Literature DB >> 24182920

Gene knockouts, in vivo site-directed mutagenesis and other modifications using the delitto perfetto system in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.

Samantha Stuckey1, Francesca Storici.   

Abstract

Gene manipulation serves the purpose of providing a better understanding of the function of specific genes as well as for developing novel variants of the genes of interest. The generation of knockout genes, the alteration, depletion, or enhancement of a particular gene function through the generation of specific gene mutations, or the generation of random mutations in a gene are all essential processes for gene manipulation. The genome of the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae is relatively easy to modify, owing to its efficient homologous recombination (HR) system. Gene knockout can be a very simple, one-step approach to eliminate a gene by substituting its DNA sequence with that of a genetic marker. Differently, desired mutations can be introduced into a gene by replacing the sequence of the normal gene with that of the mutated gene. Recombinant DNA can be created in vitro and then introduced into cells, most often exploiting the endogenous recombination system of the cells. However, unless the desired mutation gives a particular phenotype, a bottleneck of 'recombineering' is the requirement of a selection system to identify the recombinant clones among those unmodified. Even in an organism like yeast where the level of HR is highly above the incidence of random integration, the frequency of homologous targeting is in the range of 10(-4)-10(-6) depending on the length of the homology used (Wach et al., 1994). Thus, a selection system is always required to identify the targeted clones. Counterselectable markers, such as URA3, LYS2, LYS5, MET15, and TRP1 (Bach and LaCroute, 1972; Chattoo et al., 1979; Singh and Sherman, 1974; Toyn et al., 2000), are widely utilized in yeast and can be recycled for additional usage in the same yeast strain. If the marker is not eliminated or it is popped out via site-specific recombination between direct repeats, such as in the Flp/FRT or Cre/Lox systems, a heterologous sequence is left as a scar at the site of the modified DNA (Storici et al., 1999; Sauer, 1987). The presence of such scars can threaten the genomic stability of the strain and/or limit the number of successive genetic manipulations for that strain. Here, we describe the delitto perfetto approach for in vivo mutagenesis that combines the practicality of a general selection system with the versatility of synthetic oligonucleotides for targeting (Storici et al., 2001). It provides for generation of gene knockouts and almost any sort of mutation and genome rearrangement via HR. The delitto perfetto in vivo mutagenesis technique is designed for efficient and precise manipulation of yeast strains in a two-step process spanning ~2 weeks. Here, we present the theory and procedures of the delitto perfetto technique.
© 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Agarose gel electrophoresis; Colony PCR of the transformants; Concentration of the pcr product; Delitto perfetto method; Genetic locus; In vivo site-directed mutagenesis; PCR amplification of the core cassette; Point mutations and random mutations; Saccharomyces cerevisiae; Transformation using DNA oligonucleotides

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24182920     DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-12-420067-8.00008-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Methods Enzymol        ISSN: 0076-6879            Impact factor:   1.600


  21 in total

1.  Unique and Shared Roles for Histone H3K36 Methylation States in Transcription Regulation Functions.

Authors:  Julia V DiFiore; Travis S Ptacek; Yi Wang; Bing Li; Jeremy M Simon; Brian D Strahl
Journal:  Cell Rep       Date:  2020-06-09       Impact factor: 9.423

2.  Role of the Pif1-PCNA Complex in Pol δ-Dependent Strand Displacement DNA Synthesis and Break-Induced Replication.

Authors:  Olga Buzovetsky; Youngho Kwon; Nhung Tuyet Pham; Claire Kim; Grzegorz Ira; Patrick Sung; Yong Xiong
Journal:  Cell Rep       Date:  2017-11-14       Impact factor: 9.423

3.  A user-friendly and streamlined protocol for CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing in budding yeast.

Authors:  Daniele Novarina; Andriana Koutsoumpa; Andreas Milias-Argeitis
Journal:  STAR Protoc       Date:  2022-06-10

Review 4.  Tips, Tricks, and Potential Pitfalls of CRISPR Genome Editing in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.

Authors:  Jacob S Antony; John M Hinz; John J Wyrick
Journal:  Front Bioeng Biotechnol       Date:  2022-05-30

5.  Extent and context dependence of pleiotropy revealed by high-throughput single-cell phenotyping.

Authors:  Kerry A Geiler-Samerotte; Shuang Li; Charalampos Lazaris; Austin Taylor; Naomi Ziv; Chelsea Ramjeawan; Annalise B Paaby; Mark L Siegal
Journal:  PLoS Biol       Date:  2020-08-17       Impact factor: 8.029

6.  High-efficiency genome editing and allele replacement in prototrophic and wild strains of Saccharomyces.

Authors:  William G Alexander; Drew T Doering; Chris Todd Hittinger
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2014-09-09       Impact factor: 4.562

7.  Recognition of Histone Crotonylation by Taf14 Links Metabolic State to Gene Expression.

Authors:  Graeme J Gowans; Joseph B Bridgers; Jibo Zhang; Raghuvar Dronamraju; Anthony Burnetti; Devin A King; Aline V Thiengmany; Stephen A Shinsky; Natarajan V Bhanu; Benjamin A Garcia; Nicolas E Buchler; Brian D Strahl; Ashby J Morrison
Journal:  Mol Cell       Date:  2019-10-29       Impact factor: 17.970

8.  Stress-induced nuclear RNA degradation pathways regulate yeast bromodomain factor 2 to promote cell survival.

Authors:  Kevin Roy; Guillaume Chanfreau
Journal:  PLoS Genet       Date:  2014-09-18       Impact factor: 5.917

9.  To nick or not to nick: comparison of I-SceI single- and double-strand break-induced recombination in yeast and human cells.

Authors:  Samantha S Katz; Frederick S Gimble; Francesca Storici
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-02-18       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Methylation of yeast ribosomal protein Rpl3 promotes translational elongation fidelity.

Authors:  Qais Al-Hadid; Kevin Roy; Guillaume Chanfreau; Steven G Clarke
Journal:  RNA       Date:  2016-01-29       Impact factor: 4.942

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.