Fig. 5. (A) The direct comparison of G-protein-anchor FRET pairs suggests that G
q
and G
i/o
share the same microdomain, whereas G
i/o and G
q do not. The Emax values are given in % ± s.d.; n, number of independent experiments. Emax values of heterotrimer construct FRET pairs are not significantly different (dark grey), whereas the values of G
construct FRET pairs Ni2-mCFP/Ni2-mCit and NGAP-43-mCFP/Ni2-mCit (light grey) are significantly different (P<0.05, 2-tailed Student's t-test). Blue and yellow column headings highlight mCFP- and mCit-labeled constructs, respectively. (B) The FRET map of heterotrimeric G-protein microdomains based on the results of their membrane anchors. This scheme is based on the Emax relationships, where a high Emax value relates to a large overlap of the microdomains or a higher probability of the respective molecules to co-cluster. As an example, the arrow shows how the G
i/o subunit displaces after activation. Its starting microdomain has a lesser `proximity' to the tR-microdomain-marker (low FRET), than the destination microdomain of active G
i/o (high FRET). Thus, activation results in an increase of FRET for the FRET pair G
i/o-construct/tR (Fig. 6C).