| Literature DB >> 25250056 |
Asmini Athman1,2, Sandra K Tanz3, Vanessa M Conn1,2, Charlotte Jordans1,2, Gwenda M Mayo2,4, Weng W Ng1,2, Rachel A Burton5, Simon J Conn2,6, Matthew Gilliham1,2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: An important step in characterising the function of a gene is identifying the cells in which it is expressed. Traditional methods to determine this include in situ hybridisation, gene promoter-reporter fusions or cell isolation/purification techniques followed by quantitative PCR. These methods, although frequently used, can have limitations including their time-consuming nature, limited specificity, reliance upon well-annotated promoters, high cost, and the need for specialized equipment. In situ PCR is a relatively simple and rapid method that involves the amplification of specific mRNA directly within plant tissue whilst incorporating labelled nucleotides that are subsequently detected by immunohistochemistry. Another notable advantage of this technique is that it can be used on plants that are not easily genetically transformed.Entities:
Keywords: Cell-specific localisation; Immunohistochemistry; In situ PCR; Plant tissue; RT-PCR
Year: 2014 PMID: 25250056 PMCID: PMC4171716 DOI: 10.1186/1746-4811-10-29
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Plant Methods ISSN: 1746-4811 Impact factor: 4.993
Techniques available for cell level expression analysis
| Specific gene promoter: indicator protein fusions [i.e. beta-glucuronidase (GUS) or fluorescent proteins] | 1, B | Long lead times of >2 months to get stably expressed genes, homozygous gene expression, sequences other than the promoter may control gene expression, no guarantee that promoter fragment chosen is correct, not suitable for plants that cannot be transformed. | [ |
| Laser Capture Microdissection (LCM) and Single Cell Sampling (SiCSA) | 2, A | Difficulty in isolating certain cell-types (e.g. vascular cells using SiCSA), long tissue prep (~2 weeks) for LCM, need for specialised equipment | [ |
| 3, B | No specialised equipment required apart from vibratome, simple and fast method. No detailed protocol for plants until this manuscript, especially for agarose- embedded vibratome- sectioned in tube PCR. Can be performed on plants that are difficult to, or cannot be transformed. We do not recommend fluorescence detection of | | |
| 3, B | High detection threshold (10–20 copies per cell for ISH vs 1–2 copies per cell for | [ | |
| Protoplasting of fluorescently labelled cells and single cell sorting (FACS) | 4, A | Can assay multiple transcripts at the same time. Potential damage responses of tissue. Needs specialised sorting flow cytometer. Limited to analysis of cells that are fluorescently labelled. Cannot give detail of all cells in which a particular gene is expressed. | [ |
| Nuclear sorting, INTACT (isolation of nuclei tagged in specific cell types) or ribosomal binding techniques | 4, A | When combined with microarrays or RNAseq can assay multiple transcripts at the same time. Limited to analysis of cells that are fluorescently labelled. Cannot give detail of all cells in which a particular gene is expressed. Not easily replicated. | [ |
| 3, B | Offers the prospect of obtaining whole transcriptomes and more from single cells in tissue sections. Not yet optimised in any tissue. Has not been performed for plant tissue. | [ |
Figure 1Schematic representation of the PCR pipeline. Plant tissue is fixed in an ethanol/acetic acid/formaldehyde solution, followed by embedding in agarose and sectioning. Sections are collected into a microfuge tube in which DNase treatment, reverse transcription and in situ PCR are carried out using a thermocycler. During in situ PCR, DIG labeled nucleotides are incorporated into the PCR products. An anti-DIG antibody conjugated with alkaline phosphatase and an alkaline phosphatase substrate are used for the detection of the DIG labeled PCR products. These are visualized under a microscope. Thin fragile sections are placed onto a glass slide after sectioning, while *non-embedded, non-sectioned samples (i.e. epidermal peels) are placed directly onto slides for all processes from fixation to the final PCR step (dotted arrow).
Figure 2PCR for various transcripts in barley and Arabidopsis. Blue staining demonstrates presence of cDNA (left panel) while a brown colour indicates absence of amplified target cDNA within cells (right panel). (A, left) 18S ribosomal RNA positive control to show staining in all cell-types of barley leaf, (B, left) 18S ribosomal RNA positive control to show staining in all cell-types of Arabidopsis leaf, (C, left)AtCAX1 expression predominantly in the mesophyll of Arabidopsis leaf, (D, left) guard cell staining of a barley Aluminum-activated malate transporter (ALMT) (SL1251) from an in situ PCR performed on epidermal peels. (E and F, left) detection of an Arabidopsis ALMT14 in the septum (E) and embryo (F) of developing flowers/siliques. The same primers and conditions were used for the corresponding negative controls (A-F, right panels, Table 6). Scale bars represent 100 μm.
List of primers used during PCR
| AK251731.1 | ||
| DQ646339.2 | ||
| XM_003532769.2 | ||
| NM_201901.3 | ||
| AK371960.1 | ||
| NM_001125913.1 | ||
Various alkaline phosphatase (AP) substrates used with this PCR protocol on different plant species and tissues
| Leaf | BM Purple | |
| Elf97 | ||
| Vector Blue | ||
| Flower | BM Purple | |
| Leaf | BM purple | |
| Leaf | BM purple | |
| Root | BM purple | |
| Leaf | BM purple | |
| Elf97 | ||
| Epidermal peel | BM Purple | |
| Elf97++ | ||
| Leaf | BM Purple | |
| Vector Blue | ||
| Root | BM Purple | |
| Leaf | Vector Blue | |
| Root | BM Purple | |
| Leaf | Elf97 | |
| Root | BM Purple | |
| NBT/BCIPX | ||
| Vector Blue++ | ||
| Root | Vector Blue | |
| Leaf | BM Purple | |
| Leaf | BM Purple |
Most AP substrates were used successfully for specific detection of the transcript in question, with some exceptions as indicated. ++indicates detection with significant background staining. Xindicates no detectable signal.
RT reaction solution
| cDNA synthesis buffer (kit) | 5× | 1× | 4 | 20 |
| DTT (kit) | 0.1 M | 5 mM | 1 | 5 |
| RNaseOUT (kit) | 40 U μL−1 | 40 U | 1 | 1 |
| Thermoscript RT (kit) | 15 U μL−1 | 15 U | 1 | 1 |
PCR reaction solution
| HiFi Phusion buffer | 5× | 1× | 10 | 20 |
| dNTPs | 10 mM | 0.2 mM | 1 | 2 |
| DIG-11-dUTP | 1 mM | 4 μM | 0.2 | 0.4 |
| HiFi Phusion polymerase | 2 U μL−1 | 1 U | 0.5 | 0.5 |
| Sterile water | 33.3 | 67.1 |
Troubleshooting suggestions
| 3 | Inconsistent staining in the positive control sample (as in Figure | i) RNA is degraded | i) Reduce the time between harvesting plant tissue and placing it in fixative. Follow general rules for working with RNA to prevent contamination with RNases (see also start of protocol). |
| ii) Over-fixation | ii) Reduce overall fixation time, but increase pressure/time of vacuum infiltration to ensure fixative penetrates. | ||
| iii) Under-fixation (tissue may be too large for fixative to penetrate). | iii) Pieces must be kept at a maximum of 5x5 mm to ensure fixative can penetrate entire tissue. Increase pressure/time of vacuum infiltration to ensure fixative penetrates. | ||
| 11, 20 | Poor morphology (as in Figure | i) Long axis of sample is not perpendicular to blade on vibratome | i) Be quick when orienting the tissue pieces in the molten agarose and place the sample on ice for the agarose to solidify. Examine the first few sections cut on the vibratome and if they appear smeared, adjust the orientation of the block by either tilting the adjustable stage or removing the agarose block and making sure the side stuck on the stage is perfectly flat. |
| ii) Sections have been damaged during processing | ii) Be careful not to damage the tissue sections during processing (use a paintbrush for manipulation, do not vortex or centrifuge tubes, prevent pipette tip from contacting sections during multiple rounds of pipetting, consider performing experiments on-slide). | ||
| 29 | Nuclear staining throughout the sample (as in Figure | Amplification of gDNA | Design primers that are split across an exon-exon junction to eliminate the possibility of amplifying gDNA. Alternatively, design primers that have 1 or more large introns between them such that reducing the elongation time during PCR only allows amplification of the smaller cDNA product. |
| Increase the incubation time of the DNase treatment or change the DNase enzyme. | |||
| 45, 60 | Staining of sections appears very dark | Saturated staining | Reduce the number of cycles in the PCR and/or reduce the overall staining time. |
| 60 | Positive result in the negative “no RT” control or weak non-specific staining in the positive control | Background staining caused by presence of endogenous alkaline phosphatase enzymes | Add levamisole to the substrate to inhibit endogenous alkaline phosphatases. |
Figure 3PCR demonstrating vasculature-specific expression of a sodium transporter (in durum wheat () root sections. The blue stain indicates the presence of transcripts while the images in the right panel are magnifications of figures in the left panel. (A) shows that TmHKT1;5-A is undetectable in Tamaroi [−Nax2] (the near-isogenic line without Nax2/TmHKT1;5-A). (B) depicts the stele-specific expression of TmHKT1;5-A in Tamaroi [+Nax2]. In (C) the expression of 18S ribosomal RNA is seen in all cell-types (positive control). (D) is the negative control where the reverse transcription (RT) step was omitted in Tamaroi [+Nax2]. c, cortex; en, endodermis; p, pericycle; x, xylem; xp, xylem parenchyma. Scale bars represent 100 μm. This figure was originally published in [21].
Figure 4Examples of tissue sections where PCR was unsuccessful. Inconsistent, non-uniform expression of 18S rRNA in Vitis vinifera leaf (A) and Hordeum vulgare leaf (B). Severely damaged Glycine max root cells (C). Distinct staining of cell nuclei (genomic DNA) in Triticum durum root section (D). Fluorescent staining using Elf97 in Hordeum vulgare leaf (E, Hv18S rRNA and F, Hv18S rRNA negative control; Zeiss stereofluorescence microscope) and Triticum durum root sections (G, TmHKT1; 5-A and H, TmHKT1;5-A negative control; Nikon confocal microscope). Please see Table 5 for troubleshooting tips. Scale bars represent 100 μm.