↓ Skip to main content

A Simple and Efficient In Vivo Non-viral RNA Transfection Method for Labeling the Whole Axonal Tree of Individual Adult Long-Range Projection Neurons

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroanatomy, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
46 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
A Simple and Efficient In Vivo Non-viral RNA Transfection Method for Labeling the Whole Axonal Tree of Individual Adult Long-Range Projection Neurons
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroanatomy, March 2016
DOI 10.3389/fnana.2016.00027
Pubmed ID
Authors

César Porrero, Javier Rodríguez-Moreno, José I. Quetglas, Cristian Smerdou, Takahiro Furuta, Francisco Clascá

Abstract

We report a highly efficient, simple, and non-infective method for labeling individual long-range projection neurons (LRPNs) in a specific location with enough sparseness and intensity to allow complete and unambiguous reconstructions of their entire axonal tree. The method is based on the "in vivo" transfection of a large RNA construct that drives the massive expression of green fluorescent protein. The method combines two components: injection of a small volume of a hyperosmolar NaCl solution containing the Pal-eGFP-Sindbis RNA construct (Furuta et al., 2001), followed by the application of high-frequency electric current pulses through the micropipette tip. We show that, although each component alone increases transfection efficacy, compared to simple volume injections of standard RNA solution, the highest efficacy (85.7%) is achieved by the combination of both components. In contrast with the infective viral Sindbis vector, RNA transfection occurs exclusively at the position of the injection micropipette tip. This method simplifies consistently labeling one or a few isolated neurons per brain, a strategy that allows unambiguously resolving and quantifying the brain-wide and often multi-branched monosynaptic circuits created by LRPNs.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 2%
Spain 1 2%
France 1 2%
Unknown 43 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 26%
Student > Master 9 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 13%
Professor 4 9%
Student > Bachelor 4 9%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 6 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 16 35%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 30%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Engineering 2 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 4%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 8 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 March 2016.
All research outputs
#18,447,592
of 22,856,968 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroanatomy
#924
of 1,161 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#219,641
of 300,781 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroanatomy
#37
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,856,968 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,161 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.9. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 300,781 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.