Comparisons of the Transfection Methods

Abstract

From time to time, workers have presented data enabling quantitative comparisons of transfection methods, especially comparisons of their sensitivities for detecting viral NA in some particular cell-viral NA system. Usually, these comparisons have indicated that some new transfection method, discovered or developed by the investigator himself, has greater sensitivity than some old transfection method. Thus, in this vein, Holland, Hoyer, McLaren and Syverton (1960), using poliovirus RNA and HeLa cell sheets, found their hypertonic MgSO4 method to be 5 to 1,000 times as sensitive as a hypertonic NaCl method, 10 to 1,000 times as sensitive as a hypertonic KCl method, and > 10,000 times as sensitive as hypertonic sucrose. At the same time, Dubes and Klingler (1961) found their calcium phosphate and chromic oxide transfection methods to be far more sensitive than some hypertonic NaCl methods, for titrating the infectivity of poliovirus RNA on primary rhesus or cynomolgus monkey kidney cell sheets; and later, using the same cell-viral NA system, Dubes, Faas, Kelly, Chapin, Lamb and Lucas (1964) found their talc method to be approximately 50 times as sensitive as a hypertonic NaCl method. The data of Ludwig and Smull (1963), obtained using HeLa cell sheets and poliovirus RNA, showed their histone transfection method to be about 8 times as sensitive as a hypertonic NaCl method. Vaheri and Pagano (1965), using poliovirus RNA and primary rhesus monkey kidney cell sheets, found their DEAE-dextran method to be about 30 times more sensitive than a hypertonic MgSO4 method, and > 400 times more sensitive than hypertonic sucrose. And, finally, Amstey and Parkman (1966), using poliovirus RNA and primary African green monkey kidney cell sheets, found their DMSO transfection method to be about 4 times more sensitive than a DEAE-dextran method, 17 times more sensitive than a protamine method, 110 times more sensitive than a hypertonic MgSO4 method, and about 300 times more sensitive than a histone method.