Literature DB >> 25863058

Electroporation of DC-3F cells is a dual process.

Lars H Wegner1, Wolfgang Frey2, Aude Silve2.   

Abstract

Treatment of biological material by pulsed electric fields is a versatile technique in biotechnology and biomedicine used, for example, in delivering DNA into cells (transfection), ablation of tumors, and food processing. Field exposure is associated with a membrane permeability increase usually ascribed to electroporation, i.e., formation of aqueous membrane pores. Knowledge of the underlying processes at the membrane level is predominantly built on theoretical considerations and molecular dynamics (MD) simulations. However, experimental data needed to monitor these processes with sufficient temporal resolution are scarce. The whole-cell patch-clamp technique was employed to investigate the effect of millisecond pulsed electric fields on DC-3F cells. Cellular membrane permeabilization was monitored by a conductance increase. For the first time, to our knowledge, it could be established experimentally that electroporation consists of two clearly separate processes: a rapid membrane poration (transient electroporation) that occurs while the membrane is depolarized or hyperpolarized to voltages beyond so-called threshold potentials (here, +201 mV and -231 mV, respectively) and is reversible within ∼100 ms after the pulse, and a long-term, or persistent, permeabilization covering the whole voltage range. The latter prevailed after the pulse for at least 40 min, the postpulse time span tested experimentally. With mildly depolarizing or hyperpolarizing pulses just above threshold potentials, the two processes could be separated, since persistent (but not transient) permeabilization required repetitive pulse exposure. Conductance increased stepwise and gradually with depolarizing and hyperpolarizing pulses, respectively. Persistent permeabilization could also be elicited by single depolarizing/hyperpolarizing pulses of very high field strength. Experimental measurements of propidium iodide uptake provided evidence of a real membrane phenomenon, rather than a mere patch-clamp artifact. In short, the response of DC-3F cells to strong pulsed electric fields was separated into a transient electroporation and a persistent permeabilization. The latter dominates postpulse membrane properties but to date has not been addressed by electroporation theory or MD simulations.
Copyright © 2015 Biophysical Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25863058      PMCID: PMC4390810          DOI: 10.1016/j.bpj.2015.01.038

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biophys J        ISSN: 0006-3495            Impact factor:   4.033


  44 in total

1.  Nanoelectropulse-induced phosphatidylserine translocation.

Authors:  P Thomas Vernier; Yinghua Sun; Laura Marcu; Cheryl M Craft; Martin A Gundersen
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 4.033

2.  Manipulation of cell volume and membrane pore comparison following single cell permeabilization with 60- and 600-ns electric pulses.

Authors:  Olena M Nesin; Olga N Pakhomova; Shu Xiao; Andrei G Pakhomov
Journal:  Biochim Biophys Acta       Date:  2010-12-20

Review 3.  Microsecond and nanosecond electric pulses in cancer treatments.

Authors:  Marie Breton; Lluis M Mir
Journal:  Bioelectromagnetics       Date:  2011-08-03       Impact factor: 2.010

4.  In vivo electrical conductivity measurements during and after tumor electroporation: conductivity changes reflect the treatment outcome.

Authors:  Antoni Ivorra; Bassim Al-Sakere; Boris Rubinsky; Lluis M Mir
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2009-09-17       Impact factor: 3.609

5.  Control by ATP and ADP of voltage-induced mammalian-cell-membrane permeabilization, gene transfer and resulting expression.

Authors:  M P Rols; C Delteil; M Golzio; J Teissié
Journal:  Eur J Biochem       Date:  1998-06-01

6.  Transport of siRNA through lipid membranes driven by nanosecond electric pulses: an experimental and computational study.

Authors:  Marie Breton; Lucie Delemotte; Aude Silve; Lluis M Mir; Mounir Tarek
Journal:  J Am Chem Soc       Date:  2012-08-16       Impact factor: 15.419

7.  Transient potential gradients and impedance measures of tethered bilayer lipid membranes: pore-forming peptide insertion and the effect of electroporation.

Authors:  Charles G Cranfield; Bruce A Cornell; Stephan L Grage; Paul Duckworth; Sonia Carne; Anne S Ulrich; Boris Martinac
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2014-01-07       Impact factor: 4.033

8.  Listeria monocytogenes cell wall constituents exert a charge effect on electroporation threshold.

Authors:  Alex Golberg; Chris S Rae; Boris Rubinsky
Journal:  Biochim Biophys Acta       Date:  2011-11-09

Review 9.  Electroporation theory. Concepts and mechanisms.

Authors:  J C Weaver
Journal:  Methods Mol Biol       Date:  1995

10.  Functional truncated membrane pores.

Authors:  David Stoddart; Mariam Ayub; Lajos Höfler; Pinky Raychaudhuri; Jochen W Klingelhoefer; Giovanni Maglia; Andrew Heron; Hagan Bayley
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2014-01-27       Impact factor: 11.205

View more
  3 in total

1.  Dependence of Electroporation Detection Threshold on Cell Radius: An Explanation to Observations Non Compatible with Schwan's Equation Model.

Authors:  Borja Mercadal; P Thomas Vernier; Antoni Ivorra
Journal:  J Membr Biol       Date:  2016-05-11       Impact factor: 1.843

2.  Control by Low Levels of Calcium of Mammalian Cell Membrane Electropermeabilization.

Authors:  Florin Ciobanu; Muriel Golzio; Eugenia Kovacs; Justin Teissié
Journal:  J Membr Biol       Date:  2017-08-20       Impact factor: 1.843

3.  Ionomycin-Induced Changes in Membrane Potential Alter Electroporation Outcomes in HL-60 Cells.

Authors:  Erik J Aiken; Brian G Kilberg; Siyuan Yu; Susan C Hagness; John H Booske
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2018-06-19       Impact factor: 4.033

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.