| Literature DB >> 32958829 |
Carlee MacPherson Cunningham1, Gianfranco Bellipanni1, Raymond Habas1, Darius Balciunas2.
Abstract
Two complimentary approaches are widely used to study gene function in zebrafish: induction of genetic mutations, usually using targeted nucleases such as CRISPR/Cas9, and suppression of gene expression, typically using Morpholino oligomers. Neither method is perfect. Morpholinos (MOs) sometimes produce off-target or toxicity-related effects that can be mistaken for true phenotypes. Conversely, genetic mutants can be subject to compensation, or may fail to yield a null phenotype due to leakiness (e.g. use of cryptic splice sites or downstream AUGs). When discrepancy between mutant and morpholino-induced (morphant) phenotypes is observed, experimental validation of such phenotypes becomes very labor intensive. We have developed a simple genetic method to differentiate between genuine morphant phenotypes and those produced due to off-target effects. We speculated that indels within 5' untranslated regions would be unlikely to have a significant negative effect on gene expression. Mutations induced within a MO target site would result in a Morpholino-refractive allele thus suppressing true MO phenotypes whilst non-specific phenotypes would remain. We tested this hypothesis on one gene with an exclusively zygotic function, tbx5a, and one gene with strong maternal effect, ctnnb2. We found that indels within the Morpholino binding site are indeed able to suppress both zygotic and maternal morphant phenotypes. We also observed that the ability of such indels to suppress morpholino phenotypes does depend on the size and the location of the deletion. Nonetheless, mutating the morpholino binding sites in both maternal and zygotic genes can ascertain the specificity of morphant phenotypes.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32958829 PMCID: PMC7506532 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-71708-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Partial rescue of Tbx5a-MO4 morphant phenotype by (− 3) and (− 7) binding site mutations. (A) Embryos injected with Tbx5a-MO4 display a range of tbx5a loss of function phenotypes including pectoral fin malformation or absence and severe cardiac edema. Black arrow denotes cardiac edema, black arrowheads denote pectoral fin loss, red arrowheads denote pectoral fin defects. (PFA + E, pectoral fins absent with edema, PFD + E, pectoral fin defect with edema, PFD, pectoral fin defect only) (B) Two sgRNAs, tbx5adeMO1 and tbx5adeMO2 targeting the tbx5a-MO4 binding site (MO sequence shown above in purple, PAM sites are highlighted in magenta, coding sequence is highlighted in green. Tbx5adeMO2 overlaps a RsaI restriction enzyme site used for genotyping. (C) Sequence confirmation of the (− 3) and (− 7) deletion alleles. (D) Titration of Tbx5a-MO4 in wild type (TFL) embryos. Numbers indicate percentages of embryos displaying designated morphant phenotypes. WT is wild-type, E is edema only. (E) Suppression of cardiac and/or pectoral fin phenotypes by the (− 3) and (− 7) binding site deletions at different doses of MO. Adults heterozygous for either the (− 3) or (− 7) deletion were outcrossed and embryos were injected with either 2 ng or 8 ng of tbx5a-MO4. (F) Tbx5a-MO4 is able to at least partly block the translation of mRNAs containing (− 3) and (− 7) binding site mutations. In vitro transcribed mRNAs from each eGFP construct was injected along with mRFP mRNA as a control, and half of the mRNA-injected embryos were then injected with tbx5a-MO4. At 1dpf, embryos displaying similar levels of mRFP expression were photographed. T3, T3 transcription start site, Xβg 5′ UTR and Xβg 3′ UTR, Xenopus β-globin 5′ and 3′ untranslated regions, respectively.
Figure 2Suppression of a maternal morphant phenotype by DeMOBS. (A) Two sgRNAs, ctnnb2deMO1 and ctnnb2deMO2 target ctnnb2-MO1 binding site. ctnnb2deMO1 overlaps a Bpu10I restriction enzyme site used for genotyping. A single nucleotide polymorphism resulting in a single base mismatch between the MO and the target sequence is shown in lower case. (B) Confirmation of the (− 4) allele by sequence analysis. (C) Co-injection ctnnb2-MO1 and ctnnb1-MO2 into embryos obtained from four female siblings (two wild type and two heterozygous for the deletion) in blind experiments. (D) ciuffo morphant phenotype resulting from injection of ctnnb1-MO2 and ctnnb2-MO1. (E–H) Residual phenotypes observed in MO-injected embryos from a female heterozygous for the MO-refractive (− 4) mutation.