Fig. 2: Validation of mNeon sensing constructs functionality.
A Dose-proportional decrease in pHluorin2 signal in response to increasing weak acid exposure (n = 8 technical replicates, p < 0.001 based on Welch Two Sample t-test with control condition). B Change in pYRE-mNeon signal following exposure to varying concentrations of diamide with respect to time (left), with resulting correlation between pYRE-mNeon signal, relative to control 0 mM condition, and diamide concentrations 2 h post exposure displayed (right). Dashed line represents fitted linear regression (n = 4 technical replicates, ρ = 0.97). C Scatterplot between growth rate and change in sensing signal, normalised to non-sensing control strain, of pRPL28-, pRPL31B- and pHXT5-mNeon expressing strains at each timepoint of growth curve. Dashed lines display fitted linear regressions. D Change in mNeon-FBPs and pFBP-2_6 positive control signals following shift from glucose to pyruvate media as opposed to when shifted back to glucose media. E Difference in pGPD2-mNeon signal between WT and gpd1Δgpd2Δ KO sensing strains (n = 3 biological replicates, p = 0.041 based on Welch Two Sample t-test). F Change in yAT1.03 signal of strains pre-grown on ethanol following exposure to antimycin A inhibitor (AA). Baseline calculated by averaging sensing signal prior to AA exposure. G Drop in ATP sensing signals relative to baseline (as calculated in F) following exposure to AA. Dotted line represents baseline (n = 3 biological replicates, p < 0.01 (**) and p > 0.05 (ns) based on Welch One Sample t-test to baseline mean value of 1). Bar plots represent mean ± SEM across specified n replicates. Source data are provided as a Source Data file.
