| Literature DB >> 33808382 |
Sanaz Nargesi1, Saeed Kaboli2,3, Jose Thekkiniath4, Somayeh Heidari5, Fatemeh Keramati6, Seyedmojtaba Seyedmousavi5,7, Mohammad Taghi Hedayati1,5.
Abstract
Manipulating fungal genomes is an important tool to understand the function of target genes, pathobiology of fungal infections, virulence potential, and pathogenicity of medically important fungi, and to develop novel diagnostics and therapeutic targets. Here, we provide an overview of recent advances in genetic manipulation techniques used in the field of medical mycology. Fungi use several strategies to cope with stress and adapt themselves against environmental effectors. For instance, mutations in the 14 alpha-demethylase gene may result in azole resistance in Aspergillusfumigatus strains and shield them against fungicide's effects. Over the past few decades, several genome editing methods have been introduced for genetic manipulations in pathogenic fungi. Application of restriction enzymes to target and cut a double-stranded DNA in a pre-defined sequence was the first technique used for cloning in Aspergillus and Candida. Genome editing technologies, including zinc-finger nucleases (ZFNs) and transcriptional activator-like effector nucleases (TALENs), have been also used to engineer a double-stranded DNA molecule. As a result, TALENs were considered more practical to identify single nucleotide polymorphisms. Recently, Class 2 type II Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeat (CRISPR)/Cas9 technology has emerged as a more useful tool for genome manipulation in fungal research.Entities:
Keywords: CRISPR/Cas9; gene editing techniques; medically important fungi
Year: 2021 PMID: 33808382 PMCID: PMC8067129 DOI: 10.3390/jof7040257
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Fungi (Basel) ISSN: 2309-608X
Figure 1Hypothetical model of RNA interference (RNAi) pathway in fungi. The Dicer ribonuclease III enzyme (DCR) cleaves exogenous long double-stranded RNA (dsRNAs) into ~21–24 nucleotide small interfering RNAs (siRNAs). The guide siRNA then loaded onto the major catalytic component called Argonaute (Ago) and other proteins generating the RNA-induced silencing complex (RISC). siRNA, along with RISC, complementarily pair with messenger RNA (mRNA) resulting in degradation of mRNAs.
Figure 2Schematic representation of RNA-guided Cas9 constructs designed for genome editing. Bottom panel: (structure of the vector plasmids used to deliver Cas9-sgRNA components into fungal cells). PromoterX can express NLS-Cas9-NLS protein. PromoterY can express 20 nt guide sequence + sgRNA cassette. Upper panel: (Cas9+sgRNA+genomic DNA). Mechanism of Cas9/gRNA ribonucleoprotein complex action, NGG (PAM site) highlighted in black line. The Cas9 nuclease domain HNH then cleaves the target DNA sequence complementary to the 20 bp guide sequence, while RuvC domain cuts another DNA strand, forming a double stranded break (DSB). DSB must be repaired via either non-homologous end joining (NHEJ) or homologous recombination (HR) immediately to avoid cell death. Insertions and deletion mutations at the target site generated by NHEJ and homology directed repair (HDR) allow disrupting or abolishing the function of a target gene. Moreover, modifications in this system can also be used to silence genes, insert new exogenous DNA, or block RNA transcription.
Modules, applications and success rate of the CRISPR/Cas9 system in manipulating clinically relevant yeasts.
| Organism | CAS9 Expression Module | GRNA Expression Module | Target Gene (S) | Purpose of Application | Editing Rate and Result | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| The RNA polymerase III (Pol III) promoter SNR52 |
| To generate homozygous mutations in one transformation by Duet and Solo system | Duet system showed 20–40% mutagenesis efficiency, and Solo system enabled 60–80% targeting | Vyas et al. (2015) [ | |
|
| Transient CRISPR-Cas9 system by using a SAT1-FLP system | SNR52P/TENO1 | NDT80, REP1, and RON1 | To better understand role of target genes (single or in combination) in virulence | Single, double, and triple deletion strains were successfully constructed | Min et al. (2018) [ |
|
| US-pENO1 ˃ Cas9-NAT | NAT-pSNR52-gRNA-DS | ADE2, URA3, WOR1,WOR, and CZF1 | To develop a marker less system without need for molecular cloning step | 80% single gene deletion, 20% double genes deletion and ˃50% integration efficiency | Nguyen et al. (2017) [ |
|
| CIp-ARG4-PTEF CaCAS9 |
| To optimize gRNA intracellular expression | Increase the gene editing efficiency by 10-fold | Ng et al. (2017) [ | |
|
| CaCas9 into the | 5′ homology arm–SNR52 promoter–gRNA1–gRNA2-3′ homology arm | antifungal efflux and biofilm adhesion factors | To develop a gene drive array system for the generation of combinatorial deletion mutants | Two larges pairwise gene deletion mutants were successfully generated | Shapiro et al. (2018) [ |
|
| the ENO1 promoter/Cas9 (CaCas9)/TCYC1 | SNR52P/TENO1 |
| To describe a transient CRISPR-Cas9 system for efficient gene deletion | Homozygous deletions by introduction of CaCas9 transiently | Min et al. (2016) [ |
|
| TEF1p-CAS9-TEF1t | pCpSNR52-sgRNA-SUP4t and cpGAPDHp-HH-sgRNA-HDV-GAPDHt | To apply gene manipulation in single transformation step which can be used for editing of any number of target genes | The system yielded up to 100% efficiency across a panel of 20 clinical isolates | Lombardi et al. (2017) [ | |
|
| pTEF1-Cas9-tCYC1/pCYC1-Cas9-tCYC1 | pSNR52-sgRNA-tTY2/pRNAH1-sgRNA-tTY2 |
| To establish a loss-of-function mutation through the NHEJ repair pathway | High | Enkler et al. (2016) [ |
|
| pTEF-Cas9-KanMX | p | To compare genome modifications in | Targeting efficiency in the | Cen et al. (2017) [ | |
|
| Codon-optimized version of Cas9(CaCas9)-SV40NLS | SNR52 RNA polymerase III promoter |
| To present a modified gene-drive-based assay for gene manipulation | − | Halder et al. (2019) [ |
|
| ACT1p-dCAS9-ACT1t | SNR52p-gRNA tail |
| To demonstrate a functional CRISPRi system for transcriptional repression | 20-fold repression of target gene achieved | Wensing et al. (2019) [ |
|
| MgTEF1p-CAS9-MgTRP1t | pAgTEF1-sgRNA-HDV-ScCYC1t |
| To construct an autonomously replicating plasmid for markerless ediing in | Single gene distribution efficiency observed in | Lombardi et al. (2019) [ |
|
| TEF1p-Cas9-SV40NLS-TEF1t | pACT1-HH-gRNA-HDV-TRPt |
| To demonstrate the first proof of principle study | 70% | Arras et al. (2016) [ |
|
| ACT1P-SV40NLS-Cas9-NLS-bGHpAt | pCnU6-GN19-gRNA-6Ts | To develop a system for gene alterations by subsequent complementation and off-target effects reduction | Frequency of gene deletion was over 80%, indel efficiency and HR rates were 40–90% and 20–90%, respectively | Wang et al. (2016) [ | |
|
| GPD1p–Cas9-GPD1 t | pCnU6-sgRNA-6-Tt |
| To generate a TRACE system as an cost-effective and efficient strategy for genetic modifications | Up to 90% gene disruption rate | Fan et al. (2018) [ |
|
| pTEF-Cas9-FLAG-NLS | ptRNA-sgRNA-NLS |
| To deliver a preassembled RNP via electroporation to accelerate of gene editing | Approach is sufficient to induce gene modification | Wang P. (2018) [ |
Modules, applications and success rate of the CRISPR system in manipulating clinically relevant molds.
| Organism | CAS9 Expression Module | GRNA Expression Module | Target Gene (S) | Purpose of Application | Editing Rate and Result | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| p-hph-Ptef1-cas9 | p426-SNR52p-gRNA.CAN1.Y-SUP4t |
| To test CRISPR-CAS9 method in this organism | High gene targeting efficiency reached 25–53% | Fuller et al. (2015) [ |
|
| Gpdap-3xFLAG-NLS-Cas9-NLS-TRPCt | U6-3-gRNA | To establish the system for mutagenesis using MMEJ process | Approximately 95–100% rate of mutagenesis obtained | Zhang et al. (2016) [ | |
|
| Alt-R-CRISPR-Cas9 components from integrated DNA technologies (IDT) | cr5 = pksP and cr3 = pksP |
| An in vitro assembly of RNP demonstrated to eliminate the strain construction step | Gene deletion efficiency was close to 100% | Al-Abdallah et al. (2017) [ |
|
| Cas9-NLS | T7-sgRNA |
| To investigate the mechanisms of azole resistance via cyp51A alteration | Site-directed mutagenesis successfully performed using CRISPR-CAS9 system | Umeyama et al. (2018) [ |
|
| Alt-R CRISPR-Cas9 tracrRNA | Alt-R CRISPR crRNA | To obtain mitotically stable mutants, a plasmid free CRISPR-Cas9 approach demonstrated | Targeting efficiency of NHEJ and HR reach to 100% | Nagy et al. (2017) [ | |
|
| pmCas9: tRNA-gRNA | pmCas9: tRNA-gRNA |
| For investigating molecular pathogenesis mechanisms, point mutation introduced | Efficiency of 36% to 59% | Bruni et al. (2019) [ |