Literature DB >> 16102425

Mutant Mos1 mariner transposons are hyperactive in Aedes aegypti.

David W Pledger1, Craig J Coates.   

Abstract

The development of genetic strategies to control the spread of mosquito-borne diseases through the use of class II transposons has been hampered by suboptimal rates of transformation and the absence of post-integration mobility for all transposons evaluated to date. Two Mos1 mariner transposase mutants were produced by the site-directed mutagenesis of amino acids, E137 and E264, to K and R, respectively. The effects of these mutations on the transpositional activities of Mos1-derived transposon constructs were evaluated by interplasmid transposition assays in Escherichia coli and Aedes aegypti. The transpositional activities of two Mos1 transposons, one with imperfect wild type inverted terminal repeats (ITRs) and another that contained two perfectly matched 3' ITRs, were increased when the mutant transposases were supplied in trans in E. coli. The use of the perfect repeat transposon with wild type transposase did not result in an increase in transposition frequency in Ae. aegypti. However, an improvement in the integrity of the transposition process did occur, as evidenced by a lower rate of recombination events in which the transgene was transferred. An increase in the transpositional activity of the perfect repeat transposon was observed in the mosquito in the presence of either mutant transposase, and in the case of the E264R transposase, the observed increase in transposition frequency was also accompanied by a further improvement in the integrity of transposition. We discuss the possible contributions of these mutant residues to the transposition of the perfect repeat Mos1 transposon, the implications of these results with respect to the molecular evolution of Mos1, and the potential uses of the perfect repeat transposon and mutant transposases for the improvement of Mos1 mediated germ line transformation of Ae. aegypti.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16102425     DOI: 10.1016/j.ibmb.2005.06.002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Insect Biochem Mol Biol        ISSN: 0965-1748            Impact factor:   4.714


  11 in total

1.  piggyBac is a flexible and highly active transposon as compared to sleeping beauty, Tol2, and Mos1 in mammalian cells.

Authors:  Sareina Chiung-Yuan Wu; Yaa-Jyuhn James Meir; Craig J Coates; Alfred M Handler; Pawel Pelczar; Stefan Moisyadi; Joseph M Kaminski
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2006-09-27       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 2.  Bacterial genetic methods to explore the biology of mariner transposons.

Authors:  David J Lampe
Journal:  Genetica       Date:  2009-08-27       Impact factor: 1.082

3.  Excision efficiency is not strongly coupled to transgenic rate: cell type-dependent transposition efficiency of sleeping beauty and piggyBac DNA transposons.

Authors:  Orsolya Kolacsek; Zsuzsa Erdei; Agota Apáti; Sára Sándor; Zsuzsanna Izsvák; Zoltán Ivics; Balázs Sarkadi; Tamás I Orbán
Journal:  Hum Gene Ther Methods       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 2.396

4.  Transposition of a rice Mutator-like element in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae.

Authors:  Dongyan Zhao; Ann Ferguson; Ning Jiang
Journal:  Plant Cell       Date:  2015-01-13       Impact factor: 11.277

5.  Mariner Mos1 transposase optimization by rational mutagenesis.

Authors:  Stéphanie Germon; Nicolas Bouchet; Sophie Casteret; Guillaume Carpentier; Jérémy Adet; Yves Bigot; Corinne Augé-Gouillou
Journal:  Genetica       Date:  2009-06-17       Impact factor: 1.082

6.  The mariner Mos1 transposase produced in tobacco is active in vitro.

Authors:  Xavier Thomas; Sabah Hedhili; Laurent Beuf; Marie-Véronique Demattéi; Hélène Laparra; Giang Ngan Khong; Jean-Christophe Breitler; Frédéric Montandon; Elodie Carnus; Frédéric Norre; Daniel Burtin; Pascal Gantet; Yves Bigot; Sylvaine Renault
Journal:  Genetica       Date:  2009-10-22       Impact factor: 1.082

7.  Active integration: new strategies for transgenesis.

Authors:  Eric T Shinohara; Joseph M Kaminski; David J Segal; Pawel Pelczar; Ravindra Kolhe; Thomas Ryan; Craig J Coates; Malcolm J Fraser; Alfred M Handler; Ryuzo Yanagimachi; Stefan Moisyadi
Journal:  Transgenic Res       Date:  2007-03-06       Impact factor: 2.788

Review 8.  Delivering the goods: viral and non-viral gene therapy systems and the inherent limits on cargo DNA and internal sequences.

Authors:  Helen Atkinson; Ronald Chalmers
Journal:  Genetica       Date:  2010-01-19       Impact factor: 1.633

9.  Insertion sequence content reflects genome plasticity in strains of the root nodule actinobacterium Frankia.

Authors:  Derek M Bickhart; Johann P Gogarten; Pascal Lapierre; Louis S Tisa; Philippe Normand; David R Benson
Journal:  BMC Genomics       Date:  2009-10-12       Impact factor: 3.969

10.  Factors acting on Mos1 transposition efficiency.

Authors:  Ludivine Sinzelle; Gwenhael Jégot; Benjamin Brillet; Florence Rouleux-Bonnin; Yves Bigot; Corinne Augé-Gouillou
Journal:  BMC Mol Biol       Date:  2008-11-26       Impact factor: 2.946

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.