ArticleIn vitro cellular & developmental biology. Animal2024
Evaluation of culture methods and chemical reagent combinations on CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing systems by lipofection in pig zygotes.
Article in In vitro cellular & developmental biology. Animal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficient gene editing of pig embryos by combining electroporation and lipofection.Veterinary world · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
The delivery of CRISPR/Cas ribonucleoprotein (RNP) complexes is gaining attention owing to its high cleavage efficiency and reduced off-target effects. Although RNPs can be delivered into porcine zygotes via electroporation with relatively high efficiency, lipofection-mediated transfection appears to be versatile because of its ease of use, low cost, and adaptation to high-throughput systems. However, this system requires improvements in terms of embryo development and mutation rates. Therefore, this study elucidated the effects of culture methods and reagent combinations on the CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing systems by using three lipofection reagents: Lipofectamine™ CRISPRMAX™ Cas9 Transfection Reagent (CM), Lipofectamine™ 2000 Transfection Reagent (LP), and jetCRISPR™ RNP Transfection Reagent (Jet). Porcine zona pellucida-free zygotes were incubated for 5 h with Cas9, a guide RNA targeting CD163, and the above lipofection reagents. When examining the effect of culture methods using 4-well (multiple embryo culture) and 25-well plates (single embryo culture) on the efficiency of CM-mediated zygote transfection, the culture of embryos in 25-well plates significantly increased the blastocyst formation rate; however, there was no difference in mutation rates between the 4-well and 25-well plates. When assessing the effects of individual or combined reagents on the efficiency of zygote transfection, the mutation rate was significantly lower for individual LP compared to individual CM- and Jet-mediated transfections. Moreover, combinations of lipofection transfection reagents did not significantly increase the mutation rate or mutation efficiency.
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.