Localized Electroporation: A Method for Targeting Expression of Genes in Avian Embryos
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Avian embryos are a popular model for cell and developmental biologists. However, analysis of gene function in living embryos has been hampered by difficulties in targeting the expression of exogenous genes. We have developed a method for localized electroporation that overcomes some of the limitations of current techniques. We use a double-barreled suction electrode, backfilled with a solution containing a plasmid-encoding green fluorescent protein (GFP) and a neurophysiological stimulator to electroporate small populations of cells in living embryos. As many as 600 cells express GFP 24-48 h after electroporation. The number of cells that express GFP depends on the number of trains, the pulse frequency and the voltage. Surface epithelial cells and cells deep to the point of electroporation express GFP. No deformities result from electroporations, and neurons, neural crest, head mesenchyme, lens and otic placode cells have been transfected. This method overcomes some of the disadvantages of viral techniques, lipofection and in vivo electroporation. The method will be useful to biologists interested in tracing cell lineage or making genetic mosaic avian embryos.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".