Literature DB >> 14506218

Gene vector and transposable element behavior in mosquitoes.

David A O'Brochta1, Nagaraja Sethuraman, Raymond Wilson, Robert H Hice, Alexandra C Pinkerton, Cynthia S Levesque, Dennis K Bideshi, Nijole Jasinskiene, Craig J Coates, Anthony A James, Michael J Lehane, Peter W Atkinson.   

Abstract

The development of efficient germ-line transformation technologies for mosquitoes has increased the ability of entomologists to find, isolate and analyze genes. The utility of the currently available systems will be determined by a number of factors including the behavior of the gene vectors during the initial integration event and their behavior after chromosomal integration. Post-integration behavior will determine whether the transposable elements being employed currently as primary gene vectors will be useful as gene-tagging and enhancer-trapping agents. The post-integration behavior of existing insect vectors has not been extensively examined. Mos1 is useful as a primary germ-line transformation vector in insects but is inefficiently remobilized in Drosophila melanogaster and Aedes aegypti. Hermes transforms D. melanogaster efficiently and can be remobilized in this species. This element is also useful for creating transgenic A. aegypti, but its mode of integration in mosquitoes results in the insertion of flanking plasmid DNA. Hermes can be remobilized in the soma of A. aegypti and transposes using a common cut-and-paste mechanism; however, the element does not remobilize in the germ line. piggyBac can be used to create transgenic mosquitoes and occasionally integrates using a mechanism other than a simple cut-and-paste mechanism. Preliminary data suggest that remobilization is infrequent. Minos also functions in mosquitoes and, like the other gene vectors, appears to remobilize inefficiently following integration. These results have implications for future gene vector development efforts and applications.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14506218     DOI: 10.1242/jeb.00638

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Biol        ISSN: 0022-0949            Impact factor:   3.312


  39 in total

1.  piggyBac transposon remobilization and enhancer detection in Anopheles mosquitoes.

Authors:  David A O'Brochta; Robert T Alford; Kristina L Pilitt; Channa U Aluvihare; Robert A Harrell
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2011-09-19       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Assessing fitness costs for transgenic Aedes aegypti expressing the GFP marker and transposase genes.

Authors:  Nic Irvin; Mark S Hoddle; David A O'Brochta; Bryan Carey; Peter W Atkinson
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2004-01-07       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 3.  Safe and fit genetically modified insects for pest control: from lab to field applications.

Authors:  F Scolari; P Siciliano; P Gabrieli; L M Gomulski; A Bonomi; G Gasperi; A R Malacrida
Journal:  Genetica       Date:  2010-08-20       Impact factor: 1.082

4.  Evolution and horizontal transfer of a DD37E DNA transposon in mosquitoes.

Authors:  James K Biedler; Hongguang Shao; Zhijian Tu
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2007-10-18       Impact factor: 4.562

Review 5.  Mariner transposons as genetic tools in vertebrate cells.

Authors:  L Delaurière; B Chénais; Y Hardivillier; L Gauvry; N Casse
Journal:  Genetica       Date:  2009-05-29       Impact factor: 1.082

6.  Genetic transformation of the codling moth, Cydia pomonella L., with piggyBac EGFP.

Authors:  Holly J Ferguson; Lisa G Neven; Stephen T Thibault; Ahmed Mohammed; Malcolm Fraser
Journal:  Transgenic Res       Date:  2010-04-13       Impact factor: 2.788

7.  High efficiency site-specific genetic engineering of the mosquito genome.

Authors:  D D Nimmo; L Alphey; J M Meredith; P Eggleston
Journal:  Insect Mol Biol       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 3.585

8.  Use of the piggyBac transposon to create HIV-1 gag transgenic insect cell lines for continuous VLP production.

Authors:  Alisson G Lynch; Fiona Tanzer; Malcolm J Fraser; Enid G Shephard; Anna-Lise Williamson; Edward P Rybicki
Journal:  BMC Biotechnol       Date:  2010-03-31       Impact factor: 2.563

Review 9.  Culture for genetic manipulation of developmental stages of Schistosoma mansoni.

Authors:  Victoria H Mann; Maria E Morales; Gabriel Rinaldi; Paul J Brindley
Journal:  Parasitology       Date:  2009-09-21       Impact factor: 3.234

10.  Transpositionally active episomal hAT elements.

Authors:  David A O'Brochta; Christina D Stosic; Kristina Pilitt; Ramanand A Subramanian; Robert H Hice; Peter W Atkinson
Journal:  BMC Mol Biol       Date:  2009-12-14       Impact factor: 2.946

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.