| Literature DB >> 27807677 |
Jiaqi Liu1,2,3, Yangzhong Zhou2,4,5, Xiaolong Qi6, Jia Chen1,2,4, Weisheng Chen1,2,4, Guixing Qiu1,2,4, Zhihong Wu7,8,9, Nan Wu10,11,12.
Abstract
The next-generation sequencing identifies a growing number of candidate genes associated with human genetic diseases, which inevitably requires efficient methods to validate the causal links between genotype and phenotype. Recently, zebrafish, with sufficiently high-throughput capabilities, has become a favored option to study human pathogenesis. In addition, CRISPR/Cas9-based approaches have radically reduced the efforts to introduce targeted genome engineering in various organisms. Here, we systemically review the basic considerations in the design of gene editing in zebrafish with CRISPR/Cas9, and explore the potential of the combination of these two to support efficient functional analysis of human genetic variants.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27807677 PMCID: PMC5214880 DOI: 10.1007/s00439-016-1739-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Hum Genet ISSN: 0340-6717 Impact factor: 4.132
Fig. 1The integrated phenotyping toolbox to examine genotype-phenotype correlations in transgenic zebrafish models. The zebrafish develops and reaches sex maturity rapidly, thus time spent in gene manipulation and following phenotyping could be reduced. Once the transgenic fish is available, it is critical to apply the appropriate phenotyping tools at a right time window, which is dependent on the pathogenic features of the disease. And here we highlight the characteristic benefits of fish for imaging, behavioral assays and gene expression profiling. Quantification of the phenotypes is able to generate the phenotypic barcodes, thus assisting in high-throughput analysis or chemical screening
Fig. 2Schematic illustration of the components of engineered CRISPR-Cas9 systems. The chimeric single guide RNA (sgRNA) interacts with the complementary strand of the DNA target site harboring an adjacent protospacer adjacent motif (PAM) sequence (blue and red text, respectively), which is recognized and cleaved by Cas9 nuclease (light gray shape). The PAM is required for sequence specificity of Cas9-mediated endonuclease activity against genomic DNA
Fig. 3The developing utility of zebrafish in research of disease modeling. It shows above the timeline of important disease model studies and technological developments in zebrafish research. The line represents the evolution of the number of PubMed publications on zebrafish per year between 1983 and 2013. Earliest models of porphyria and other hematologic disorders could date back to 1983. As shown in the figure, the use of zebrafish in modeling human diseases has increased dramatically over the past years, benefiting from the development of several tools including morpholino, ZFNs, TALENs and CRISPR/Cas9
Comparison of ZFN, TALEN and CRISPR/Cas9 techniques
| Tool name | Target sequence | Recognition module | Transmission efficiency | Throughput |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ZFN | Every 140–400 bp | Zinc finger domain | Low | Low |
| TALEN | Every 1–3 bp | TALE | Variable | Moderate |
| CRISPR/Cas9 | N20-PAM sequence | sgRNA | High | High, proper for reverse genetic screening |
ZFN zinc finger nuclease, TALEN transcription activator-like effector nuclease, sgRNA single guide RNA
Fig. 4A high-throughput targeted mutagenesis pipeline to study human genetic disease with the combination of CRISPR-Cas9 system and zebrafish. Phenotypes of a certain disease or syndrome are characterized and categorized in details, as a clinical reference for animal model characterizations. Depending on the genetic research background of the disease, individual sgRNA could be constructed and injected into either the yolk or the cell of one-cell stage embryos. When information of candidate genes or mutations is limited, sgRNA library is also easily constructed in the 96-well format with one target-specific sequence and the other a generic oligonucleotide that contains the remaining nucleotides required in a sgRNA. Similarly, individual sgRNA is injected into the fish embryos. The founder fish are often outcrossed to wild type to generate heterozygous F1 (3 months) and F2 fish (6 months), and phenotype-genotype analysis is carried out in the F2 fish as shown in Fig. 1. In certain screening design, phenotyping can be performed in F0 or F1 fish to reduce the timeline, although off-target effects are more concerned in this approach. With the proper phenotypes characterized, the potential causal link between genotypes and phenotypes can be drawn. Further design of studies may include chemical screenings based on the particular phenotype in fish, thus improving our understandings of the pathogenesis and accelerating therapy development
Comparison of CRISPR/Cas9 system and MO in disease modeling with zebrafish
| CRISPR/Cas9 system | MO | |
|---|---|---|
| Targeted loss of function | Cas9 induces indels and frame-shifts (KO); CRISPRi represses gene transcription | Translation of target genes are blocked (KD) |
| Targeted gain of function | Sequences are inserted with templates co-injected with Cas9 (KI); CRISPRa activates gene transcription | Unavailable |
| Timeframe | In KO and KI studies, phenotypes can be observed in F0 (0–5d), F1 (3 m) or F2 (>6 m), off-target effects need to be considered in early generations | Phenotypes can be observed in F0 (0–5d) |
| Cost and throughput | Relatively cheap and high-throughput, depending on the study design and individual institutes | Cheap and high-throughput |
| On-target efficacy | Highly variable depending on the design and target sequence | |
| Gene dosage modulation | Complete KO is accomplished with a coding frameshift. Gene dosage modulation can be done with CRISPRi/a | Complete KO is generally not available |
| Conditional function | Conditional gene editing is accomplished with conditional Cas9 expression | Generally not available |
| Duration of the effect | KO or KI is permanent and can be transmitted through generations | Transient KD |
| Reversibility | Cas9 KO is irreversible, CRISPRi/a is reversible | Reversible |
| Toxicity | Highly variable among the different sgRNAs, not correlate with the on-target efficacy | Increase with the MO dose injected |
KO knock-out, KD knock-down, KI knock-in, MO morpholino oligomers