| Title |
Improved delivery of Cas9 protein/gRNA complexes using lipofectamine CRISPRMAX
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Biotechnology Techniques, February 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10529-016-2064-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Xin Yu, Xiquan Liang, Huimin Xie, Shantanu Kumar, Namritha Ravinder, Jason Potter, Xavier de Mollerat du Jeu, Jonathan D. Chesnut |
| Abstract |
To identify the best lipid nanoparticles for delivery of purified Cas9 protein and gRNA complexes (Cas9 RNPs) into mammalian cells and to establish the optimal conditions for transfection. Using a systematic approach, we screened 60 transfection reagents using six commonly-used mammalian cell lines and identified a novel transfection reagent (named Lipofectamine CRISPRMAX). Based on statistical analysis, the genome modification efficiencies in Lipofectamine CRISPRMAX-transfected cell lines were 40 or 15 % higher than those in Lipofectamine 3000 or RNAiMAX-transfected cell lines, respectively. Upon optimization of transfection conditions, we observed 85, 75 or 55 % genome editing efficiencies in HEK293FT cells, mouse ES cells, or human iPSCs, respectively. Furthermore, we were able to co-deliver donor DNA with Cas9 RNPs into a disrupted EmGFP stable cell line, resulting in the generation of up to 17 % EmGFP-positive cells. Lipofectamine CRISPRMAX was characterized as the best lipid nanoparticles for the delivery of Cas9 RNPs into a variety of mammalian cell lines, including mouse ES cells and iPSCs. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 567 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Denmark | 2 | <1% |
| Finland | 1 | <1% |
| China | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 562 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 106 | 19% |
| Researcher | 106 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 78 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 67 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 23 | 4% |
| Other | 65 | 11% |
| Unknown | 122 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 169 | 30% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 131 | 23% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 35 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 18 | 3% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 18 | 3% |
| Other | 63 | 11% |
| Unknown | 133 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 February 2024.
All research outputs
#3,343,138
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Biotechnology Techniques
#82
of 2,762 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#50,181
of 312,017 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biotechnology Techniques
#2
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,762 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 312,017 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.