| Literature DB >> 30593266 |
Chenzi Zhang1, Xiangjun He1, Yvonne K Kwok2, Feng Wang1, Junyi Xue1,3,4, Hui Zhao1,3,4, Kin Wah Suen2, Chi Chiu Wang2,5, Jianwei Ren6, George G Chen6,7, Paul B S Lai6,7,8, Jiangchao Li9, Yin Xia1,4, Andrew M Chan1,4, Wai-Yee Chan10,11,12,13, Bo Feng14,15,16,17.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cultured human cells are pivotal models to study human gene functions, but introducing complete loss of function in diploid or aneuploid cells has been a challenge. The recently developed CRISPR/Cas9-mediated homology-independent knock-in approach permits targeted insertion of large DNA at high efficiency, providing a tool for insertional disruption of a selected gene. Pioneer studies have showed promising results, but the current methodology is still suboptimal and functional outcomes have not been well examined. Taking advantage of the promoterless fluorescence reporter systems established in our previous study, here, we further investigated potentials of this new insertional gene disruption approach and examined its functional outcomes.Entities:
Keywords: CtIP; FAT10; Homology-independent knock-in; Hyperploid cells; Loss-of-function; Multiallelic gene disruption; UlK1
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30593266 PMCID: PMC6310992 DOI: 10.1186/s12915-018-0616-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Biol ISSN: 1741-7007 Impact factor: 7.431
Fig. 1Insertional disruption of GFP transgene via NHEJ-based knock-in. a Schematic for NHEJ-based homology-independent knock-in of ires-Td reporter at the GFP transgene in LO2-GFP cells. sgGFP-i and sgGFP-ii are two different sgRNAs targeting GFP coding sequence. Shown are GFP transgene integrated at GAPDH locus, before and after the knock-in of ires-Td reporter. b FACS plots obtained after cotransfection of ires-Tddonor/Cas9/sg-A with sgGFP-i or sgGFP-ii in LO2-GFP cells. GFP+ cells are gated to the right, and Td+ cells are gated to the top in each plot. The control without sgRNA to GFP is shown. c Fluorescence images showing the expression of GFP transgene as well as newly integrated tdTomato reporter. Nuclei were stained using Hoechst. Arrows indicate the cells that have acquired tdTomato expression but lost the GFP expression. Scale bars = 50 μm
Fig. 2Complete disruption of ULK1 and FAT10 genes through simultaneous knock-in of dual reporters. a Schematic for dual reporter knock-in at ULK1 and FAT10 using ires-GFP/Tddonor (left), and corresponding FACS data obtained in LO2 cells (right). sgFAT10-i and sgFAT10-ii represent two different sgRNAs targeting FAT10 exon-2. GFP+ cells are gated to the right, while Td+ cells are gated to the top. sg-G represents any sgRNA targeting ULK1 or FAT10 genes. Controls without sg-A or sg-G are shown. b Genome PCR analysis of pooled Td+/GFP+ and Td+/GFP− cells collected from the targeting at ULK1. Primer binding sites are shown in a. c Western blot analysis of sorted Td+ /GFP+ and Td+ /GFP− cell populations targeted for ULK1. Numbers shown are ULK1 protein normalized to β-actin. d Numbers of single cell clones analyzed and success rates of complete disruption from the targeting at ULK1 or FAT10. e Schematic of ULK1 mRNA and primer binding sites (top), and corresponding RT-PCR results (bottom). GAPDH was included as control. f Western blot analysis of ULK1−/− clones, using antibodies against ULK1 and β-Actin. g Mitochondria staining with MytoTracker Red in wild-type LO2 cells and ULK1−/− clones. Shown are images taken after treatment with Oligomycin (10 μM) and Antimycin A (1 μM) for 24 h. Untreated cells were included as controls. Scale bars = 20 μm. h Schematic of FAT10 mRNA and primer binding sites (top), and RT-PCR analysis (bottom). Cell samples were treated with TNFα and INFγ. GAPDH was included as control. i Western blot analysis of FAT10−/− clones, using antibodies against FAT10, GFP and β-Actin. Cells were treated with TNFα and INFγ. Untreated cells were included as control. j Cell viability measured using MTT assays. Shown are percentages of growth rate after treatment with TNFα and INFγ, compared to untreated cells. The measurements were done in wild-type LO2 cells and FAT10−/− clones. k Reversal of the increased cell viability in FAT10−/− clone F-13 after overexpression of FAT10 cDNA. Cell viability measured using MTT assays. Each column represents the mean ± s.d. of the six replicates in j, or of the four replicates in k (Additional file 2: Individual data values for Fig. 2j and k). *p ≤ 0.05
Fig. 3Targeted disruption at CtIP exon-7 yielded cells carrying in-frame variant transcripts. a Schematic for dual reporter knock-in at CtIP using ires-GFP/Tddonor (left), and corresponding FACS data obtained in LO2 cells (right). GFP+ cells are gated to the right, while Td+ cells are gated to the top. Controls without sg-A or sgCtIP are included in right panel. Numbers of single cell clones analyzed and success rates of complete disruption at CtIP are shown. b Genome PCR analysis of CtIP−/− clones raised from the Td+/GFP− single-positive (SP) cells. Primer binding sites are shown in a. c Schematic of CtIP mRNA, sgCtIP target site, and primer binding positions (top); and gel electrophoresis of RT-PCR from selected CtIP−/− clones (middle), and quantitative analysis by real-time RT-PCR using primers CtIP_F3/R3 (bottom) (Additional file 2: Individual data values for Fig. 3c). d Western blot analysis of selected CtIP−/− clones. Cells transiently transfected with CtIP cDNA were included. OE:overexpression. e Junction sequences of three aberrant CtIP transcripts amplified using primers CtIP_F2/R2 in c. The sg-A target sequence from donor is shown in red, and sgCtIP target sequence from genome is in blue. The cleavage sites at the 3rd and 4th nucleotide upstream of PAM in sgCtIP target sequence are indicated with black and blue arrowheads respectively. Other donor sequences are in grey, while other sequences from CtIP genome locus are in black. Two short fragments originated from donor vectors are highlighted in light green and beige. The numbers of base pairs omitted are indicated in brackets. f Schematic showing the modified CtIP alleles harboring reversely integrated ires-Tddonor or ires-GFPdonor (top). Red bars below indicated the positions of sequences detected in the aberrant CtIP transcripts. Sequences showing cryptic splice sites and the splicing events involved in producing the aberrant CtIP transcripts (bottom)
Fig. 4Targeted knock-in of pgk-GFP/Td reporters at CtIP exon-7 yielded cells carrying distinct in-frame transcripts. a Schematic for dual reporter knock-in at CtIP using pgk-GFP/Tddonor (left), and corresponding FACS data obtained in LO2 cells (right). GFP+ cells are gated to the right, while Td+ cells are gated to the top. Controls without sg-A or sgCtIP are included. Numbers of single-cell clones analyzed and success rates of complete disruption are shown. b Genome PCR showing CtIP disruption, forward and reserve integrations of donors, in selected CtIP −/− clones raised in a. c RT-PCR analysis of the selected CtIP −/− clones. Shown are schematic of CtIP mRNA, sgCtIP target site, and primer binding positions (top), gel electrophoresis of RT-PCR products (middle), and quantitative RT-PCR analysis using primers CtIP_F3/R3 (bottom) (Additional file 2: Individual data values for Fig. 4c). d Western blot analysis of the selected CtIP −/− clones using antibodies against CtIP and β-actin. Cells transiently transfected with CtIP cDNA were included as positive control. OE, overexpression. e Junction sequences of two aberrant CtIP transcripts amplified using primers CtIP_F2/R2 in c. The sg-A target sequence is in red, and sgCtIP target sequence from genome is in blue. The cleavage sites at the 3rd and 4th nucleotide upstream of PAM in sgCtIP target sequence are indicated with black and blue arrowheads respectively. Other donor sequences are in grey, while other sequences from CtIP genome locus are in black. Three short fragments originated from donors are highlighted with shades in different colors. The numbers of base pairs omitted are indicated in brackets. f Schematic for the modified CtIP allele harboring reversely integrated pgk-GFPdonor or pgk-Tddonor (top). Red bars below indicated the positions of sequences detected in the aberrant CtIP transcripts. Sequences showing cryptic splice sites and the splicing events involved in producing the aberrant CtIP transcripts detected (bottom)
Fig. 5Targeted disruption at CtIP 5′-UTR also produced cells carrying splice variant transcripts. a Schematic for simultaneous knock-in of 5’GFPdonor and 5′Tddonor at CtIP 5′-UTR (left); and FACS plot obtained in LO2 cells (right). GFP+ cells are gated to the right, while Td+ cells are gated to the top. Controls without sg-A or sg5′CtIP are shown. b Western blot analysis of pooled Td+/GFP+ double-positive (DP) and Td+/GFP− single-positive (SP) cells collected from a. Cells transiently transfected with CtIP cDNA were included. Numbers shown are CtIP protein levels normalized to β-actin. OE, overexpression. c RT-PCR analysis of selected CtIP −/− clones. Shown are schematic of CtIP mRNA, sg5′CtIP target site, and primer binding positions (top), gel electrophoresis of RT-PCR products (bottom left), and quantitative RT-PCR analysis using primers CtIP_F3/R3 (bottom right) (Additional file 2: Individual data values for Fig. 5c). d Western blot analysis of the selected CtIP −/− clones. Cells transiently transfected with CtIP cDNA were included as positive control. OE, overexpression. e Sequences of the RT-PCR products amplified from aberrant CtIP transcripts with primers CtIP_F5/R5* in c. Shown are junction sequences of two aberrant CtIP transcripts. The sg-A target sequence is in red, and sg5′CtIP target sequence at CtIP 5′-UTR is in blue. The cleavage sites at the 3rd and 4th nucleotide at upstream of PAM in sg-A target sequence are indicated with black and red arrowheads respectively. Other donor sequences are in grey, while other sequences from CtIP genome locus are in black. The short fragment originated from donors is highlighted with shades in light green. The number of base pairs omitted is indicated in brackets