Back

Defining the EM-signature of successful cell-transfection

Pemberton, J. G.; Tenkova, T.; Felgner, P. L.; Zimmerberg, J.; Balla, T.; Heuser, J. E.

2024-03-07 cell biology
10.1101/2024.03.07.583927 bioRxiv
Show abstract

In this report, we describe the architecture of Lipofectamine 2000 and 3000 transfection- reagents, as they appear inside of transfected cells, using classical transmission electron microscopy (EM). We also demonstrate that they provoke consistent structural changes after they have entered cells, changes that not only provide new insights into the mechanism of action of these particular transfection-reagents, but also provide a convenient and robust method for identifying by EM which cells in any culture have been successfully transfected. This also provides clues to the mechanism(s) of their toxic effects, when they are applied in excess. We demonstrate that after being bulk-endocytosed by cells, the cationic spheroids of Lipofectamine remain intact throughout the entire time of culturing, but escape from their endosomes and penetrate directly into the cytoplasm of the cell. In so doing, they provoke a stereotypical recruitment and rearrangement of endoplasmic reticulum (ER), and they ultimately end up escaping into the cytoplasm and forming unique inclusion-bodies. Once free in the cytoplasm, they also invariably develop dense and uniform coatings of cytoplasmic ribosomes on their surfaces, and finally, they become surrounded by annulate lamellae of the ER. In the end, these annulate-lamellar enclosures become the ultrastructural signatures of these inclusion-bodies, and serve to positively and definitively identify all cells that have been effectively transfected. Importantly, these new EM-observations define several new and unique properties of these classical Lipofectamines, and allow them to be discriminated from other lipoidal or particulate transfection-reagents, which we find do not physically break out of endosomes or end up in inclusion bodies, and in fact, provoke absolutely none of these signature cytoplasmic reactions.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
eLife
5828 papers in training set
Top 6%
12.7%
2
Molecular Biology of the Cell
311 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
12.7%
3
Journal of Cell Biology
392 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
11.0%
4
Journal of Cell Science
393 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
7.9%
5
Biology of the Cell
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.7%
50% of probability mass above
6
Biology Open
156 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
4.3%
7
Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology
233 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
4.0%
8
Cells
249 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
3.2%
9
Journal of Structural Biology
64 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.2%
10
Life Science Alliance
285 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.2%
11
Cell
431 papers in training set
Top 4%
2.4%
12
EMBO Reports
263 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.9%
13
The EMBO Journal
309 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
14
Cell Reports
1498 papers in training set
Top 20%
1.7%
15
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 62%
1.3%
16
PLOS Biology
486 papers in training set
Top 8%
1.1%
17
iScience
1154 papers in training set
Top 26%
1.1%
18
Biophysical Journal
631 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.1%
19
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2444 papers in training set
Top 35%
1.1%
20
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 51%
1.1%
21
Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences
96 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.0%
22
Journal of Extracellular Vesicles
55 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.9%
23
Communications Biology
993 papers in training set
Top 35%
0.6%
24
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 65%
0.6%
25
Frontiers in Molecular Biosciences
102 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.6%