↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of IRES and F2A-Based Locus-Specific Multicistronic Expression in Stable Mouse Lines

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, December 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
patent
2 patents
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
75 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
197 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Comparison of IRES and F2A-Based Locus-Specific Multicistronic Expression in Stable Mouse Lines
Published in
PLOS ONE, December 2011
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0028885
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hsiao Yun Chan, Sivakamasundari, Xing Xing, Petra Kraus, Sook Peng Yap, Patricia Ng, Siew Lan Lim, Thomas Lufkin

Abstract

Efficient and stoichiometric expression of genes concatenated by bi- or multi-cistronic vectors has become an invaluable tool not only in basic biology to track and visualize proteins in vivo, but also for vaccine development and in the clinics for gene therapy. To adequately compare, in vivo, the effectiveness of two of the currently popular co-expression strategies - the internal ribosome entry site (IRES) derived from the picornavirus and the 2A peptide from the foot-and-mouth disease virus (FDMV) (F2A), we analyzed two locus-specific knock-in mouse lines co-expressing SRY-box containing gene 9 (Sox9) and enhanced green fluorescent protein (EGFP) linked by the IRES (Sox9(IRES-EGFP)) or the F2A (Sox9(F2A-EGFP)) sequence. Both the constructs expressed Sox9 and EGFP proteins in the appropriate Sox9 expression domains, with the IRES construct expressing reduced levels of EGFP compared to that of the F2A. The latter, on the other hand, produced about 42.2% Sox9-EGFP fusion protein, reflecting an inefficient ribosome 'skipping' mechanism. To investigate if the discrepancy in the 'skipping' process was locus-dependent, we further analyzed the FLAG(3)-Bapx1(F2A-EGFP) mouse line and found similar levels of fusion protein being produced. To assess if EGFP was hindering the 'skipping' mechanism, we examined another mouse line co-expressing Bagpipe homeobox gene 1 homolog (Bapx1), Cre recombinase and EGFP (Bapx1(F2A-Cre-F2A-EGFP)). While the 'skipping' was highly efficient between Bapx1 and Cre, the 'skipping' between Cre and EGFP was highly inefficient. We have thus demonstrated in our comparison study that the efficient and close to equivalent expression of genes linked by F2A is achievable in stable mouse lines, but the EGFP reporter may cause undesirable inhibition of the 'skipping' at the F2A sequence. Hence, the use of other reporter genes should be explored when utilizing F2A peptides.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 197 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 191 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 58 29%
Researcher 45 23%
Student > Master 31 16%
Student > Bachelor 13 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 3%
Other 19 10%
Unknown 25 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 79 40%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 43 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 6%
Neuroscience 10 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 5 3%
Other 18 9%
Unknown 30 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 29 November 2021.
All research outputs
#3,989,729
of 22,660,862 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#56,757
of 193,497 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,156
of 243,043 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#542
of 2,927 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,660,862 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,497 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 243,043 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2,927 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.