MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1653026469 · doi:10.1071/rdv17n2ab46

46 EFFICIENT TRANSFECTION OF PLASMID DNA INTO CELLS FOR USE AS NUCLEAR DONORS

2004· article· en· W1653026469 on OpenAlexfundno aff
S.-L. Lee, Sun A Ock, Hao Song, B. Mohana Kumar, S.Y. Choe, Gyu‐Jin Rho

Bibliographic record

VenueReproduction Fertility and Development · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCRISPR and Genetic Engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaOntario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs
KeywordsTransfectionElectroporationMolecular biologySomatic cell nuclear transferPlasmidRecombinant DNACell cultureGreen fluorescent proteinBiologyFluorescence microscopeChemistryAndrologyDNAGeneFluorescenceGeneticsMedicineEmbryogenesis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT) has the potential to significantly improve the production of valuable livestock that produce recombinant proteins, such as pharmaceutical proteins for human disease or biomaterials for medical use. The success of this potential depends on efficient and optimized protocols for introducing exogenous DNA into cells. In this study, we compared two methods of transfection, Effectene (Qiagen, Inc., Valencia, CA, USA) and electroporation. Plasmid DNA (pEGFF-N1, Clontech, Seoul, Korea) was transfected into fetal fibroblasts (FFB), cumulus cells (CUC), and adult ear skin cells (ESC). Transfection efficiency, chromosome normality, gene expression, and apoptosis were assessed. Cells cultured in a-modified Eagle's medium (a-MEM; BioWhittaker, Walkersville, MD, USA) + 10% FBS were transfected with pEGFP-N1. For electroporation, cells (5 × 106 cells/mL) were mixed in 300 µL perrim buffer (75% Cytosalts with 120 mM KCl, 0.15 mM CaCl2, 10 mM K2HPO4, 5 mM MgCl2, and 25% a-MEM) + 15 µg pEGFP-N1, and subjected to two pulses of 0.38 kV and 400 µF delivered by Gene Pulser (Bio-Rad; BMS, Ltd., Seoul, South Korea). For Effectene transfection, the procedure suggested by the manufacture was followed. Transfected cells were selected with 600 µg/mL G418 (Gibco; KDR Biotech Co., Ltd., Seoul, South Korea) and cultured at 39°C, 5% CO2 in air. Assessments of EGFP transfected cells by green fluorescence was carried out under an inverted epifluorescence microscope (Nicon, Kanagawa, Japan) equipped with a filter for FITC (excitation maximum = 488 nm; emission maximum = 507 nm). Differences among the groups were analyzed using one-way ANOVA after arc-sine transformation of proportional data. Most cells (>80%) in confluence were at G0/G1 phase, and transfection of the gene into all three cell types did not affect the incidence of chromosomal abnormality or change morphology. In addition, the rates of apoptosis assessed by TUNEL did not differ in all three cell types by either method of transfection at different cell passages. However, the efficiency of gene transfection into FFB by Effectene reagent (14.2 ± 1.7%) was significantly (P < 0.05) higher than that by electroporation (5.1 ± 1.0%). Among the three type cells, the efficiency of gene transfection by Effectene and electroporation of FFB (14.2 ± 1.7 and 5.1 ± 1.0%, respectively) was significantly (P < 0.05) higher than those of CUC and ESC (9.4 ± 1.5 and 3.3 ± 0.8; 8.8 ± 0.7 and 2.1 ± 0.4%, respectively). In conclusion, although there were no differences in the alteration of chromosomes, cell morphology, and apoptosis among three cell types transfected with or without plasmid DNA, FFB is the most effective cell type to be transfected. Effectene is superior to other currently available methods for introducing plasmid DNA into a variety of cells. The high level of transfection achieved by Effectene will encourage its use as a tool for producing transgenic embryos and animals by SCNT. This work was supported by High Technology Development Project for Agriculture and Forestry Korea, MAF-SGRP, 300012-05-3-SB010.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.371

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.246 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReproduction Fertility and DevelopmentSame topicCRISPR and Genetic EngineeringFrench-language works237,207