Literature DB >> 19774400

Physical properties of DNA components affecting the transposition efficiency of the mariner Mos1 element.

Sophie Casteret1, Najat Chbab, Jeanne Cambefort, Corinne Augé-Gouillou, Yves Bigot, Florence Rouleux-Bonnin.   

Abstract

Previous studies have shown that the transposase and the inverted terminal repeat (ITR) of the Mos1 mariner elements are suboptimal for transposition; and that hyperactive transposases and transposon with more efficient ITR configurations can be obtained by rational molecular engineering. In an attempt to determine the extent to which this element is suboptimal for transposition, we investigate here the impact of the three main DNA components on its transposition efficiency in bacteria and in vitro. We found that combinations of natural and synthetic ITRs obtained by systematic evolution of ligands by exponential enrichment did increase the transposition rate. We observed that when untranslated terminal regions were associated with their respective natural ITRs, they acted as transposition enhancers, probably via the early transposition steps. Finally, we demonstrated that the integrity of the Mos1 inner region was essential for transposition. These findings allowed us to propose prototypes of optimized Mos1 vectors, and to define the best sequence features of their associated marker cassettes. These vector prototypes were assayed in HeLa cells, in which Mos1 vectors had so far been found to be inactive. The results obtained revealed that using these prototypes does not circumvent this problem. However, such vectors can be expected to provide new tools for the use in genome engineering in systems such as Caenorhabditis elegans in which Mos1 is very active.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19774400     DOI: 10.1007/s00438-009-0484-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mol Genet Genomics        ISSN: 1617-4623            Impact factor:   3.291


  40 in total

1.  Self-inflicted wounds, template-directed gap repair and a recombination hotspot. Effects of the mariner transposase.

Authors:  A R Lohe; C Timmons; I Beerman; E R Lozovskaya; D L Hartl
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 4.562

2.  cis and trans factors affecting Mos1 mariner evolution and transposition in vitro, and its potential for functional genomics.

Authors:  L R Tosi; S M Beverley
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2000-02-01       Impact factor: 16.971

3.  The GC-rich transposon Bytmar1 from the deep-sea hydrothermal crab, Bythograea thermydron, may encode three transposase isoforms from a single ORF.

Authors:  N Halaimia-Toumi; N Casse; M V Demattei; S Renault; E Pradier; Y Bigot; M Laulier
Journal:  J Mol Evol       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 2.395

4.  Conservation of Palindromic and Mirror Motifs within Inverted Terminal Repeats of mariner-like Elements.

Authors:  Yves Bigot; Benjamin Brillet; Corinne Augé-Gouillou
Journal:  J Mol Biol       Date:  2005-08-05       Impact factor: 5.469

5.  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

6.  Factors affecting transposition of the Himar1 mariner transposon in vitro.

Authors:  D J Lampe; T E Grant; H M Robertson
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  1998-05       Impact factor: 4.562

7.  Transposition of the mariner element from Drosophila mauritiana in zebrafish.

Authors:  J M Fadool; D L Hartl; J E Dowling
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  1998-04-28       Impact factor: 11.205

8.  Regulated transposition of a fish transposon in the mouse germ line.

Authors:  S E Fischer; E Wienholds; R H Plasterk
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2001-05-29       Impact factor: 11.205

9.  Distribution of bending propensity in DNA sequences.

Authors:  A Gabrielian; A Simoncsits; S Pongor
Journal:  FEBS Lett       Date:  1996-09-09       Impact factor: 4.124

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
  6 in total

Review 1.  The Caenorhabditis elegans Transgenic Toolbox.

Authors:  Jeremy Nance; Christian Frøkjær-Jensen
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2019-08       Impact factor: 4.562

2.  The structural code of cyanobacterial genomes.

Authors:  Robert Lehmann; Rainer Machné; Hanspeter Herzel
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2014-07-23       Impact factor: 16.971

3.  Transposable elements in phytopathogenic Verticillium spp.: insights into genome evolution and inter- and intra-specific diversification.

Authors:  Stefan G Amyotte; Xiaoping Tan; Kayla Pennerman; Maria del Mar Jimenez-Gasco; Steven J Klosterman; Li-Jun Ma; Katherine F Dobinson; Paola Veronese
Journal:  BMC Genomics       Date:  2012-07-16       Impact factor: 3.969

4.  In and out of the rRNA genes: characterization of Pokey elements in the sequenced Daphnia genome.

Authors:  Tyler A Elliott; Deborah E Stage; Teresa J Crease; Thomas H Eickbush
Journal:  Mob DNA       Date:  2013-09-23

5.  Regulation of mariner transposition: the peculiar case of Mos1.

Authors:  Jérôme Jaillet; Murielle Genty; Jeanne Cambefort; Jacques-Deric Rouault; Corinne Augé-Gouillou
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-08-14       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Random and targeted transgene insertion in Caenorhabditis elegans using a modified Mos1 transposon.

Authors:  Christian Frøkjær-Jensen; M Wayne Davis; Mihail Sarov; Jon Taylor; Stephane Flibotte; Matthew LaBella; Andrei Pozniakovsky; Donald G Moerman; Erik M Jorgensen
Journal:  Nat Methods       Date:  2014-03-16       Impact factor: 28.547

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.