| Literature DB >> 25896825 |
Ying-Ying Guo1, Zhen-Yu Shi2, Xiao-Zhi Fu3, Jin-Chun Chen4, Qiong Wu5, Guo-Qiang Chen6,7.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: With the rapid development of synthetic biology, the demand for assembling multiple DNA (genes) fragments into a large circular DNA structure in one step has dramatically increased. However, for constructions of most circular DNA, there are two contradictions in the ligation/assembly and transformation steps. The ligation/assembly consists of two different reactions: 1) the ligation/assembly between any two pieces of a linear form DNA; 2) the cyclization (or self-ligation) of a single linear form DNA. The first contradiction is that the bimolecular ligation/assembly requires a higher DNA concentration while the cyclization favors a lower one; the second contradiction is that a successful transformation of a ligation/assembly product requires a relatively high DNA concentration again. This study is the first attempt to use linear plasmid and Cyclization After Transformation (CAT) strategy to neutralize those contradictions systematically.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25896825 PMCID: PMC4455692 DOI: 10.1186/s12934-015-0204-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Microb Cell Fact ISSN: 1475-2859 Impact factor: 5.328
Figure 1Mechanism of the contradiction between bimolecular ligation and cyclization and its resulting by-production formation mechanisms. A) In any construction of circular DNA from linear forms, there are both bimolecular ligation/assembly and monomolecular cyclization. B) Multimer by-product formation mechanism in single molecule cyclization. C) By-product formation mechanism when circular plasmids are constructed from two fragments. D) This contradiction becomes more obvious when more fragments are involved in ligations.
Figure 2Description of grouped linear ligation and comparison of ligation efficency of circular ligation, linear ligation and grouped ligation. A) Gel Electrophoresis of linear ligation, grouped linear ligation and circular ligation products for four fragments. B) Description of grouped linear ligation of FR, F1, F2, F3 and FK.
Figure 3Schematic description of various attempts to avoid the contradiction on bimolecular ligation/assembly and monomolecular cyclization. A) Conventional circular ligation, B) Ligation into linear plasmid. No cyclization is required to make the plasmid stable and thus the contradiction was avoided. C) Linear ligation and diluted self-ligating cyclization (First branch from the left), linear ligation and in vitro LR clonase cyclization (Second branch from the left) linear ligation coupled with in vivo cyclization (Third branch from the left).
Number of transformants formed using conventional circular ligation system, diluted self-ligation cyclization, self-recombination cyclization, and CAT respectively
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
|
| 204(16/96) | 60(2/60) |
|
| 162(42/96) | 22 (12/22) |
|
| ---- | 40(3/40) |
|
| 200(80/96) | 42(36/42) |
Figure 4The experimental comparison between non-CAT and CAT strategy. A) The non-CAT control group assembled 3 fragments into a circular form in vitro and thus engaged 3 in vitro ligation/assembly reactions (left). CAT strategy assembled 4 fragments with attL and attR as the linear ends in in vitro ligation/assembly, thus also engaged precisely the same three in vitro ligation/assembly reactions (right). B) The cyclization mechanism. attL and attR recombines and produces attP, and thus the final products in CAT strategy are the same as the final products in non-CAT control group.
Results of the comparisons between CAT strategy and non-CAT control
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 38 (35/38) | 184 (44/48) | 304 (40/48) |
|
| 88 (44/48) | 364 (35/48) | 804 (42/48) |
|
| 3.07 | 2.10 | 3.70 |
|
| 84 (37/48) | 168 (32/48) | 284 (32/48) |
|
| 140 (40/48) | 308 (33/48) | 624 (38/48) |
|
| 2.40 | 2.52 | 3.48 |
|
| 66 (20/48) | 142 (25/48) | 276 (28/48) |
|
| 124 (38/48) | 212 (41/48) | 486 (40/48) |
|
| 4.76 | 3.26 | 3.48 |
|
| N/A | 4 (3/4) | 25 (10/25) |
|
| N/A | 132 (40/48) | 248 (29/48) |
The comparisons between CAT and non-CAT control (explained in Figure 4) were presented by the colony number and correct colony number. CAT/non-CAT is the correct colony number in CAT over the correct colony number in non-CAT.
Figure 5Construction and verification of precorrin-3A synthesis pathway. A) Schematic diagram of precorrin-3A pathway. B) Construction of E. coli strains BL21DE3 (p15ABCDAI). C): The color change of the culture supernatant of E. coli strains BL21DE3 (p15ABCDAI). These strains were cultured in LB medium plus with 1 g/L 5-aminolevulinic acid.
Bacterial strains and plasmids used in this study
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
|
| TpR SmR recA, thi, pro, hsdR-M + RP4: 2-Tc:Mu: Km Tn7 λp | 19 |
|
| F−, ompT, hsdS(rb −mb −), gal, dcm(DE3) | Transgene Corporation |
|
| Host strain fro linear plasmid | Lucigen corporation |
|
| AmpR; Wild type isolated from sewage samples, PHBHHx producing strain | 22 |
|
| Gram-negative facultative anaerobic bacterium that performs denitrification, producing VB12 | Huabei Pharmaceutical Enterprise |
|
| HK022 | 23 |
|
| pUK derived, | This study |
|
| FLP recombinase helper plasmid, ts-rep, AmpR,CmR | 21 |
|
| pAH83 derived, expression control gene | 23 |
|
| pAL2 derived, |
|
|
| Cloning vector | Lucigen corporation |
|
| pJAZZOC derived, a fragment containing DraIII recognition site inserted. | This study |
|
| P15A replicon, CmR | Qing Lan corporation |
|
| pVQL derived, haboring genes | This study |