Recently, a call for improving basic research protocols in order to get results more relevant for the clinical setting has been made.
Transient transfection is a wide used technique in current research, specially in cancer research.
Transfection efficiency varies within cell lines, protocols, etc..
Depends on the construct. Some luciferase constructs only require 10% of cells to be transfected to detect a signal above backround.
It also depends on the cell type, some cells are renoundedly hard to transfect and thus people accept lower rates of transfection.
As indicated in the previous answer it completely depends on the experimental design. Some experimental methods don't require high transfection rates, others completely depend on almost 100% efficiency. And importantly: Low transfection efficiency is sometimes expected (as eg transfection of some primary cell types), but can also often be amended by other means, such as sorting out or selection for transfected cells. Therefore, setting standards without taking the experimental design into account will always be a little arbitrary...
Ok about comments related to methodology.
But my question was a bit more related to trusting of the Results:
When reviewers for a Journal, or of Research projects: Should we trust results where only 10% of the cells are transfected?
Which would be the confidence limit for a functional response to be trusted?
Any %? At least 50% of the cells in a dish? At least more than 60% of the cells in a dish?
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Biological Science
- Molecular Cell Biology
- Culture Cells
- Cell Line