4.4 Article

Optimization of piggyBac Transposon System Electrotransfection in Sheep Fibroblasts

期刊

MOLECULAR BIOTECHNOLOGY
卷 65, 期 10, 页码 1585-1597

出版社

SPRINGERNATURE
DOI: 10.1007/s12033-023-00659-5

关键词

Sheep; Fibroblasts; piggyBac transposon system; Electroporation optimization; Transfection efficiency; Square-wave

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Electroporation is a non-viral mediated transfection technique that offers advantages such as being harmless, easy to operate, and less expensive. However, there is a need for further improvement in electroporation efficiency, as there is no universal standard electrotransfection step for different cell types, and inappropriate parameters can result in low transfection efficiency and high cell mortality.
Electroporation is a non-viral mediated transfection technique, which has the advantages of being harmless, easy to operate, and less expensive. This transfection method can be used for almost all cell types and has gradually become the preferred transfection method for mammalian gene editing. However, further improvements are needed in electroporation efficiency. There is no universal standard electrotransfection step for different types of cells, and the inappropriate electroporation parameters will result in a low transfection efficiency and high cell mortality. Here, we systematically optimized the electrotransfection parameters of piggyBac transposon system into sheep fetal fibroblasts for the first time. We found that the cell transfection efficiency and cell viability could be improved by using traditional cell culture medium DMEM/F12 as an electroporation buffer, and simultaneously using the square-wave pulsing program of 200 V, 2 pulses, 20 ms length, and 20 mu g DNA (3 mu g/mu L) in 4 mm cuvette, and the transfection efficiency and cell viability could eventually reach 78.0% and 40.9%, respectively. The purpose of this study is to provide a method reference and theoretical basis for the plasmid electrotransfection in mammal cells.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据