Extended Data Fig. 3: Analysis of ROS levels, SEAP production and cell viability when applying different half-cell potentials.
From: An electrogenetic interface to program mammalian gene expression by direct current
a, Schematic model of the three-electrode set-up, with a potentiostat connected to an Ag/AgCl reference electrode and two platinum electrodes, of which one serves as a working electrode and the other as a counter-electrode. b,c, Cyclic voltammogram (CV) in standard potassium hexacyanoferrate (III) (K3Fe(CN)6) solution (10 mM, black) or in culture medium (DMEM plus 10% FBS, red) at the potential window of −0.3 to 0.6 V (b) and −5.0 to 5.0 V (c). All CVs were scanned at a rate of 10 mV s−1. d-f, ROS quantification in cell-free culture medium (d), DART-engineered HEK-293 cell cultures (e) and DART-engineered hMSC-TERT cell cultures (f). RFU, relative fluorescence units. g,h, SEAP produced by DART-engineered HEK-293 cells (g) and DART-engineered hMSC-TERT cells (h), 24 h after electrostimulation. i,j, Viability of DART-engineered HEK-293 cells (i) and DART-engineered hMSC-TERT cells (j), 24 h after electrostimulation. All stimulations were performed with the three-electrode system, during 10 or 20 sec at the indicated voltages. Data points represent mean ± SD; n = 4.
