| Literature DB >> 32251396 |
Drahomíra Faktorová1, R Ellen R Nisbet2,3, José A Fernández Robledo4, Elena Casacuberta5, Lisa Sudek6, Andrew E Allen7,8, Manuel Ares9, Cristina Aresté5, Cecilia Balestreri10, Adrian C Barbrook2, Patrick Beardslee11, Sara Bender12, David S Booth13, François-Yves Bouget14, Chris Bowler15, Susana A Breglia16, Colin Brownlee10, Gertraud Burger17, Heriberto Cerutti11, Rachele Cesaroni18, Miguel A Chiurillo19, Thomas Clemente11, Duncan B Coles4, Jackie L Collier20, Elizabeth C Cooney21, Kathryn Coyne22, Roberto Docampo19, Christopher L Dupont8, Virginia Edgcomb23, Elin Einarsson2, Pía A Elustondo16,24, Fernan Federici25, Veronica Freire-Beneitez26,27, Nastasia J Freyria4, Kodai Fukuda28, Paulo A García29, Peter R Girguis30, Fatma Gomaa30, Sebastian G Gornik31, Jian Guo6,9, Vladimír Hampl32, Yutaka Hanawa33, Esteban R Haro-Contreras16, Elisabeth Hehenberger21, Andrea Highfield10, Yoshihisa Hirakawa33, Amanda Hopes34, Christopher J Howe2, Ian Hu2, Jorge Ibañez25, Nicholas A T Irwin21, Yuu Ishii35, Natalia Ewa Janowicz32, Adam C Jones12, Ambar Kachale36, Konomi Fujimura-Kamada37, Binnypreet Kaur36, Jonathan Z Kaye12, Eleanna Kazana26,27, Patrick J Keeling21, Nicole King13, Lawrence A Klobutcher38, Noelia Lander19, Imen Lassadi2, Zhuhong Li19, Senjie Lin38, Jean-Claude Lozano14, Fulei Luan11, Shinichiro Maruyama35, Tamara Matute25, Cristina Miceli39, Jun Minagawa37,40, Mark Moosburner7,8, Sebastián R Najle5,41, Deepak Nanjappa22, Isabel C Nimmo2, Luke Noble42,43, Anna M G Novák Vanclová32, Mariusz Nowacki18, Isaac Nuñez25, Arnab Pain44,45, Angela Piersanti39, Sandra Pucciarelli39, Jan Pyrih26,32, Joshua S Rest46, Mariana Rius20, Deborah Robertson47, Albane Ruaud25,48, Iñaki Ruiz-Trillo5,49,50, Monika A Sigg13, Pamela A Silver51,52, Claudio H Slamovits16, G Jason Smith53, Brittany N Sprecher38, Rowena Stern10, Estienne C Swart18,48, Anastasios D Tsaousis26,27, Lev Tsypin54,55, Aaron Turkewitz54, Jernej Turnšek7,8,51,52, Matus Valach17, Valérie Vergé14, Peter von Dassow25,56, Tobias von der Haar26, Ross F Waller2, Lu Wang57, Xiaoxue Wen11, Glen Wheeler10, April Woods53, Huan Zhang38, Thomas Mock58, Alexandra Z Worden59,60, Julius Lukeš61.
Abstract
Diverse microbial ecosystems underpin life in the sea. Among these microbes are many unicellular eukaryotes that span the diversity of the eukaryotic tree of life. However, genetic tractability has been limited to a few species, which do not represent eukaryotic diversity or environmentally relevant taxa. Here, we report on the development of genetic tools in a range of protists primarily from marine environments. We present evidence for foreign DNA delivery and expression in 13 species never before transformed and for advancement of tools for eight other species, as well as potential reasons for why transformation of yet another 17 species tested was not achieved. Our resource in genetic manipulation will provide insights into the ancestral eukaryotic lifeforms, general eukaryote cell biology, protein diversification and the evolution of cellular pathways.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32251396 PMCID: PMC7200600 DOI: 10.1038/s41592-020-0796-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nat Methods ISSN: 1548-7091 Impact factor: 28.547
Fig. 1Phylogenetic relationships and transformation status of marine protists.
A schematic view of the eukaryotic tree of life with effigies of main representatives. Color-coordinated species we have attempted to genetically modify are listed below. Current transformability status is schematized in circles indicating: DNA delivered and shown to be expressed (yellow, for details see text and Table 1); DNA delivered, but no expression seen (gray) and no successful transformation achieved despite efforts (blue). The details of transformation of species that belong to ‘DNA delivered’ and ‘Not achieved yet’ categories are described in Supplementary Table 5. mRNA, messenger RNA; FITC–dextran, fluorescein isothiocyanate (FITC)-conjugated dextran.
Parameters used for successful transformation as shown in Figs. 2, 3 and 4
| Species | Transformation method/device | Cell number (input) | Vector amount (µg) | Promotor | Regulatory elements | Drug selection (µg ml−1) | Time selection (d) | Efficiency (%) | Transformation status (stable, S; transient, T) | Reporter | Evidence of transformation | protocols.io link |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Electroporation Genepulser II | 1–2 × 109 | Plasmid PotLuc; linear; 5 | HAPT, Histone H4 | None | G418 (1,000) | 10–21 | <0.0001 | S | Luc | G418 resist, luminescence, PCR | ||
| Electroporation Genepulser II | 1–2 × 109 | Fusion PCR; | HAPT, Histone H4 Endogenous | None | G418 (1,000) | 10–21 | <0.0001 | S | Luc | G418 resist, luminescence PCR | 10.17504/protocols.io.g86bzze; 10.17504/protocols.io.zj2f4qe; 10.17504/protocols.io.hcib2ue | |
| Electroporation Lonza-Nucleofector | 3 × 107 | RPS9proMco-eGFP-NLS-RPS9ter in pUC05-AMP; circular; 10–20 | Endogenous, ribosomal protein S9; | Endogenous, ribosomal protein S9; | NA | 2–6 | 5.6 ± 1.3 (of post-transformation population) | Ta | eGFP | Per cell eGFP fluorescence, fluorescence microscopy | ||
| Electroporation Lonza-Nucleofector | 3 × 107 | H3proMpo-LUC-H3ter in pUC05-AMP; circular; 10–20 | Histone H3 5′ UTR from | Histone H3 3′ end formation -histone stem loop from | NA | 3 | NA (Luc. assay is bulk, not per cell) | Ta | NanoLuc | Luminescence | ||
| Bio-Rad Biolistics PDS-1000/He biolistics system | 2.0 × 107 | pACTpro:Ble; linear; 1.0 | Actin, | Actin, | Zeocin (150) | 21–28 | S | Zeocin resist, PCR | ||||
| Biolistics PDS-1000/He | 1–2 × 106 | pIgNAT; circular; 1.0 | Hsp70 | Heterologous | Nourseothricin (80–150) | 14 | <0.0001 | S | None | Nourseothricin resistance, PCR, RT–PCR | ||
| Electroporation Gene Pulser Xcell | 0.5–1 × 107 | GFP-Rubisco; circular; 30–50 | rbcS1, Endogenous | rbcS1 Endogenous | Manual selection of fluorescent cellsa | NA | NA | S/T | GFP | Fluorescence, western blot | ||
| Bio-Rad Biolistics PDS-1000/He biolistics system | 5 × 107 | pUC:FCP:ShBle:FCP:eGFP; circular; 1.0 | FCP, Endogenous | None | Zeocin (100) | 21–49 | 0.00003 (30 c.f.u. per 108 cells) | S | eGFP | Zeocin resist, fluorescence, PCR, RT–PCR | 10.17504/protocols.io.z39f8r6 | |
| Bacterial conjugation | 4 × 107 | TpSIl3p-eGFP in pTpPuc3; circular; NA | Endogenous | Endogenous | Nourseothricin (100 in plates, 200 in liquid culture) | ~14 | ~10 | T | eGFP | Nourseothricin resistance, colony PCR, fluorescence | ||
| Conjugation | 1 × 105 | Pm_actP_egfp_actT; pPtPUC3 | Pm actin; Pt fcpB | None, other than contained in promoter/term | Manual selection of fluorescent cells in LGTA; zeocin (200) | 24 h, 7 | <0.1% | T | eGFP, shble | Fluorescence, vector targeted PCR on gDNA | ||
| Bio-Rad Gene Pulser (165-2076) NEPA21 | 1 × 108 | 18GZG 18GeZG plasmid; linear; 1–10 | Endogenous GAPDH | None | Zeocin (100) | 5–7 | 44 per μg of DNA | S | eGFP, shble | Zeocin resist., PCR, Southern, fluorescence | ||
| Electroporation Genepulser II | 1 × 109 | pMOD, linear/circular; 0.1–1 | CMV | None | None | 0.1–1 | 20 (linear), 1–2 (circular) | T | mTagBFP2 | Fluorescence, PCR, RT–PCR | ||
| Bacterial conjugation | 4 × 107 | hCas9-2A-shble PtpBR episome 100 µl | FcpF-hCas9 psRNA–sgRNA | Cen6-Arsh4-His3 centromere | Phleomycin (50) Zeocin (100) | 10–16 | 1.25 × 10−5 ≈ 500 c.f.u. | S | shble (Cas9) yfp VENUS | Phleoycin resistance, PCR maintained episome, PCR Cas9 target site | ||
| Electroporation LONZA-Nucleofector Glass beads abrasion (425–600 μm) | 5–7 × 107 | pPmMOE-GFP; linear-circular (1:1); 5 | Endogenous | Endogenous | FACS Blasticidin (50–200), puromycin (10-50), bleo (50-200) | Drug: 20–60 FACS: 3 | 0.01–5 | S | GFP, mCherry | Fluorescence sequencing, PCR, western blot | ||
| Electroporation Gene Pulser Xcell; Chemical (CaCl2) | 1–5 × 106; 1 × 105 | Fluorescently labeled DNA (5–25 µg) or FITC–dextran; mCherry | NA, endogenous hsp90 | NA, endogenous hsp90 | NA | NA | 0.5–5% | T | mCherry | Fluorescence | ||
| Electroporation LONZA-Nucleofector | Stained DNA (739 bp); linear; 1 | None | None | NA | NA | <0.001 | T | Fluorescence | Fluorescence | |||
| Bio-Rad Biolistics PDS-1000/He biolistics system | 2.5 × 107 | pAmpAtpBChl; circular; 0.5 | Endogenous | Endogenous | Chloramphenicol (20) | 3 onward | NA | S | Ab res | RT–PCR, PCR phenotype | ||
| Electroporation | 4 × 105 | linear-DinoIII-neo; linear; 2 | Endogenous | Endogenous | Kanamycin (150) | 7 | 0.0005 | S (3 mon) | NA | RT–PCR, PCR | ||
| Electroporation Nepa21 | 1–1.5 × 107 | Bs-EF1- α C-terminal tagging; linear; 3–5 | Endogenous | Endogenous | G418 (5) | 7–9 | S | GFP | Fluorescence, PCR, RT–PCR | |||
| Electroporation Lonza-Nucleofector | 5 × 107 | p57-V5+NeoR; linear; 3 | Endogenous | Endogenous | G418 (75) | 7–14 | ~5.5 | S | NA | Western blot (resistance marker), RT–PCR | ||
| Electroporation Bio-Rad Gene Pulser xCell | 5 × 106 | pNAEG-HYG; circular; 4 | Endogenous | Endogenous | Hygromycin (300) Neo (700) | 15–28 | 80 | T | GFP | Western blot (resistance marker), fluorescence, | ||
| Electroporation Lonza-Nucleofector | 3 × 105 | Awhis_H2Bvenus+ pUC19; circular; 1–5 + 40 carrier | Endogenous | Endogenous | NA | 10–15 | 1 | T | Venus | Fluorescence, RT–PCR | ||
| Electroporation Lonza-Nucleofector | 4 × 105 | SrActmCherry-CCTLL +pUC19; circular; 1–10 + 40 carrier | Endogenous | Endogenous | Puromycin (80) | 10–12 | S | mCherry | Gene expression (Luc, fluorescence)/resistance | |||
For additional information, see protocols.io links, Supplementary Table 5 and Supplementary Note 1. For contacting laboratories working with particular species, see details given in Supplementary Table 6.
aMay be stable but overgrown by wild-type strain.
NA, not applicable; NLS, nuclear localization signal.
Fig. 2Epifluorescence micrographs of transformed marine protists.
Representative images of transformants and wild-type cell lines of ten selected protist species. Colored boxes behind species names refer to phylogenetic supergroup assignments given in Fig. 1. Representative data of at least two independent experiments are shown. The fluorescent images show the expression of individual fluorescent marker genes introduced via transformation for all organisms shown, except in the case of A. amoebiformis. For this, red depicts the natural autofluorescence of photosynthetic pigments in the cell, while the additional green spheres in the transformant fluorescence panel shows introduced GFP fluorescence (see Supplementary Fig. 15c for a trace of these different regions in the cell). Scale bars are as follows: 10 µm for A. amoebiformis, T. pseudonana, A. limacinum, B. saltans, N. gruberi, A. whisleri and S. rosetta; 15 µm for P. marinus; 20 µm for F. cylindrus and 100 µm for P. multiseries.
Fig. 3Various methods were used to demonstrate successful transformation in different archaeplastid species: luminescence and fluorescence.
a–c, Luminescence (a,b) and fluorescence (by FACS and epifluorescence microscopy) (c) were used to verify expression of introduced constructs in three archaeplastids: O. lucimarinus (a), B. prasinos (b) and M. commoda (c). For the latter, red in the image depicts the natural autofluorescence of photosynthetic pigments in the cell, while green shows introduced eGFP fluorescence and blue shows the DAPI-stained nucleus; the overlay shows colocalization of eGFP and nucleus signals. See Supplementary Fig. 15d for a trace of these different regions in the cell. NS, not significant; trans., transformed. Representative data of at least two independent experiments are shown. For a detailed figure description see Supplementary Notes 2.
Source data
Fig. 4Various methods were used to demonstrate successful transformation in different species: RT–PCR, western blot and sequencing.
a–j, Western blot, RT–PCR or sequencing (in case of Cas9-induced excision by CRISPR) were used to verify expression of introduced constructs in one haptophyte: I. galbana (a), one rhizarian—A. amoebiformis (b), two stramenopiles—F. cylindrus (c) and P. tricornutum (d), three alveolates—K. veneficum (e), P. marinus (f) and A. carterae (g), two discobans—B. saltans (h) and D. papillatum (i) and one opisthokont—A. whisleri (j). Note that nptII/neo is used synonymously with amino 3′-glycosyl phosphotransferase gene (aph(3′)) conferring resistance to kanamycin and neomycin. Representative data of at least two independent experiments are shown. For a detailed figure description see Supplementary Notes 2.
Source data
Fig. 5‘Transformation roadmap’ for the creation of genetically tractable protists.
a, Vector design and construction for microeukaryotes of interest and a natural community. b, Transformation approaches. Different symbols represent methods (for example chemical, physical or biological) for introducing DNA/RNA/protein into a living cell. c, Protocol. Key methodological steps for successful transformation are listed in an abbreviated form (for particular examples, see Table 1 and text).