Testimonials
4.6/5
Performance vs usual method:
3.8/5
Workflow integration:
4.5/5
Protocol ease:
Name: Stuart Fawke
Organisation: Wellcome Sanger Institute
Core Research Area:
Human genetic variants
Which transfection or delivery methods have you used before?:
Xfect
What type of cargo did you use?:
What cell type(s) did you use?:
Mammalian cell line HAP1
Was your experiment in 2D culture, 3D, or suspension?:
2D
Please briefly describe the goal of your experiment:
Find the optimal delivery method for plasmid DNA based HDR library that results in the best balance of DNA delivery and cell survival
How easy was the protocol to follow? (1–5 scale):
2. A little complicated
How well did BubbleFect integrate into your existing workflow? (1-5 scale):
5. Very easy
What were the observed outcomes of your experiment?:
The optimum in my situation seems to lie around 40-60uM and 0.5-1ng/ul plasmid DNA
Compared to your usual method, how did BubbleFect perform? (1-5 scale):
Would you use BubbleFect again for this application?:
Yes
Protocol Ease: 2/5
Workflow Integration: 5/5
Name: Emma Kinloch
Organisation: The Francis Crick Institute
BubbleFect Performance: 5/5
“Almost 100% delivery with no effect on cell viability”
Core Research Area:
p53, cell fate decisions, chemical biology
Which transfection or delivery methods have you used before?:
Mechanical - bead loading, cell squeezing
What type of cargo did you use?:
Protein
What cell type(s) did you use?:
HCT116 and H1299 (human cancer cell lines)
Was your experiment in 2D culture, 3D, or suspension?:
2D
Please briefly describe the goal of your experiment:
Delivery of GFP protein into cells at high efficiency with little effect on cell viability
How easy was the protocol to follow? (1–5 scale):
5. Very easy
How well did BubbleFect integrate into your existing workflow? (1-5 scale):
5. Very easy
What were the observed outcomes of your experiment?:
Almost 100% delivery with no effect on cell viability
Compared to your usual method, how did BubbleFect perform? (1-5 scale):
5. Much better
Would you use BubbleFect again for this application?:
Yes
Protocol Ease: 5/5
Workflow Integration: 5/5
BubbleFect Performance: 5/5
Organisation: [Genomics Biotech]
BubbleFect Performance: 4/5
Core Research Area:
Which transfection or delivery methods have you used before?:
Lonza Nucleofection, Lipofectamine RNAiMax, LNPs
What type of cargo did you use?:
Protein
What cell type(s) did you use?:
Fibroblasts
Was your experiment in 2D culture, 3D, or suspension?:
2D culture
Please briefly describe the goal of your experiment:
How easy was the protocol to follow? (1–5 scale):
5. Very easy
How well did BubbleFect integrate into your existing workflow? (1-5 scale):
5. Very easy
What were the observed outcomes of your experiment?:
Compared to your usual method, how did BubbleFect perform? (1-5 scale):
4. Better
Would you use BubbleFect again for this application?:
Yes
Protocol Ease: 5/5
Workflow Integration: 5/5
BubbleFect Performance: 4/5
Organisation: [Academic Institution]
BubbleFect Performance: 5/5
Core Research Area:
Neuroscience
Which transfection or delivery methods have you used before?:
ProtiFect
What type of cargo did you use?:
Protein
What cell type(s) did you use?:
SH-SY5Y
Was your experiment in 2D culture, 3D, or suspension?:
2D culture
Please briefly describe the goal of your experiment:
Deliver a recombinant protein to cells for further functional assays
How easy was the protocol to follow? (1–5 scale):
2. A little complicated
How well did BubbleFect integrate into your existing workflow? (1-5 scale):
3. OK
What were the observed outcomes of your experiment?:
We compared the delivery efficiency between BubbleFect and ProtiFect, and BubbleFect worked better than ProtiFect.
Compared to your usual method, how did BubbleFect perform? (1-5 scale):
5. Much better
Would you use BubbleFect again for this application?:
Yes
Protocol Ease: 2/5
Workflow Integration: 3/5
BubbleFect Performance: 5/5
Organisation: [Academic Institution]
BubbleFect Performance: 5/5
Core Research Area:
Genetics (******)
Which transfection or delivery methods have you used before?:
Lipofection
What type of cargo did you use?:
Plasmid DNA
What cell type(s) did you use?:
mouse NIH 3T3
Was your experiment in 2D culture, 3D, or suspension?:
2D culture
Please briefly describe the goal of your experiment:
Co-transfect two ~8-9kb plasmids, each one carrying one half of a (******) base editor.
How easy was the protocol to follow? (1–5 scale):
4. Relatively simple
How well did BubbleFect integrate into your existing workflow? (1-5 scale):
5. Very easy
What were the observed outcomes of your experiment?:
~10% double transfectants (measured by FACS) in a 24-well plate layout one day after transfection.
Compared to your usual method, how did BubbleFect perform? (1-5 scale):
5. Much better
Would you use BubbleFect again for this application?:
Yes
Protocol Ease: 4/5
Workflow Integration: 5/5
BubbleFect Performance: 5/5
Organisation: [Pharmaceutical]
BubbleFect Performance: 4/5
“low toxicity was good to see, even transfection so all in all I was happy with the results”
Core Research Area:
Target ID for human therapeutics
Which transfection or delivery methods have you used before?:
Lipofectamine, electroporation
What type of cargo did you use?:
Labeled protein, RNP, cDNA plasmid
What cell type(s) did you use?:
Huh7, HCT-116
Was your experiment in 2D culture, 3D, or suspension?:
2d
Please briefly describe the goal of your experiment:
Check if it was possible to transfect cells
How easy was the protocol to follow? (1–5 scale):
5. Very easy
How well did BubbleFect integrate into your existing workflow? (1-5 scale):
4. With some ease
What were the observed outcomes of your experiment?:
Unfortunately we needed larger amounts of cargo than other methods making it rather expensive
Compared to your usual method, how did BubbleFect perform? (1-5 scale):
4. Better
Would you use BubbleFect again for this application?:
Maybe
Protocol Ease: 5/5
Workflow Integration: 4/5
BubbleFect Performance: 4/5