Table 1

Comparison of the different injection and electroporation techniques. Intramuscularly injected mice are represented as IM and intra-arterially injected mice are represented as IA. Mice that were electroporated are identified with a + sign and mice that were not electroporated are identified with a - sign. The four different electrode types are identified with letters that correspond to the letters in figure 3. a mean % β-Gal expression = average value of [β-Gal activity (mg)/total protein (mg)]. b,c,d,e,f,g statistical significance (p < .05) between groups with differing superscripts. n = 7 for each treatment group.
Group #
 Limb
 Injection
 EP
 Electrode Type
 Mean % β-Gal expressiona (+/- SD)
 Mean % Area of Muscle Damage (+/- SD)
1
 Left
 IA CMVLacZ in 0.9% Saline
 No EP
 No EP
 0.0475b ± 0.0377
2
 Right
 IA CMVLacZ in 0.9% Saline
 +
 A
 0.4900h ± 0.0200
3
 Left
 IM CMVLacZ in 0.9% Saline
 No EP
 No EP
 0.0200b ± 0.0082
4
 Right
 IM CMVLacZ in 0.9% Saline
 +
 A
 7.790c,e ± 4.5254
 5.6 ± 4.9
5
 Right
 IM CMVLacZ in 0.9% Saline
 +
 B
 5.04c,d,f ± 2.4683
 8.5 ± 4.9
6
 Right
 IM CMVLacZ in 0.9% Saline
 +
 C
 3.6167d ± 2.2234
 21.3 ± 6.1
7
 Right
 IM CMVLacZ in 0.9% Saline
 +
 D
 11.650e,g ± 3.0645
 3.4 ± 4.9
8
 Right
 IM CMVLacZ in 1.25% DMSO
 +
 A
 8.190e,f,g ± 1.9986
9
 Left
 IM CMVLacZ in LipoFECTAMINE
 No EP
 No EP
 0.0214b ± 0.0107
10
 Right
 IM CMVLacZ in LipoFECTAMINE
 +
 A
 0.0414b ± 0.1912

Taylor et al. BMC Biotechnology 2004 4:11   doi:10.1186/1472-6750-4-11