1991
DOI: 10.1007/bf00236468
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Factors affecting transient gene expression in electroporated Glycine max protoplasts

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

4
3
0
1

Year Published

1995
1995
2008
2008

Publication Types

Select...
3
3
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
4
3
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…2, 3), as reported for other species (42)(43)(44)(45). This result highlights an advantage of FCM over biochemical methods, namely, the ability to quantify gene expression on a per-cell basis in a small (Ͻ6%; Fig.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 80%
“…2, 3), as reported for other species (42)(43)(44)(45). This result highlights an advantage of FCM over biochemical methods, namely, the ability to quantify gene expression on a per-cell basis in a small (Ͻ6%; Fig.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 80%
“…2a) . Similar frequencies were observed by other groups in different species (Zhang & Wu, 1988 ;Dhir et al ., 1991 ;Diaz & Carbonero, 1992) .…”
Section: Transient Gus Expression (Tge) In Electroporated Protoplastssupporting
confidence: 91%
“…One ml of protoplast suspension was mixed with 20 mg of the plasmid DNA to which was added 200 ml of 15% (w/v) PEG 4000. Electroporation was performed by delivering an electric pulse at 25 mF from the capacitor charged at 150 V (350 V cm 21 ) as described previously (Dhir et al, 1991;Mitchell et al, 1998). Electroporated protoplasts were diluted immediately after electroporation with KM8P (Kao and Michayluk, 1975) medium to a density of 10 5 ml 21 , and incubated in the dark for 1 h before embedding in 1.2% SeaPlaque (FMC) agarose.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%