Cargando…

Evaluation of Methods to Assess in vivo Activity of Engineered Genome-Editing Nucleases in Protoplasts

Genome-editing is being implemented in increasing number of plant species using engineered sequence specific nucleases (SSNs) such as Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats/CRISPR-associated systems (CRISPR/Cas9), Transcription activator like effector nucleases (TALENs), and more...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Nadakuduti, Satya Swathi, Starker, Colby G., Ko, Dae Kwan, Jayakody, Thilani B., Buell, C. Robin, Voytas, Daniel F., Douches, David S.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6376315/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30800139
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2019.00110
_version_ 1783395527610597376
author Nadakuduti, Satya Swathi
Starker, Colby G.
Ko, Dae Kwan
Jayakody, Thilani B.
Buell, C. Robin
Voytas, Daniel F.
Douches, David S.
author_facet Nadakuduti, Satya Swathi
Starker, Colby G.
Ko, Dae Kwan
Jayakody, Thilani B.
Buell, C. Robin
Voytas, Daniel F.
Douches, David S.
author_sort Nadakuduti, Satya Swathi
collection PubMed
description Genome-editing is being implemented in increasing number of plant species using engineered sequence specific nucleases (SSNs) such as Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats/CRISPR-associated systems (CRISPR/Cas9), Transcription activator like effector nucleases (TALENs), and more recently CRISPR/Cas12a. As the tissue culture and regeneration procedures to generate gene-edited events are time consuming, large-scale screening methodologies that rapidly facilitate validation of genome-editing reagents are critical. Plant protoplast cells provide a rapid platform to validate genome-editing reagents. Protoplast transfection with plasmids expressing genome-editing reagents represents an efficient and cost-effective method to screen for in vivo activity of genome-editing constructs and resulting targeted mutagenesis. In this study, we compared three existing methods for detection of editing activity, the T7 endonuclease I assay (T7EI), PCR/restriction enzyme (PCR/RE) digestion, and amplicon-sequencing, with an alternative method which involves tagging a double-stranded oligodeoxynucleotide (dsODN) into the SSN-induced double stranded break and detection of on-target activity of gene-editing reagents by PCR and agarose gel electrophoresis. To validate these methods, multiple reagents including TALENs, CRISPR/Cas9 and Cas9 variants, eCas9(1.1) (enhanced specificity) and Cas9-HF1 (high-fidelity1) were engineered for targeted mutagenesis of Acetolactate synthase1 (ALS1), 5-Enolpyruvylshikimate- 3-phosphate synthase1 (EPSPS1) and their paralogs in potato. While all methods detected editing activity, the PCR detection of dsODN integration provided the most straightforward and easiest method to assess on-target activity of the SSN as well as a method for initial qualitative evaluation of the functionality of genome-editing constructs. Quantitative data on mutagenesis frequencies obtained by amplicon-sequencing of ALS1 revealed that the mutagenesis frequency of CRISPR/Cas9 reagents is better than TALENs. Context-based choice of method for evaluation of gene-editing reagents in protoplast systems, along with advantages and limitations associated with each method, are discussed.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6376315
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-63763152019-02-22 Evaluation of Methods to Assess in vivo Activity of Engineered Genome-Editing Nucleases in Protoplasts Nadakuduti, Satya Swathi Starker, Colby G. Ko, Dae Kwan Jayakody, Thilani B. Buell, C. Robin Voytas, Daniel F. Douches, David S. Front Plant Sci Plant Science Genome-editing is being implemented in increasing number of plant species using engineered sequence specific nucleases (SSNs) such as Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats/CRISPR-associated systems (CRISPR/Cas9), Transcription activator like effector nucleases (TALENs), and more recently CRISPR/Cas12a. As the tissue culture and regeneration procedures to generate gene-edited events are time consuming, large-scale screening methodologies that rapidly facilitate validation of genome-editing reagents are critical. Plant protoplast cells provide a rapid platform to validate genome-editing reagents. Protoplast transfection with plasmids expressing genome-editing reagents represents an efficient and cost-effective method to screen for in vivo activity of genome-editing constructs and resulting targeted mutagenesis. In this study, we compared three existing methods for detection of editing activity, the T7 endonuclease I assay (T7EI), PCR/restriction enzyme (PCR/RE) digestion, and amplicon-sequencing, with an alternative method which involves tagging a double-stranded oligodeoxynucleotide (dsODN) into the SSN-induced double stranded break and detection of on-target activity of gene-editing reagents by PCR and agarose gel electrophoresis. To validate these methods, multiple reagents including TALENs, CRISPR/Cas9 and Cas9 variants, eCas9(1.1) (enhanced specificity) and Cas9-HF1 (high-fidelity1) were engineered for targeted mutagenesis of Acetolactate synthase1 (ALS1), 5-Enolpyruvylshikimate- 3-phosphate synthase1 (EPSPS1) and their paralogs in potato. While all methods detected editing activity, the PCR detection of dsODN integration provided the most straightforward and easiest method to assess on-target activity of the SSN as well as a method for initial qualitative evaluation of the functionality of genome-editing constructs. Quantitative data on mutagenesis frequencies obtained by amplicon-sequencing of ALS1 revealed that the mutagenesis frequency of CRISPR/Cas9 reagents is better than TALENs. Context-based choice of method for evaluation of gene-editing reagents in protoplast systems, along with advantages and limitations associated with each method, are discussed. Frontiers Media S.A. 2019-02-08 /pmc/articles/PMC6376315/ /pubmed/30800139 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2019.00110 Text en Copyright © 2019 Nadakuduti, Starker, Ko, Jayakody, Buell, Voytas and Douches. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Plant Science
Nadakuduti, Satya Swathi
Starker, Colby G.
Ko, Dae Kwan
Jayakody, Thilani B.
Buell, C. Robin
Voytas, Daniel F.
Douches, David S.
Evaluation of Methods to Assess in vivo Activity of Engineered Genome-Editing Nucleases in Protoplasts
title Evaluation of Methods to Assess in vivo Activity of Engineered Genome-Editing Nucleases in Protoplasts
title_full Evaluation of Methods to Assess in vivo Activity of Engineered Genome-Editing Nucleases in Protoplasts
title_fullStr Evaluation of Methods to Assess in vivo Activity of Engineered Genome-Editing Nucleases in Protoplasts
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of Methods to Assess in vivo Activity of Engineered Genome-Editing Nucleases in Protoplasts
title_short Evaluation of Methods to Assess in vivo Activity of Engineered Genome-Editing Nucleases in Protoplasts
title_sort evaluation of methods to assess in vivo activity of engineered genome-editing nucleases in protoplasts
topic Plant Science
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6376315/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30800139
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2019.00110
work_keys_str_mv AT nadakudutisatyaswathi evaluationofmethodstoassessinvivoactivityofengineeredgenomeeditingnucleasesinprotoplasts
AT starkercolbyg evaluationofmethodstoassessinvivoactivityofengineeredgenomeeditingnucleasesinprotoplasts
AT kodaekwan evaluationofmethodstoassessinvivoactivityofengineeredgenomeeditingnucleasesinprotoplasts
AT jayakodythilanib evaluationofmethodstoassessinvivoactivityofengineeredgenomeeditingnucleasesinprotoplasts
AT buellcrobin evaluationofmethodstoassessinvivoactivityofengineeredgenomeeditingnucleasesinprotoplasts
AT voytasdanielf evaluationofmethodstoassessinvivoactivityofengineeredgenomeeditingnucleasesinprotoplasts
AT douchesdavids evaluationofmethodstoassessinvivoactivityofengineeredgenomeeditingnucleasesinprotoplasts