ArticleThe Journal of membrane biology2015
Protein Extraction by Means of Electroporation from E. coli with Preserved Viability.
Article in The Journal of membrane biology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Electroporation outcomes in human Jurkat cells are affected by exposure to simulated microgravity.Research square · 2026Article
- Article
- Pulsed Electric Fields Effects on Proteins: Extraction, Structural Modification, and Enhancing Enzymatic Activity.Bioelectricity · 2024Review
- Expression of mammalian cell entry genes in clinical isolates of M. tuberculosis and the cell entry potential and immunological reactivity of the Rv0590A protein.Medical microbiology and immunology · 2023Article
- Evaluation and Optimization of Protein Extraction FromFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2020Article
- Selective Release of Recombinant Periplasmic Protein FromFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2020Article
- Low concentrations of acetic and formic acids enhance the inactivation of Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa with pulsed electric fields.BMC microbiology · 2019Article
- Non-invasive nanosecond electroporation for biocontrol of surface infections: an in vivo study.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- Radiotherapy Enhancement with Electroporation in Human Intestinal Colon Cancer HT-29 CellsAsian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2018Article
- Overcoming Antimicrobial Resistance in Bacteria Using Bioactive Magnetic Nanoparticles and Pulsed Electromagnetic Fields.Frontiers in microbiology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Extracting proteins by means of electroporation from different microorganisms is gaining on its importance, as electroporation is a quick, chemical-free, and cost-effective method. Since complete cell destruction (to obtain proteins) necessitates additional work, and cost of purifying the end-product is high, pulses have to be adjusted in order to prevent total disintegration. Namely, total disintegration of the cell releases bacterial membrane contaminants in the final sample. Therefore, our goal was to study different electric pulse parameters in order to extract as much proteins as possible from E. coli bacteria, while preserving bacterial viability. Our results show that by increasing electric field strength the concentration of extracted proteins increases and viability reduces. The correlation is reasonable, since high electric field destroys bacterial envelope, releasing all intracellular components into surrounding media. The strong correlation was also found with pulse duration. However, at longer pulses we obtained more proteins, while bacterial viability was not as much affected. Pulse number and/or pulse repetition frequency at our conditions have no or little effect on concentration of extracted proteins and/or bacterial viability. We can conclude that the most promising pulse protocol for protein extraction by means of electroporation based on our experience would be longer pulses with lower pulse amplitude assuring high protein yield and low effect on bacterial viability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26201287What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.