger. Light might be an ideal orthogonal external trigger since, if judiciously selected, it will not affect the biological environment.

Phototriggers and photoswitches provide the capability to rapidly cause the initiation of a wide range of dynamic biological processes (Fig. (Fig.1).1). The first strategy refers to caged compounds that release biological effectors after photolysis (Corrie and Trentham, 1993; Adams and Tsien, 1993; Marriott, 1998; Pelliccioli and Wirz, 2002; Goeldner, 2005; Mayer and Heckel, 2006; Ellis-Davies et al., 2007). The second refers to synthetic photochromic systems (a “photoswitch” molecule), which conditionally activate a protein by attaching a photoisomerizable ligand (Kramer et al., 2005, Volgraf et al., 2006; Gorostiza and Isacoff, 2008; Sakata et al., 2005).

Figure 1
Photoregulation of functional proteins using a phototrigger or a photoswitch.

Caged compounds are biological effectors, which are rendered biologically inert (or caged) by chemical modification with a photoremovable protecting group (Adams and Tsien, 1993; Marriott, 1998; Bochet et al., 2002; Pelliccioli and Wirz, 2002) (Fig. (Fig.2).2). Illumination results in a localized concentration jump of the biological active effecter, turning on the biological process. Ideally, the photoremovable protecting groups should be water soluble, stable to hydrolysis, their photodeprotection should take a single reaction pathway and occur with a high efficiency (high product quantum yields together with high absorbance), the photolytic side-product(s) should not interfere with the ongoing photolysis and should be biologically inert, and finally the release of the biological effector should be fast, in agreement with the time scale of the analyzed biological event.

Figure 2
Several photolabile groups used for the caging of biologically active compounds (LG=leaving group).

The idea of using light to unleash biologically active compounds from inert precursors (uncaging) was introduced over 30 years ago, using o-NB [o-nitrobenzyl] (Fig. (Fig.2)2) esters of cAMP (Engels and Schlaeger, 1977) or ATP (Kaplan et al., 1978) to induce, through the action of light, rapid enzyme activation or ion channels activities. The o-nitrobenzyl photoremovable derivatives were by far the mostly developed series, even though their overall properties might not be optimal, in particular in the near-UV and visible range.

This concept was applied to investigate neurological processes using caged neurotransmitters (Callaway and Yuste, 2002; Hess, 2005; Gillespie et al., 2005), in cell biology using caged second messengers and cellular signaling molecules (Adams et al., 1988; Ellis-Davies and Kaplan, 1994; Hagen et al., 2005; Pavlos et al., 2005; Walker et al., 1987; Dinkel and Schultz, 2003; Li et al., 1998), in gene expressions using caged small molecule inducers (Cambridge, 2005) and caged RNA (Ando et al., 2001; Mikat and Heckel, 2007), and in structural biology by combining caged compounds with time-resolved analytical techniques (IR, x-ray, etc.) (Barth, 2005; Bourgeois and Royant, 2005; Bourgeois and Weik, 2005). Recent efforts prompted the development of photoremovable groups that have increased photochemical efficiencies in the near-UV (Papageorgiou, et al., 2005; Specht et al., 2006; Shembekar et al., 2007) and visible range (Hagen et al., 2008) and/or displaying faster photorelease kinetics (Furuta, 2005; Givens and Yousef, 2005; Hagen et al., 2008) to allow more sophisticated applications.

On the other hand, precise light-induced protein activity regulation has recently been performed using synthetic optical switches (Kramer et al., 2005, Volgraf et al., 2006; Gorostiza and Isacoff, 2008, Sakata et al., 2005). Therefore, the protein of interest was modified by attaching photoisomerizable ligands. Theses ligands tethered via an optical switch can function in two ways. They can conditionally block the active site of an enzyme or the pore of a channel or they can reversibly present ligand to a protein binding site and conditionally trigger the protein activity (Fig. (Fig.11).

All those cutting edge applications of the concept of “caging” groups have recently been thoroughly reviewed (Pelliccioli and Wirz, 2002; Goeldner and Givens, 2005; Mayer and Heckel, 2006; Ellis-Davies et al., 2007; Lee et al., 2009). Therefore we will focus the discussion, in Secs. 1, 2, 3, on recent developments and applications in this field: such as two-photon excitation process, caged fluorophores, and the photoregulation of protein activities in combination with time-resolved x-ray techniques. Two-photon excitation permits a tremendous increase in the spatial resolution of the released biomolecule, including fluorescent signals associated with cellular proteins to investigate events in living cells, while the last approach should allow new insights into the understanding of protein dynamics.


The challenging problems encountered in life sciences, and in particular in neurosciences, need new powerful techniques to trigger and record cellular signals. Indeed, there is a strong demand for new methods and techniques with an increased spatiotemporal resolution and/or allowing complex patterned illuminations (Dedecker et al., 2007; Papagiakoumou et al., 2008; Lutz et al., 2008). Two-photon excitation can intrinsically provide such a fine spatiotemporal control, for example, during a photochemical reaction (photolabile protecting groups: uncaging) (Ellis-Davies, 2007) or fluorescence (imaging) (Denk et al., 1990; Zipfel et al., 2003). Indeed, a molecule can reach an excited state not only by the absorption of a single photon of energy E=hv, but also by the simultaneous absorption of two photons of half energy E=hv/2 (Fig. (Fig.3a).3a). The interaction between the electric field of the excitation light (E) and the electronic cloud of a molecule induces a charge redistribution so that the molecular dipole moment (μ) is modified. The resulting μ is usually described as a development of increasing powers of the electric field E, as described in Eq. 1 (Terenziani et al., 2008). The static dipolar moment of the molecule is μ0, and αE represents the effects related to the polarizability (linear optical properties). The terms β[center dot]E2 and γ[center dot]E3 lead to the first and second order molecular nonlinear optical properties, while β and γ are, respectively, the first order and second order molecular hyperpolarizabilities,


The cubic term γ[center dot]E3 deals in particular with the two-photon absorption phenomenon. The excitation probability of a molecule (P) is in this case dependent of the squared light intensity [Eq. 2]


This quadratic dependence of P versus I is crucial for the spatial localization of this nonlinear optical phenomenon. The excitation will occur only where the light intensity is maximum (Fig. (Fig.3b),3b), typically at the focal point of an optical system and only with a pulsed laser as excitation source (yielding to spatial and temporal compression of photons by a lens system and a pulsed laser, respectively). The parameter σ2 is called “two-photon absorption cross section”; it indicates the efficiency of the two-photon absorption by a molecule, and is generally expressed in Göppert-Mayer unit (GM) in honor of Maria Göppert-Mayer who predicted theoretically this phenomenon in 1931 (Göppert-Mayer, 1931) (1 GM=10−50 cm4 s photon−1 molecule−1). The σ2 is directly correlated with the imaginary part of the second order hyperpolarizability γ (Andraud et al., 2000). It is important to note that some physicists symbolize this parameter as δ (Lee et al., 2005; Albota et al., 1998), notation also adopted for uncaging. In addition to an intrinsic fine 3D localization of the excitation, this nonlinear process is obtained with low energy wavelength (typically with IR light for molecules which absorb classically in the UV). This induces limited phototoxicity for cells, tissues, or organs, and an increased penetration depth (tissues transparency windows from 700 to 1,000 nm), for example, in highly scattering tissues such as brain slices (Helmchen and Denk, 2005; Zipfel et al., 2003). This type of excitation shows an increasing interest, in particular, in the photorelease of active small molecules (uncaging). Nevertheless, efficient photoremovable groups used upon one-photon excitation are rarely efficient upon two-photon processes, and exhibit low two-photon uncaging action cross sections (δu[center dot]Φu), typically <0.1 GM (Goeldner, 2005). This value δu[center dot]Φu is matching to ε[center dot]Φ in one-photon experiments, taking into account both the efficiencies of the excitation and of the photochemical reaction. Thus, these classical cages cannot be used in new patterned illuminating systems, such as holographic photolysis microscopes or two-photon macrophotolysis. The laser power needed for two-photon uncaging would be too high, leading to cellular damages, as endogenous chromophores (such NAD(P)H, flavins, and porphyrinic systems) could also absorb and generate reactive oxygen species, thus inducing an oxidative stress. (Kiskin et al., 2002). Collaborative efforts between chemists, physicists, and biologists have led to the design and the synthesis of new photolabile protecting groups with increased two-photon uncaging action cross sections. The molecular engineering of the two-photon uncaging cross sections was performed on classical platforms such as MNI [4-methoxy-7-nitroindolinyl], o-NB, or DMNPB [3-(4,5-dimethoxy-2-nitrophenyl)-2-butyl] (Fig. (Fig.2).2). Classical strategies known in optimization of organic molecules for nonlinear optics were used. At this point, it is important to remember that the two-photon absorption process occurs through second order nonlinear optical properties. This is of crucial importance for the molecular engineering of new systems. Contrary to first order nonlinear optical properties (such as second harmonic generation), to be active in two-photon absorption, molecules do not need to be noncentrosymmetric. The simplest active systems upon two-photon excitation are linear (or one-dimensional) and consist in a more or less rigid conjugated central core surrounded by conjugated systems bearing electron withdrawing or donating groups. The modifications used to improve two-photon absorption are classically the lengthening of the conjugated system and the increase of the electron donating or withdrawing ability of one part of the molecular system (He et al., 2008). These modifications have led to new caging platforms with increased two-photon uncaging cross sections, such as CDNI [4-carboxymethoxy-5,7-dinitroindolinyl] (Fig. (Fig.3c)3c) (Ellis-Davies et al., 2007), modified nitrobenzyls (Aujard et al., 2006) or nitrophenethyl derivatives (Gug et al., 2008a). Recently, symmetrical architectures (Fig. (Fig.3c)3c) were described with ultra-efficient glutamate two-photon uncaging cross section, over 3 GM within a large wavelength range (750–820 nm) in vitro (Gug et al., 2008b).

Figure 3
(a) Two-photon versus one-photon processes.

These new efficient two-photon photolabile protecting groups can be conjugated to various biologically active molecules, such as neurotransmitters, gene effectors, or combined to photocleavable ions chelators for calcium uncaging for example (Ellis-Davies, 2007; Nikolenko et al., 2007; Neveu et al., 2008; Gug et al., 2008a, 2008b). They should play in the next years a critical role to understand the neuronal circuitry in brain slices and to study synaptic integration. They would also permit experiments in small living animals, since the two-photon excitation allows either an increase in depth penetration of the uncaging signal (over 750 μm) or a decrease in the excitation power compared with classical cages developed for one-photon applications (Kerr and Denk, 2008; Helmchen and Denk, 2005; Lutz et al., 2008; Papagiakoumou et al., 2008).

In addition, two-photon excitations would be of great interest as it can induce the generation of reactive oxygen species in combination with a sensitizer, which could be used in FALI (fluorophore assisted light inactivation of proteins), with an increased spatiotemporal control known as microFALI (Tanabe et al., 2005; Jacobson et al., 2008).

Another interesting outcome for tracking molecular and cellular dynamics is fluorophore uncaging of fluorescently labeled proteins. The development of new caged fluorophores specifically engineered for two-photon excitation represents again a crucial issue. They would allow new development in emerging microscopies with nanometer resolution, such as PALM (photoactivated localization microscopy), which takes advantage of the intrinsic 3D resolution of the two-photon excitation (2P-PALM) (Hess et al., 2006; Folling et al., 2008, Gould et al., 2009).


Since the introduction of the green fluorescent protein as a genetically encoded fluorophore 15 years ago (Chalfie et al., 1994), AFPs (autofluorescent proteins) have been employed by a plethora of researchers in both in vivo and in vitro applications (Chudakov et al., 2005). Genetically encoded PAFPs (“photoactivatable” fluorescent proteins) make up a small category of fluorescent proteins (Lukyanov et al., 2005) but allow more sophisticated use over AFPs (Hell, 2007). The fluorescence characteristics of photoactivatable proteins can be controlled by irradiation at a specific wavelength, intensity, and duration. This provides unique possibilities for the optical labeling and tracking of living cells, organelles, and intramolecular molecules in a spatiotemporal manner (Lippincott-Schwartz and Patterson, 2008). But all those genetically encoded fluorescent proteins have two intrinsic limitations, especially for trafficking studies, first their big size and a restricted number of fluorophores (Eisenstein, 2006), which do not necessarily display the “best” photophysical properties in terms of brightness and stability. To overcome these limitations the specific labeling of fusion proteins with synthetic small molecule photoactivated fluorophores (also called caged fluorophores) has been developed.

The general strategy in masking fluorescence is to perturb the electronic structure by attachment of the photoremovable group to render the molecule either nonfluorescent or very weakly so. Photoactivation removes the protecting group and abruptly switches on the fluorescence of parental dyes. Desirable properties for caged fluorophores include fast release of the fluorophore and a large enhancement of the fluorescence in response to brief irradiation, the fluorophore being selected for its photophysical properties: high brightness and weak photobleaching at selected wavelengths. More recently, the fluorophore formation can result from a photochemically induced intramolecular rearrangement of a nonfluorescent precursor, creating the fluorophore in situ (Gagey et al., 2007). Caged fluorophores initially described on fluorescein and rhodamin derivatives (Theriot and Mitchison, 1991; Ottl et al., 1998) have been reviewed (Mitchison et al., 1998) and prompted innovative cell biology applications (Theriot and Mitchison, 1991). Subsequently, 7-hydroxy coumarin derivatives were caged as o-nitrobenzyl ether derivatives (Zhao et al., 2004). These molecules allowed a 200-fold fluorescence enhancement after UV photolysis and displayed an increased “uncaging”cross section over previously reported caged fluorophores. Recently, novel orthonitrobenzyl fluorescein derivatives (caged TokyoGreens) displaying a larger fluorescence enhancement were described (Kobayashi et al., 2007). We have recently reported a new class of caged 7-hydroxycoumarin fluorophore (Orange et al., 2008) using an DMNPB (orthonitro phenethyl ether) as a photoremovable protecting group, which was initially described for the caging of carboxylic acids (Specht et al., 2006). This probe displayed a high uncaging cross section at 365 nm and showed a rapid enhancement of fluorescence after irradiation.

Nevertheless, all those caged fluorophores will have a limited use in cell biology, especially because these blue-emitting fluorescent dyes are excited at “toxic” visible light (400–430 nm). Therefore it becomes urgent to develop new red-emitting caged fluorophores, which are excited at wavelength, where tissue turbidity and cellular autofluorescence are low (Billinton and Knight, 2001).

Indeed, even with the best photoactivable fluorophore in hand, the biggest limitation for visualizing molecular events in living cells remains its specific recognition of the cellular component of interest, i.e., a cellular protein. This limitation can be overcome by using small genetically encoded peptide tags and complementary small organic affinity probes (Griffin et al., 1998) with sufficient specificity and affinity to be used in living cells. To be of practical use, such an approach has to provide a highly specific labeling reaction both in vitro and in living cells (Gronemeyer et al., 2005; Johnsson et al., 2005).

Therefore, the development of specific and small tags for the labeling of proteins in combination with more efficient caged fluorophores should become important research tools for tracking the spatiotemporal dynamics of molecular movements in cell biology (Fig. (Fig.44).

Figure 4
Cellular protein trafficking studies using caged fluorophores and small genetically encoded peptide tags.


The dynamic behavior of proteins is one of the fundamental properties of living systems. Recent developments in x-ray source technology provide new opportunities for the rapid imaging of macromolecule in three dimensions within crystals (Neutze et al., 2000, 2004). This emerging field in structural biology has nowadays two distinct sections.

The first one is the “pump-probe” crystallography, whereby a reaction is rapidly triggered at room temperature using a “pump” (mostly light) and the structural changes within the protein are followed in real time using an x-ray “probe” (Moffat, 1998). The Laue crystallography (a technique that uses a white beam x-ray probe) has been the only method used for such studies (Bourgeois et al., 2003, Bourgeois and Royant, 2005; Bourgeois and Weik, 2005; Schotte et al., 2003; Baxter et al., 2004; Anderson et al., 2004; Rajagopal et al., 2005; Ihee et al., 2005), due to the rapid x-ray diffracting data collection on a nonrotating static crystal (Bourgeois et al., 1996) provided by this technique. The most impressive success using this methodology is the 100 ps studies on the photodissociation of the carbon-monoxide molecule bound to the heme of myoglobine (Srajer et al., 2001; Schotte et al., 2003; Hummer et al., 2004). But mostly all pump-probe dynamic x-ray studies have been done on direct light activation on built-in photosensitive moieties.

Usually, natural chromophores, such as retina of bacteriorhodopsin (Oesterhelt and Stoeckenius, 1971), 4-hydroxycinnamoic acid from photoactive yellow protein (Hoff et al., 1994), or photosensitive coordination bonds, such as iron-carbone monoxide bonds in heme containing proteins (Austin et al., 1975), have been used. Therefore the application of the caging concept to this field as light activated triggers was largely put forward as one of the most elegant applications of high-brilliance synchrotron machines in structural biology.

But even if the Laue technique allows x-ray exposure times as short as 100 ps, the time resolution for such studies would be as high as permitted by the photoactivation process (down to a few of nanoseconds, for the faster photolabile groups (Furuta, 2005; Givens and Yousef, 2005). Therefore, the biggest limitation for real-time resolved crystallography studies employing caging groups is to build up a very efficient and fast phototrigger to be able to collect a real movie of the protein activity.

The second section of time-resolved crystallography is the use of physical techniques to control the rates of reactions within crystals (Hajdu et al., 2000). Therefore, the biological reaction is stopped (usually by lowering the temperature), and monochromatic x-ray diffraction data may be collected. Recently, so-called “kinetic crystallography” studies were used to accumulate and visualize unstable intermediate in crystals (Stoddard, 2001; Petsko and Ringe, 2000; Schlichting, 2000). In principle, the easiest way for the triggering of a protein response in a crystalline state consists of letting the natural effectors diffuse into the crystal just by soaking. But this is usually a very slow process, which therefore prevents the synchronous built-up of intermediate states.

The most frequently used protocol to trigger the formation of intermediate states in protein crystallography again relies on direct light activation of built-in photosensitive moieties. But for the vast majority of proteins that do not contain a naturally photoactivatable group, caged compounds represent an ideal way to trigger protein activity by UV-visible light (Schlichting and Goody, 1997). Especially, the ability of such compounds (i.e., caged substrates) to be photolyzed at cryotemperature (Specht et al., 2001; Ursby et al., 2002) (and below the dynamical transition temperature of the studied protein) in combination with appropriate temperature profiles, represent a nice way to accumulate protein intermediates, which can then be trapped by cooling the crystal to 100 K (Bourgeois and Royant, 2005; Bourgeois and Weik, 2005). This technique does not require the use of efficient caging groups and therefore a large number of proteins may, in principle, be studied. This methodology was, for example, applied to structural changes in rapid enzymes, such as cholinesterase (Colletier et al., 2007), where the catalytic reaction has been described to occur at the bottom of a deep narrow gorge. A “kinetic” crystallography study was developed to structurally address the product traffific in acetylcholinesterase, where UV-laser-induced cleavage of a photolabile precursor of an enzymatic product analog (e.g., caged arsenocholine) was performed in a temperature-controlled x-ray crystallography regime, to allow the structural monitoring of the traffic of the enzymatic product in acetylcholinesterase. The results were consistent with the idea that choline, the enzymatic product, exits the enzyme catalytic side either via the gorge or via an alternative “backdoor” trajectory.

Related to those methodologies are the emerging possibilities for time-resolved structural probes of photoregulated proteins without using x-ray diffraction, in particular, using x-ray scattering (Neutze et al., 2001; Georgiou et al., 2006; Ihee et al., 2005b; Kim et al., 2006) and x-ray absorption spectroscopy (Saes et al., 2003) from noncrystalline samples. A major drawback of this technique is that all structural information concerning local-conformational changes within the protein, overlap with other signals, and it is therefore impossible to extract specific structural dynamics concerning one site within the protein. Therefore, a prerequisite for success in those experiments has been the presence of heavy elements in the studied system. The increased x-ray flux available from an XFEL (x-ray free electron laser) should also make it possible to recover, with confidence, smaller signals over a higher background, and hence improve the general application of those techniques. The noncrystalline sample used here, opens this field to the study of “larger” protein movements, which may lead to crystal disorder or even rupture, ruining the diffracting power of the sample. For example, time-resolved x-ray scattering methodology could be used for the study of membrane proteins catalyzing vectorial transport (Andersson et al., 2008).

Again, success relies on direct light activation of built-in photosensitive moieties; therefore, the extension of these techniques to proteins that are not responsive to light requires the design of adapted photochemical triggers.

Photochemical triggering of biological events can be achieved either from caged biological effectors or caged proteins (Goeldner, 2005). Clearly, it is more advantageous to cage directly a protein because a stoichiometric irreversible modification leads to a stable inactivated enzyme or receptor that requires a minimum amount of photons for its reactivation. Only a few examples of protein caging are found in the literature, due to the difficulty in targeting a suitable caging group to the desired site of the protein (Loudwig and Bayey, 2005; Lawrence, 2005). This has been successfully achieved by selective modification of strategic cysteine residues, either natural (Arabaci et al., 1999; Marriott and Heidecker, 1996) or incorporated by site-directed mutagenesis (Bayley et al., 1998). The extension of protein caging to residues other than cysteines is more difficult and requires a targeted site-directed modification (Turner et al., 1987; Loudwig et al., 2003). Alternatively, unnatural amino-acid mutagenesis enabled direct incorporation of photolytic precursors of various amino acids at a precise position in the sequence (Heckler et al., 1984; Beene et al., 2003; Noren et al., 1989; Stromgaard et al., 2004) and could here find a nice application. But the major actual drawback for the specific incorporation of a non-natural photoactivatable amino-acid into protein is the very limited amount of functional protein produced using this technique. Therefore the development of new, fast, and efficient tools for the triggering of biological response is still needed.

For example, we are developing a new strategy to understand, at the atomic level, the mechanism by which membrane transporter proteins can actively transport substrate using x-ray scattering methodologies. The triggering of the targeted transporter protein, which needs to undergo an important structural rearrangement to catalyze the transport of specific molecules or ions across an membrane bilayer (Abramson et al., 2003; Faham et al., 2008; Forrest et al., 2008), should be possible by using both site-directed cysteine mutants of the studied transporter protein in combination with cysteine-reactive intramolecular photocleavable crosslinkers (Omran and Specht, 2009) (Fig. (Fig.55).

Figure 5
Proposed mechanism for the photoregulation of transporter protein activity using photocleavable crosslinkers.

Application of efficient photoswitches for the triggering of protein activities in combination with time-resolved x-ray methodologies should also provide very elegant tools for protein dynamics studies. Specially, the very rapid kinetics of activation and the reversibility of such tools are very attractive for “real” time-resolved studies.


In the past 30 years, more and more sophisticated photochemical tools have been developed for the triggering of biological processes. Phototriggers (Corrie and Trentham, 1993; Adams and Tsien, 1993; Marriott, 1998; Pelliccioli and Wirz, 2002; Goeldner and Givens, 2005; Mayer and Heckel, 2006; Ellis-Davies et al., 2007) and photoswitches (Kramer et al., 2005, Volgraf et al., 2006; Gorostiza and Isacoff, 2008) provide the unique capabilities to rapidly cause the initiation of a wide range of dynamic biological processes (Lee et al., 2009). A further improvement was recently given by two-photon excitation. Especially the two-photon photo-labile protecting groups, that should play in the next years a critical role to understand the neuronal circuitry in brain slices, to study synaptic integration, or even for experiments in live small animals, since the two-photon excitation allows a fine spatiotemporal control of a photochemical reaction and a deeper penetration of light (over 750 μm).

The developments of new red emitting caged fluorophores sensitive to two-photon excitation combined to the development of specific and small tags for the in vivo labeling of proteins in living cells (Gronemeyer et al., 2005; Johnsson et al., 2005) should provide unique possibilities for trafficking studies of cellular proteins.

Applications of phototriggers and photoswitches on structural biology should also break new ground in the understanding of protein dynamics, especially using the new opportunities provided by the more powerful out coming x-ray sources (Neutze et al., 2004). But this still depends on the development of very fast and efficient photochemical tools for the triggering of proteins activities.


This work was supported by the Université de Strasbourg, the CNRS, and ANR (Grant No. PCV 07 1-0035). A.S. is a recipient of an HFSP Young Investigator’s Award (RGY0069/2006).


  • Abramson J, Smirnova I, Kasho V, Verner G, Kaback H R, and Iwata S (2003). “Structure and mechanism of the lactose permease of Escherichia coli.” Science 301(5633), 610–615.10.1126/science.1088196 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Adams S R, Kao J PY, Grynkiewicz G, Minta A, and Tsien R Y (1988). “Biologically useful chelators that release Ca2+ upon illumination.” J. Am. Chem. Soc. 110(10), 3212–3220.10.1021/ja00218a034 [Cross Ref]
  • Adams S R, and Tsien R Y (1993). “Controlling cell chemistry with caged compounds.” Annu. Rev. Physiol. 55, 755–784.10.1146/annurev.ph.55.030193.003543 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Albota M, et al. (1998). “Design of organic molecules with large two-photon absorption cross sections.” Science 281(5383), 1653–1656.10.1126/science.281.5383.1653 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Anderson S, Srajer V, Pahl R, Rajagopal S, Schotte F, Anfinrud P, Wulff M, and Moffat K (2004). “Chromophore conformation and the evolution of tertiary structural changes in photoactive yellow protein.” Structure (London) 12(6), 1039–1045.10.1016/j.str.2004.04.008 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Andersson M, Vincent J, van der Spoel D, Davidsson J, and Neutze R (2008). “A proposed time-resolved x-ray scattering approach to track local and global conformational changes in membrane transport proteins.” Structure (London) 16(1), 21–28.10.1016/j.str.2007.10.016 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Ando H, Furuta T, Tsien R Y, and Okamoto H (2001). “Photo-mediated gene activation using caged RNA/DNA in zebrafish embryos.” Nat. Genet. 28(4), 317–325.10.1038/ng583 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Andraud C, Anémian R, Collet A, Nunzi J-M, Morel Y, and Baldeck P (2000). J. Opt. A, Pure Appl. Opt. 2, 284–288.10.1088/1464-4258/2/4/307 [Cross Ref]
  • Arabaci G, Guo X-C, Beebe K D, Coggeshall K M, and Pei D (1999). “α-haloacetophenone derivatives as photoreversible covalent inhibitors of protein tyrosine phosphatases.” J. Am. Chem. Soc. 121(21), 5085–5086.10.1021/ja9906756 [Cross Ref]
  • Aujard I, Benbrahim C, Gouget M, Ruel O, Baudin J B, Neveu P, and Jullien L (2006). “o-nitrobenzyl photolabile protecting groups with red-shifted absorption: syntheses and uncaging cross-sections for one- and two-photon excitation.” Chem. Eur. J. 12(26), 6865–6879.10.1002/chem.200501393 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Austin R H, Beeson K W, Eisenstein L, Frauenfelder H, and Gunsalus I C (1975). “Dynamics of ligand binding to myoglobin.” Biochemistry 14(24), 5355–5373.10.1021/bi00695a021 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Barth A (2005). “Time-resolved IR spectroscopy with caged compounds: an introduction.” Dynamic Studies in Biology, Phototriggers, Photoswitches and Caged Biomolecules, Goeldner M, and Givens R (eds.), pp. 369–410, Wiley-VCH, Weinheim.
  • Baxter R H, Ponomarenko N, Srajer V, Pahl R, Moffat K, and Norris J R (2004). “Time-resolved crystallographic studies of light-induced structural changes in the photosynthetic reaction center.” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 101(16), 5982–5987.10.1073/pnas.0306840101 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Bayley H, Chang C Y, Miller W T, Niblack B, and Pan P (1998). “Caged peptides and proteins by targeted chemical modification.” Methods Enzymol. 291, 117–135.10.1016/S0076-6879(98)91010-2 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Beene D L, Dougherty D A, and Lester H A (2003). “Unnatural amino acid mutagenesis in mapping ion channel function.” Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 13(3), 264–270.10.1016/S0959-4388(03)00068-0 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Billinton N, and Knight A W (2001). “Seeing the wood through the trees: a review of techniques for distinguishing green fluorescent protein from endogenous autofluorescence.” Anal. Biochem. 291(2), 175–197.10.1006/abio.2000.5006 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Bochet C G (2002). “Photolabile protecting groups and linkers.” J. Chem. Soc., Perkin Trans. 1 (2), 125–152.10.1107/S090904959501661X [Cross Ref]
  • Bourgeois D, et al. (1996). “Feasibility and realization of single-pulse Laue diffraction on macromolecular crystals at ESRF.” J. Synchrotron Radiat. 3(2), 65–74.10.1107/S090904959501661X [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Bourgeois D, and Royant A (2005). “Advances in kinetic protein crystallography.” Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 15(5), 538–547.10.1016/j.sbi.2005.08.002 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Bourgeois D, Vallone B, Schotte F, Arcovito A, Miele A E, Sciara G, Wulff M, Anfinrud P, and Brunori M (2003). “Complex landscape of protein structural dynamics unveiled by nanosecond Laue crystallography.” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 100(15), 8704–8709.10.1073/pnas.1430900100 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Bourgeois D, and Weik M (2005). “New perspectives in kinetic protein crystallography using caged compounds.” Dynamic Studies in Biology, Phototriggers, Photoswitches and Caged Biomolecules, Goeldner M, and Givens R (eds.), pp. 410–434, Wiley-VCH, Weinheim.
  • Callaway E M, and Yuste R (2002). “Stimulating neurons with light.” Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 12(5), 587–592.10.1016/S0959-4388(02)00364-1 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Cambridge S B (2005). “Photoactivated gene expression through small molecule.” Dynamic Studies in Biology, Phototriggers, Photoswitches and Caged Biomolecules, Goeldner M, and Givens R (eds.), pp. 532–538, Wiley-VCH, Weinheim.
  • Chalfie M, Tu Y, Euskirchen G, Ward W W, and Prasher D C (1994). “Green fluorescent protein as a marker for gene expression.” Science 263(5148), 802–805.10.1126/science.8303295 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Chudakov D M, Lukyanov S, and Lukyanov K A (2005). “Fluorescent proteins as a toolkit for in vivo imaging.” Trends Biotechnol. 23(12), 605–613.10.1016/j.tibtech.2005.10.005 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Colletier J P, et al. (2007). “Use of a ‘caged’ analogue to study the traffic of choline within acetylcholinesterase by kinetic crystallography.” Acta Crystallogr., Sect. D: Biol. Crystallogr. 63(11), 1115–1128.10.1107/S0907444907044472 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Corrie J ET, and Trentham D R (1993). “Caged nucleotides and neurotransmitters.” Bioorganic Photochemistry, Morrison H (ed.), Vol. 2, pp. 243–305, Wiley, New York.
  • Dedecker P, Flors C, Hotta J, Uji-i H, and Hofkens J (2007). “3D nanoscopy: bringing biological nanostructures into sharp focus.” Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 46(44), 8330–8332.10.1002/anie.200703314 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Denk W, Strickler J H, and Webb W W (1990). “Two-photon laser scanning fluorescence microscopy.” Science 248(4951), 73–76.10.1126/science.2321027 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Dinkel C, and Schultz C (2003). “Synthesis of caged myo-inositol 1,3,4,5-tetrakisphosphate.” Tetrahedron Lett. 44, 1157–1159.10.1016/S0040-4039(02)02834-4 [Cross Ref]
  • Eisenstein M (2006). “Helping cells to tell a colorful tale.” Nat. Methods 3(8), 647–654.10.1038/nmeth0806-647 [Cross Ref]
  • Ellis-Davies G C (2007). “Caged compounds: photorelease technology for control of cellular chemistry and physiology.” Nat. Methods 4(8), 619–628.10.1038/nmeth1072 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Ellis-Davies G C, and Kaplan J H (1994). “Nitrophenyl-EGTA, a photolabile chelator that selectively binds Ca2+ with high affinity and releases it rapidly upon photolysis.” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 91(1), 187–191.10.1073/pnas.91.1.187 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Ellis-Davies G C, Matsuzaki M, Paukert M, Kasai H, and Bergles D E (2007). “4-carboxymethoxy-5,7-dinitroindolinyl-glu: an improved caged glutamate for expeditious ultraviolet and two-photon photolysis in brain slices.” J. Neurosci. 27(25), 6601–6604.10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1519-07.2007 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Engels J, and Schlaeger E J (1977). “Synthesis, structure, and reactivity of adenosine cyclic 3,5-phosphate benzyl triesters.” J. Med. Chem. 20(7), 907–911.10.1021/jm00217a008 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Faham S, Watanabe A, Besserer G M, Cascio D, Specht A, Hirayama B A, Wright E M, and Abramson J (2008). “The crystal structure of a sodium galactose transporter reveals mechanistic insights into Na+/sugar symport.” Science 321(5890), 810–814.10.1126/science.1160406 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Folling J, Belov V, Riedel D, Schonle A, Egner A, Eggeling C, Bossi M, and Hell S W (2008). “Fluorescence nanoscopy with optical sectioning by two-photon induced molecular switching using continuous-wave lasers.” ChemPhysChem 9(2), 321–326.10.1002/cphc.200700655 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Forrest L R, Zhang Y W, Jacobs M T, Gesmonde J, Xie L, Honig B H, and Rudnick G (2008). “Mechanism for alternating access in neurotransmitter transporters.” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 105(30), 10338–10343.10.1073/pnas.0804659105 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Furuta T (2005). “Coumarin-4-ylmethyl phototriggers.” Dynamic Studies in Biology, Phototriggers, Photoswitches and Caged Biomolecules, Goeldner M, and Givens R (eds.), pp. 29–55, Wiley-VCH, Weinheim.
  • Gagey N, Neveu P, Benbrahim C, Goetz B, Aujard I, Baudin J B, and Jullien L (2007). “Two-photon uncaging with fluorescence reporting: evaluation of the o-hydroxycinnamic platform.” J. Am. Chem. Soc. 129(32), 9986–9998.10.1021/ja0722022 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Georgiou P, Vincent J, Andersson M, Wohri A B, Gourdon P, Poulsen J, Davidsson J, and Neutze R (2006). “Picosecond calorimetry: time-resolved x-ray diffraction studies of liquid CH2Cl2.” J. Chem. Phys. 124(23), 234507.10.1063/1.2205365 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Gillespie D C, Kim G, and Kandler K. (2005). “Caged neurotransmitters for probing neuronal circuits, neuronal integration and synaptic plasticity.” Dynamic Studies in Biology, Phototriggers, Photoswitches and Caged Biomolecules, Goeldner M, and Givens R (eds.), pp. 232–251, Wiley-VCH, Weinheim.
  • Givens R S, and Yousef A (2005). “p-hydroxyphenacyl: a photoremovable protecting group.” Dynamic Studies in Biology, Phototriggers, Photoswitches and Caged Biomolecules, Goeldner M, and Givens R (eds.), pp. 55–75, Wiley-VCH, Weinheim.
  • Goeldner M (2005). “Photoremovable protecting groups used for the caging of biomolecules. Caging of ATP and glutamate: comparative analyses.” Dynamic Studies in Biology, Phototriggers, Photoswitches and Caged Biomolecules, Goeldner M, and Givens R (eds.), pp. 76–94, Wiley-VCH, Weinheim.
  • Goeldner M, and Givens R (2005). Dynamic Studies in Biology: Phototriggers, Photoswitches and Caged Biomolecules, Wiley-VCH, Weinheim.
  • Göppert-Mayer M (1931). “Über Elementarakte mit zwei Quantensprüngen.” Ann. Phys. 9, 273–294.10.1002/andp.19314010303 [Cross Ref]
  • Gorostiza P, and Isacoff E Y (2008). “Optical switches for remote and noninvasive control of cell signaling.” Science 322(5900), 395–399.10.1126/science.1166022 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Gould T J, Verkhusha V V, and Hess S T (2009). “Imaging biological structures with fluorescence photoactivation localization microscopy.” Nat. Protocols 4(3), 291–308.10.1038/nprot.2008.246 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Griffin B A, Adams S R, and Tsien R Y (1998). “Specific covalent labeling of recombinant protein molecules inside live cells.” Science 281(5374), 269–272.10.1126/science.281.5374.269 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Gronemeyer T, Godin G, and Johnsson K (2005). “Adding value to fusion proteins through covalent labelling.” Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 16(4), 453–458.10.1016/j.copbio.2005.06.001 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Gug S, et al. (2008a). “Photolabile glutamate protecting group with high one- and two-photon uncaging efficiencies.” ChemBioChem 9(8), 1303–1307.10.1002/cbic.200700651 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Gug S, Bolze F, Specht A, Bourgogne C, Goeldner M, and Nicoud J F (2008b). “Molecular engineering of photoremovable protecting groups for two-photon uncaging.” Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 47(49), 9525–9529.10.1002/anie.200803964 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Hagen V, Benndorf K, and Kaupp U B (2005). “Photochemical release of second messenger—caged cyclic nucleotides.” Dynamic Studies in Biology, Phototriggers, Photoswitches and Caged Biomolecules, Goeldner M, and Givens R (eds.), pp. 155–178, Wiley-VCH, Weinheim.
  • Hagen V, Dekowski B, Kotzur N, Lechler R, Wiesner B, Briand B, and Beyermann M (2008). “{7-[bis(carboxymethyl)amino]coumarin-4-yl}methoxycarbonyl derivatives for photorelease of carboxylic acids, alcohols/phenols, thioalcohols/thiophenols, and amines.” Chem. Eur. J. 14(5), 1621–1627.10.1002/chem.200701142 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Hajdu J, Neutze R, Sjogren T, Edman K, Szoke A, Wilmouth R C, and Wilmot C M (2000). “Analyzing protein functions in four dimensions.” Nat. Struct. Biol. 7(11), 1006–1012.10.1038/80911 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Hayek A, Bolze F, Nicoud J, Baldeck P L, and Mely Y (2006). “Synthesis and characterization of water-soluble two-photon excited blue fluorescent chromophores for bioimaging.” Photochem. Photobiol. Sci. 5(1), 102–106.10.1039/b509843b [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • He G S, Tan L S, Zheng Q, and Prasad P N (2008). “Multiphoton absorbing materials: molecular designs, characterizations, and applications.” Chem. Rev. 108(4), 1245–1330.10.1021/cr050054x [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Heckler T G, Chang L H, Zama Y, Naka T, Chorghade M S, and Hecht S M (1984). “T4 RNA ligase mediated preparation of novel ‘chemically misacylated’ tRNAPheS.” Biochemistry 23(7), 1468–1473.10.1021/bi00302a020 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Hell S W (2007). “Far-field optical nanoscopy.” Science 316(5828), 1153–1158.10.1126/science.1137395 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Helmchen F, and Denk W (2005). “Deep tissue two-photon microscopy.” Nat. Methods 2(12), 932–940.10.1038/nmeth818 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Hess G P (2005). “Photochemical release of neurotransmitters—transient kinetic investigation of membrane-bound receptors on the surface of cells in the microsecond-to-millisecond time region.” Dynamic Studies in Biology, Phototriggers, Photoswitches and Caged Biomolecules, Goeldner M, and Givens R (eds.), pp. 205–231, Wiley-VCH, Weinheim.
  • Hess S T, Girirajan T P, and Mason M D (2006). “Ultra-high resolution imaging by fluorescence photoactivation localization microscopy.” Biophys. J. 91(11), 4258–4272.10.1529/biophysj.106.091116 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Hoff W D, Dux P, Hard K, Devreese B, Nugteren-Roodzant I M, Crielaard W, Boelens R, Kaptein R, van Beeumen J, and Hellingwerf K J (1994). “Thiol ester-linked p-coumaric acid as a new photoactive prosthetic group in a protein with rhodopsin-like photochemistry.” Biochemistry 33(47), 13959–13962.10.1021/bi00251a001 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Hummer G, Schotte F, and Anfinrud P A (2004). “Unveiling functional protein motions with picosecond x-ray crystallography and molecular dynamics simulations.” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 101(43), 15330–15334.10.1073/pnas.0405295101 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Ihee H, Lorenc M, Kim T K, Kong Q Y, Cammarata M, Lee J H, Bratos S, and Wulff M (2005b). “Ultrafast x-ray diffraction of transient molecular structures in solution.” Science 309(5738), 1223–1227.10.1126/science.1114782 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Ihee H, Rajagopal S, Srajer V, Pahl R, Anderson S, Schmidt M, Schotte F, Anfinrud P A, Wulff M, and Moffat K (2005). “Visualizing reaction pathways in photoactive yellow protein from nanoseconds to seconds.” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 102(20), 7145–7150.10.1073/pnas.0409035102 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Jacobson K, Rajfur Z, Vitriol E, and Hahn K (2008). “Chromophore-assisted laser inactivation in cell biology.” Trends Cell Biol. 18(9), 443–450.10.1016/j.tcb.2008.07.001 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Johnsson N, George N, and Johnsson K (2005). “Protein chemistry on the surface of living cells.” ChemBioChem 6(1), 47–52.10.1002/cbic.200400290 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Kaplan J H, Forbush B, and Hoffman J F (1978). “Rapid photolytic release of adenosine 5-triphosphate from a protected analogue: utilization by the Na:K pump of human red blood cell ghosts.” Biochemistry 17(10), 1929–1935.10.1021/bi00603a020 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Kerr J N, and Denk W (2008). “Imaging in vivo: watching the brain in action.” Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 9(3), 195–205.10.1038/nrn2338 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Kim T K, et al. (2006). “Spatiotemporal reaction kinetics of an ultrafast photoreaction pathway visualized by time-resolved liquid x-ray diffraction.” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 103(25), 9410–9415.10.1073/pnas.0601958103 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Kiskin N I, Chillingworth R, McCray J A, Piston D, and Ogden D (2002). “The efficiency of two-photon photolysis of a ‘caged’ fluorophore, o-1-(2-nitrophenyl)ethylpyranine, in relation to photodamage of synaptic terminals.” Eur. Biophys. J. 30(8), 588–604.10.1007/s00249-001-0187-x [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Kobayashi T, Urano Y, Kamiya M, Ueno T, Kojima H, and Nagano T (2007). “Highly activateable and rapidly releaseable caged fluorescein derivatives.” J. Am. Chem. Soc. 129(21), 6696–6697.10.1021/ja070376d [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Kramer R H, Chambers J J, and Trauner D (2005). “Photochemical tools for remote control of ion channels in excitable cells.” Nat. Chem. Biol. 1(7), 360–365.10.1038/nchembio750 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Lawrence D S (2005). “The preparation and in vivo applications of caged peptides and proteins.” Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 9(6), 570–575.10.1016/j.cbpa.2005.09.002 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Lee H, Larson D, and Lawrence D (2009). “Illumination the chemistry of life: design, synthesis, and applications of caged and related photoresponsive compounds.” ACS Chem. Biol. (in press).10.1021/cb900036s [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Lee S, Thomas K, Thayumanavan S, and Bardeen C (2005). “Dependence of the two-photon absorption cross section on the conjugation of the phenylacetylene linker in dipolar donor-bridge-acceptor chromophores.” J. Phys. Chem. A 109(43), 9767–9774.10.1021/jp053864l [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Li W-H, Llopis J, Whitney M, Zlokarnick G, and Tsien R Y (1998). “Cell-permeant caged InsP3 ester shows that Ca2+ spike frequency can optimize gene expression.” Nature (London) 393, 936–941. [PubMed]
  • Lippincott-Schwartz J, and Patterson G H (2008). “Fluorescent proteins for photoactivation experiments.” Methods Cell Biol. 85, 45–61.10.1016/S0091-679X(08)85003-0 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Loudwig S, and Bayey H (2005). “Light-activated proteins: an overview.” Dynamic Studies in Biology, Phototriggers, Photoswitches and Caged Biomolecules, Goeldner M, and Givens R (eds.), pp. 253–304, Wiley-VCH, Weinheim.
  • Loudwig S, Nicolet Y, Masson P, Fontecilla-Camps J C, Bon S, Nachon F, and Goeldner M (2003). “Photoreversible inhibition of cholinesterases: catalytic serine-labeled caged butyrylcholinesterase.” ChemBioChem 4(8), 762–767.10.1002/cbic.200300571 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Lukyanov K A, Chudakov D M, Lukyanov S, and Verkhusha V V (2005). “Innovation: photoactivatable fluorescent proteins.” Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 6(11), 885–891.10.1038/nrm1741 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Lutz C, Otis T S, Desars V, Charpak S, Digregorio D A, and Emiliani V (2008). “Holographic photolysis of caged neurotransmitters.” Nat. Methods 5(9), 821–827.10.1038/nmeth.1241 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Marriott G (1998). “Caged compounds.” Methods in Enzymology—caged Compounds, Vol. 291, Academic, N.Y. [PubMed]
  • Marriott G, and Heidecker M (1996). “Light-directed generation of the actin-activated ATPase activity of caged heavy meromyosin.” Biochemistry 35(10), 3170–3174.10.1021/bi952207o [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Mayer G, and Heckel A (2006). “Biologically active molecules with a ‘light switch’.” Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 45(30), 4900–4921.10.1002/anie.200600387 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Mikat V, and Heckel A (2007). “Light-dependent RNA interference with nucleobase-caged siRNAs.” RNA 13(12), 2341–2347.10.1261/rna.753407 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Mitchison T J, Sawin K E, Theriot J A, Gee K, and Mallavarapu A (1998). “Caged fluorescent probes.” Methods Enzymol. 291, 63–78.10.1016/S0076-6879(98)91007-2 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Moffat K (1998). “Ultrafast time-resolved crystallography.” Nat. Struct. Biol. 5, 641–643.10.1038/1333 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Neutze R, Huldt G, Hajdu J, and van der Spoel D (2004). “Potential impact of an x-ray free electron laser on structural biology.” Radiat. Phys. Chem. 71, 905–916.10.1016/j.radphyschem.2004.04.121 [Cross Ref]
  • Neutze R, Wouts R, Techert S, Davidsson J, Kocsis M, Kirrander A, Schotte F, and Wulff M (2001). “Visualizing photochemical dynamics in solution through picosecond x-ray scattering.” Phys. Rev. Lett. 87(19), 195508.10.1103/PhysRevLett.87.195508 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Neutze R, Wouts R, van der Spoel D, Weckert E, and Hajdu J (2000). “Potential for biomolecular imaging with femtosecond x-ray pulses.” Nature (London) 406(6797), 752–757.10.1038/35021099 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Neveu P, Aujard I, Benbrahim C, Le Saux T, Allemand J F, Vriz S, Bensimon D, and Jullien L (2008). “A caged retinoic acid for one- and two-photon excitation in zebrafish embryos.” Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 47(20), 3744–3746.10.1002/anie.200800037 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Nikolenko V, Poskanzer K E, and Yuste R (2007). “Two-photon photostimulation and imaging of neural circuits.” Nat. Methods 4(11), 943–950.10.1038/nmeth1105 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Noren C J, Anthony-Cahill S J, Griffith M C, and Schultz P G (1989). “A general method for site-specific incorporation of unnatural amino acids into proteins.” Science 244(4901), 182–188.10.1126/science.2649980 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Oesterhelt D, and Stoeckenius W (1971). “Rhodopsin-like protein from the purple membrane of halobacterium halobium.” Nature (London), New Biol. 233(39), 149–152. [PubMed]
  • Omran Z, and Specht A (2009). “Synthesis and photochemical properties of photo-cleavable crosslinkers.” Tetrahedron Lett. 50(20), 2434–2436.10.1016/j.tetlet.2009.03.009 [Cross Ref]
  • Orange C, Specht A, Puliti D, Sakr E, Furuta T, Winsor B, and Goeldner M (2008). “Synthesis and photochemical properties of a light-activated fluorophore to label His-tagged proteins.” Chem. Commun. (Cambridge) (10), 1217–1219.10.1039/b716486f [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Ottl J, Gabriel D, and Marriott G (1998). “Preparation and photoactivation of caged fluorophores and caged proteins using a new class of heterobifunctional, photocleavable cross-linking reagents.” Bioconjugate Chem. 9(2), 143–151.10.1021/bc970147o [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Papageorgiou G, Ogden D, Kelly G, and Corrie J E (2005). “Synthetic and photochemical studies of substituted 1-acyl-7-nitroindolines.” Photochem. Photobiol. Sci. 4(11), 887–896.10.1039/b508756b [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Papagiakoumou E, de Sars V, Oron D, and Emiliani V (2008). “Patterned two-photon illumination by spatiotemporal shaping of ultrashort pulses.” Opt. Express 16(26), 22039–22047.10.1364/OE.16.022039 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Pavlos C M, Xu H, and Toscano J P (2005). “Photochemical release of second messenger—caged nitric oxide.” Dynamic Studies in Biology, Phototriggers, Photoswitches and Caged Biomolecules, Goeldner M, and Givens R (eds.), pp. 178–205, Wiley-VCH, Weinheim.
  • Pelliccioli A P, and Wirz J (2002). “Photoremovable protecting groups: reaction mechanisms and applications.” Photochem. Photobiol. Sci. 1(7), 441–458.10.1039/b200777k [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Petsko G A, and Ringe D (2000). “Observation of unstable species in enzyme-catalyzed transformations using protein crystallography.” Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 4(1), 89–94.10.1016/S1367-5931(99)00057-5 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Rajagopal S, Anderson S, Srajer V, Schmidt M, Pahl R, and Moffat K (2005). “A structural pathway for signaling in the E46Q mutant of photoactive yellow protein.” Structure (London) 13(1), 55–63.10.1016/j.str.2004.10.016 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Saes M, Bressler C, Abela R, Grolimund D, Johnson S L, Heimann P A, and Chergui M (2003). “Observing photochemical transients by ultrafast x-ray absorption spectroscopy.” Phys. Rev. Lett. 90(4), 047403.10.1103/PhysRevLett.90.047403 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Sakata T, Yan Y, and Marriott G (2005). “Optical switching of dipolar interactions on proteins.” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 102(13), 4759–4764.10.1073/pnas.0405265102 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Schlichting I (2000). “Crystallographic structure determination of unstable species.” Acc. Chem. Res. 33(8), 532–538.10.1021/ar9900459 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Schlichting I, and Goody R S (1997). “Triggering methods in crystallographic enzyme kinetics.” Methods Enzymol. 277, 467–490.10.1016/S0076-6879(97)77026-5 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Schotte F, Lim M, Jackson T A, Smirnov A V, Soman J, Olson J S, Phillips G N, Wulff M, and Anfinrud P A (2003). “Watching a protein as it functions with 150-ps time-resolved x-ray crystallography.” Science 300(5627), 1944–1947.10.1126/science.1078797 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Shembekar V R, Chen Y, Carpenter B K, and Hess G P (2007). “Coumarin-caged glycine that can be photolyzed within 3 microseconds by visible light.” Biochemistry 46(18), 5479–5484.10.1021/bi700280e [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Specht A, Thomann J S, Alarcon K, Wittayanan W, Ogden D, Furuta T, Kurakawa Y, and Goeldner M (2006). “New photoremovable protecting groups for carboxylic acids with high photolytic efficiencies at near-UV irradiation. Application to the photocontrolled release of L-glutamate.” ChemBioChem 7(11), 1690–1695.10.1002/cbic.200600111 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Specht A, Ursby T, Weik M, Peng L, Kroon J, Bourgeois D, and Goeldner M (2001). “Cryophotolysis of ortho-nitrobenzyl derivatives of enzyme ligands for the potential kinetic crystallography of macromolecules.” ChemBioChem 2(11), 845–848.10.1002/1439-7633(20011105)2:11<845::AID-CBIC845>3.0.CO;2-C [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Srajer V, Ren Z, Teng T Y, Schmidt M, Ursby T, Bourgeois D, Pradervand C, Schildkamp W, Wulff M, and Moffat K (2001). “Protein conformational relaxation and ligand migration in myoglobin: a nanosecond to millisecond molecular movie from time-resolved Laue x-ray diffraction.” Biochemistry 40(46), 13802–13815.10.1021/bi010715u [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Stoddard B L (2001). “Trapping reaction intermediates in macromolecular crystals for structural analyses.” Methods 24(2), 125–138.10.1006/meth.2001.1174 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Stromgaard A, Jensen A A, and Stromgaard K (2004). “Site-specific incorporation of unnatural amino acids into proteins.” ChemBioChem 5(7), 909–916.10.1002/cbic.200400060 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Tanabe T, Oyamada M, Fujita K, Dai P, Tanaka H, and Takamatsu T (2005). “Multiphoton excitation-evoked chromophore-assisted laser inactivation using green fluorescent protein.” Nat. Methods 2(7), 503–505.10.1038/nmeth770 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Terenziani F, Katan C, Badaeva E, Tretiak S, and Blanchard-Desce M (2008). “Enhanced two-photon absorption of organic chromophores: theoretical and experimental assessments.” Adv. Mater. (Weinheim, Ger.) 20(24), 4641–4678.10.1002/adma.200800402 [Cross Ref]
  • Theriot J A, and Mitchison T J (1991). “Actin microfilament dynamics in locomoting cells.” Nature (London) 352(6331), 126–131.10.1038/352126a0 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Turner A D, Pizzo S V, Rozakis G W, and Porter N A (1987). “Photochemical activation of acylated.alpha.-thrombin.” J. Am. Chem. Soc. 109(4), 1274–1275.10.1021/ja00238a062 [Cross Ref]
  • Ursby T, Weik M, Fioravanti E, Delarue M, Goeldner M, and Bourgeois D (2002). “Cryophotolysis of caged compounds: a technique for trapping intermediate states in protein crystals.” Acta Crystallogr. D Biol. Crystallogr. 58(4), 607–614.10.1107/S0907444902002135 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Volgraf M, Gorostiza P, Numano R, Kramer R H, Isacoff E Y, and Trauner D (2006). “Allosteric control of an ionotropic glutamate receptor with an optical switch.” Nat. Chem. Biol. 2(1), 47–52.10.1038/nchembio756 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Walker J W, Somlyo A V, Goldman Y E, Somlyo A P, and Trentham D R (1987). “Kinetics of smooth and skeletal muscle activation by laser pulse photolysis of caged inositol 1,4,5-trisphosphate.” Nature (London) 327(6119), 249–252.10.1038/327249a0 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Zhao Y, Zheng Q, Dakin K, Xu K, Martinez M L, and Li W H (2004). “New caged coumarin fluorophores with extraordinary uncaging cross sections suitable for biological imaging applications.” J. Am. Chem. Soc. 126(14), 4653–4663.10.1021/ja036958m [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
  • Zipfel W R, Williams R M, and Webb W W (2003). “Nonlinear magic: multiphoton microscopy in the biosciences.” Nat. Biotechnol. 21(11), 1369–1377.10.1038/nbt899 [PubMed] [Cross Ref]

Articles from HFSP Journal are provided here courtesy of HFSP Publishing.
PubReader format: click here to try


Related citations in PubMed

See reviews...See all...

Cited by other articles in PMC

See all...


  • PubMed
    PubMed citations for these articles

Recent Activity

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

See more...