References
Matov, A. et al. Nat. Methods 7, 761–768 (2010).
Applegate, K.T. et al. J. Struct. Biol. 176, 168–184 (2011).
Mikhailov, A. & Gundersen, G.G. Cell Motil. Cytoskeleton 41, 325–340 (1998).
Yvon, A.-M.C., Wadsworth, P. & Jordan, M.A. Mol. Biol. Cell 10, 947–959 (1999).
Waterman-Storer, C.M. & Salmon, E.D. J. Cell Biol. 139, 417–434 (1997).
Cassimeris, L., Pryer, N.K. & Salmon, E.D. J. Cell Biol. 107, 2223–2231 (1988).
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the grant from the US National Institutes of Health (R01NS064288) to F.-Q.Z.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding authors
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing financial interests.
Supplementary information
Supplementary Figures, Table and Methods
Supplementary Figures 1–3, Supplementary Table 1 and Supplementary Methods (PDF 492 kb)
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Nicovich, P., Zhou, FQ. Acquisition frame rate affects microtubule plus-end tracking analysis. Nat Methods 11, 219–220 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.2846
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.2846
- Springer Nature America, Inc.
This article is cited by
-
An assay to image neuronal microtubule dynamics in mice
Nature Communications (2014)
-
Reply to "Acquisition Frame Rate Affects Microtubule Plus-End Tracking Analysis"
Nature Methods (2014)