Literature DB >> 14654430

Comparative genotyping of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae laboratory strains S288C and CEN.PK113-7D using oligonucleotide microarrays.

Pascale Daran-Lapujade1, Jean Marc Daran, Peter Kötter, Thomas Petit, Matthew D W Piper, Jack T Pronk.   

Abstract

To analyse the reliability and accuracy of genotype analysis with high-density oligonucleotide microarrays, this method and other experimental approaches were used to analyse genomic DNA of two popular Saccharomyces cerevisiae laboratory strains. S288C was used for systematic sequencing of 'the' S. cerevisiae genome; CEN.PK113-7D is a popular strain for physiological studies and functional genomics. Random amplified polymorphic DNA, electrophoretic karyotyping and microarray analysis all indicated a high level of sequence similarity between the two strains. In the microarray analysis, as few as 288 (4.5%) of the ca. 6300 represented yeast genes were identified that yielded significantly different hybridisation intensities between the two strains. These could be classified as amplified, absent, or with sequence polymorphism in CEN.PK113-7D compared to S288C. A detailed analysis focused on the subset of 25 genes called absent in CEN.PK113-7D. Among these absent genes, 17 were clustered together on five chromosomes, mainly in subtelomeric regions. Thorough analysis of these regions by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and restriction fragment length polymorphism confirmed the absence of these genes in CEN.PK113-7D. Surprisingly, three of these regions were not smaller in CEN.PK113-7D chromosomes, indicating that they may harbour unidentified and potentially new sequences. In addition, eight genes called absent by the microarrays were scattered over the chromosomes. Using diagnostic PCR most of these genes were actually found to be present in CEN.PK113-7D, but after sequencing were found to differ significantly at the DNA level from S288C, explaining the poor hybridisation to the arrays. Our results indicate that DNA microarrays are a powerful tool for determining genotypic similarity between different yeast strains. However, to obtain meaningful information at the individual gene level, this method should be backed up by additional techniques.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14654430     DOI: 10.1016/S1567-1356(03)00156-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  FEMS Yeast Res        ISSN: 1567-1356            Impact factor:   2.796


  18 in total

1.  Grr1p is required for transcriptional induction of amino acid permease genes and proper transcriptional regulation of genes in carbon metabolism of Saccharomyces cerevisiae.

Authors:  Nadine Eckert-Boulet; Birgitte Regenberg; Jens Nielsen
Journal:  Curr Genet       Date:  2004-12-21       Impact factor: 3.886

2.  Molecular analysis of maltotriose active transport and fermentation by Saccharomyces cerevisiae reveals a determinant role for the AGT1 permease.

Authors:  Sergio L Alves; Ricardo A Herberts; Claudia Hollatz; Debora Trichez; Luiz C Miletti; Pedro S de Araujo; Boris U Stambuk
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2008-01-18       Impact factor: 4.792

3.  Defining species specific genome differences in malaria parasites.

Authors:  Kingsley J L Liew; Guangan Hu; Zbynek Bozdech; Preiser R Peter
Journal:  BMC Genomics       Date:  2010-02-23       Impact factor: 3.969

4.  Growth temperature exerts differential physiological and transcriptional responses in laboratory and wine strains of Saccharomyces cerevisiae.

Authors:  Francisco J Pizarro; Michael C Jewett; Jens Nielsen; Eduardo Agosin
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2008-08-22       Impact factor: 4.792

5.  Physiological and transcriptional responses of Saccharomyces cerevisiae to zinc limitation in chemostat cultures.

Authors:  Raffaele De Nicola; Lucie A Hazelwood; Erik A F De Hulster; Michael C Walsh; Theo A Knijnenburg; Marcel J T Reinders; Graeme M Walker; Jack T Pronk; Jean-Marc Daran; Pascale Daran-Lapujade
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2007-10-12       Impact factor: 4.792

6.  Potassium and Sodium Salt Stress Characterization in the Yeasts Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Kluyveromyces marxianus, and Rhodotorula toruloides.

Authors:  Aleksandr Illarionov; Petri-Jaan Lahtvee; Rahul Kumar
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2021-06-11       Impact factor: 4.792

Review 7.  Genome-wide analytical approaches for reverse metabolic engineering of industrially relevant phenotypes in yeast.

Authors:  Bart Oud; Antonius J A van Maris; Jean-Marc Daran; Jack T Pronk
Journal:  FEMS Yeast Res       Date:  2012-01-10       Impact factor: 2.796

8.  Systematic identification of balanced transposition polymorphisms in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.

Authors:  Dina A Faddah; Eric W Ganko; Caroline McCoach; Joseph K Pickrell; Sean E Hanlon; Frederick G Mann; Joanna O Mieczkowska; Corbin D Jones; Jason D Lieb; Todd J Vision
Journal:  PLoS Genet       Date:  2009-06-05       Impact factor: 5.917

9.  Benchmarking two commonly used Saccharomyces cerevisiae strains for heterologous vanillin-β-glucoside production.

Authors:  Tomas Strucko; Olivera Magdenoska; Uffe H Mortensen
Journal:  Metab Eng Commun       Date:  2015-09-11

10.  CRISPR-Cas system enables fast and simple genome editing of industrial Saccharomyces cerevisiae strains.

Authors:  Vratislav Stovicek; Irina Borodina; Jochen Forster
Journal:  Metab Eng Commun       Date:  2015-03-20
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.