ArticleMolecular medicine reports2018
Genetic characteristics of polycistronic system‑mediated randomly‑inserted multi‑transgenes in miniature pigs and mice.
Article in Molecular medicine reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Multi‑transgenic technology is superior to single transgenic technology in biological and medical research. Multi‑transgene insertion mediated by a polycistronic system is more effective for the integration of polygenes. The multi‑transgene insertion patterns and manners of inheritance are not completely understood. Copy number quantification is one available approach for addressing this issue. The present study determined copy numbers in two multi‑transgenic mice (K3 and L3) and two multi‑transgenic miniature pigs (Z2 and Z3) using absolute quantitative polymerase chain reaction analysis. For the F0 generation, a given transgene was able to exhibit different copy number integration capacities in different individuals. For the F1 generation, the most notable characteristic was that the copy number proportions were different among pedigrees (P<0.05). The results of the present study demonstrated that transgenes within the same vector exhibited the same integration trend between the F0 and F1 generations. In conclusion, intraspecific consistency and intergenerational copy numbers were compared and the integration capacity of each specific transgene differed in multi‑transgenic animals. In particular, the copy number of one transgene may not be used to represent other transgenes in polycistronic vector‑mediated multi‑transgenic organisms. Consequently, in multi‑transgenic experimental animal disease model research or breeding, copy numbers provide an important reference. Therefore, each transgene in multi‑transgenic animals must be separately screened to prevent large copy number differences, and inconsistent expression between transgenes and miscellaneous data, in subsequent research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.