DNA Transformation of <i>Leishmania infantum</i> Axenic Amastigotes and Their Use in Drug Screening
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Protocols for DNA electroporation in Leishmania promastigote cells are well established. More recently, in vitro culture of axenic Leishmania amastigotes became possible. We have established conditions for DNA transformation of axenically grown Leishmania infantum amastigotes. Parameters for DNA electroporation of Leishmania axenic amastigotes were systematically studied using luciferase-mediated transient transfection. Cell lines expressing stable luciferase activity were then selected, and their ability to be used in an in vitro drug screening procedure was determined. A model was established, using axenic amastigotes expressing luciferase activity, for rapidly determining the activity of drugs directly against both axenic and intracellular amastigotes. For intracellular amastigotes, the 50% effective concentrations of pentamidine, sodium stibogluconate (Pentostam), meglumine (Glucantime), and potassium antimonyl tartrate determined with the luciferase assay were 0.2 microM (0.12 microg/ml), 55 microg/ml, 95 microg/ml, and 0.12 microg/ml, respectively; these values are in agreement with values determined by more labor-intensive staining methods. We also showed the usefulness of luciferase-expressing parasites for analyzing drug resistance. The availability of luciferase-expressing amastigotes for use in high-throughput screening should facilitate the search for new antileishmanial drugs.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".