Table 7.
Methods of delivering Cre for cell-type targeting, labeling, and manipulation.
| Method of Cre delivery | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Targeted knock-in Cre mouse line | Transgenic Cre mouse line (not generated by homologous recombination) | Cre via AAV | |
| Advantages | • Specific and reliable by genetic targeting to the locus of interest (higher certainty that driver activity will reflect the endogenous expression of the gene of interest) | • Cheap and easy to produce mouse lines | • Stable over time |
| • Comprehensive with Cre mouse lines | • Lower Cre expression than AAV | • Spatial control: can restrict delivery to a particular region | |
| • Sparse if using CreER by adjusting tamoxifen dose | • Can be delivered broadly by systemic (e.g., tail vein or retro-orbital) injection | ||
| • Can combine with viral strategies to achieve spatial control or very strong expression | |||
| • Lower Cre expression than AAV | |||
| Disadvantages | • Time-consuming and costly to produce and maintain mouse lines | • Does not necessarily recapitulate the endogenous gene’s expression | • Expression gradients from injection site(s) |
| • Genetic silencing in mouse lines can affect Cre expression | • AAV vectors increase interleukin levels in the animal | ||
| • Sexual dimorphism can arise that does not reflect the gene’s native expression profile | • High levels of Cre protein exhibit cell toxicity | ||
| • Transgenic animals can lose specificity over time | |||