Knockout rat

Last updated
Knockout rat.jpg

A knockout rat is a genetically engineered rat with a single gene turned off through a targeted mutation (gene trapping) used for academic and pharmaceutical research. Knockout rats can mimic human diseases and are important tools for studying gene function (functional genomics) and for drug discovery and development. The production of knockout rats was not economically or technically feasible until 2008. [1] [2] [3] [4]

Contents

Technology developed through funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and work accomplished by the members of the Knock Out Rat Consortium (KORC) led to cost-effective methods to create knockout rats. The importance of developing the rat as a more versatile tool for human health research is evidenced by the $120 million investment made by the NIH via the Rat Genome Sequencing Project Consortium, resulting in the draft sequence of a laboratory strain of the brown or Norway rat (Rattus norvegicus). [5] Additional developments with zinc finger nuclease technology in 2009 led to the first knockout rat with targeted, germline-transmitted mutations. [6] Knockout rat disease models for Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, hypertension, and diabetes using zinc-finger nuclease technology are being commercialized by SAGE Labs. [7] [8]

Research use

Mice, rats, and humans share all but approximately 1% of each other's genes [5] [9] [10] making rodents good model organisms for studying human gene function. Both mice and rats are relatively small, easily handled, have a short generation time, and are genetically inbred. While mice have proven to be a useful rodent model and techniques have been developed for routine disruption of their genes, in many circumstances rats are considered a superior laboratory animal for studying and modeling human disease.

Rats are physiologically more similar to humans than are mice. For example, rats have a heart rate more similar to that of humans, while mice have a heart rate five to ten times as fast. It is widely believed that the rat is a better model than the mouse for human cardiovascular disease, diabetes, arthritis, and many autoimmune, neurological, behavioral, and addiction disorders. [11] In addition, rat models are superior to mouse models for testing the pharmacodynamics and toxicity of potential therapeutic compounds, partially because the number and type of many of their detoxifying enzymes are very similar to those in humans. [12] Their larger size makes rats more conducive to study by instrumentation, and also facilitates manipulation such as blood sampling, nerve conduction, and performing surgeries.

Techniques for genetic manipulation are available in the mouse, which is commonly used to model human disease. Although published knockouts exist for approximately 60% [13] of mouse genes, a large majority of common human diseases do not have a knockout mouse model. Knockout rat models are an alternative to mice that may enable the creation of new gene disruptions that are unavailable in the mouse. Knockout rat models can also complement existing transgenic mouse models. Comparing mouse and rat mutants can facilitate the distinction between rodent-specific and general mammalian phenotypes.

Production challenges

Rat models have been used to advance many areas of medical research, including cardiovascular disease, psychiatric disorders (studies of behavioral intervention and addiction), neural regeneration, diabetes, transplantation, autoimmune disorders (rheumatoid arthritis), cancer, and wound & bone healing. While the completion of the rat genome sequence provides very key information, how these diseases relate to gene function requires an efficient method to create knockout rat models in which specific genomic sequences are manipulated. Most techniques for genetic manipulation, including random mutagenesis with a gene trap (retroviral-based and non-retroviral-based), gene knock-outs/knock-ins, and conditional mutations, depend upon the culture and manipulation of embryonic stem (ES) cells. [14] Rat ES cells were only recently isolated and no demonstration of gene modification in them has been reported. Consequently, many genetic manipulation techniques widely used in the mouse are not possible in the rat.

Early methods

Until the commercial development of mobile DNA technology in 2007 and zinc-finger nuclease technology in 2009, there were only two technologies that could be used to produce rat models of human disease: cloning and chemical mutagenesis using N-ethyl-N-nitrosourea (ENU). Although cloning by somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT) could theoretically be used to create rats with specific mutations by mutating somatic cells, and then using these cells for SCNT, this approach has not been used successfully to create knockout rats. One problem with this strategy is that SCNT is extremely inefficient. The first published attempt had a success rate of less than 1%. [15] Alternatively, ENU mutagenesis is a common random mutagenesis gene knockout strategy in the mouse that can also be used in the rat. ENU mutagenesis involves using a chemical, N-ethyl-N-nitrosourea (ENU), to create single base changes in the genome. ENU transfers its ethyl group to oxygen or nitrogen radicals in DNA, resulting in mis-pairing and base pair substitution. Mutant animals can be produced by injecting a male mouse with ENU, and breeding with a wild type female to produce mutant offspring. ENU mutagenesis creates a high frequency of random mutations, with approximately one base pair change in any given gene in every 200-700 gametes. [16] Despite its high mutagenicity, the physical penetration of ENU is limited and only about 500 genes are mutated for each male and a very small number of the total mutations have an observable phenotype. Thousands of mutations typically need to be created in a single animal in order to generate one novel phenotype.

Despite recent improvements in ENU technology, [17] [18] [19] mapping mutations responsible for a particular phenotype is typically difficult and time-consuming. Neutral mutations must be separated from causative mutations, via extensive breeding. ENU and cloning methods are simply inefficient for creating and mapping gene knockouts in rats for the creation of new models of human disease. Through 2007, the largest rat ENU mutagenesis project to date run by the Medical College of Wisconsin was able to produce only 9 knockout rat lines in a period of five years at an average cost of $200,000 per knockout line. Although some companies are still pursuing this strategy, the Medical College of Wisconsin has switched to a more efficient and commercially viable method using mobile DNA and CompoZr ZFN technology.

Zinc-finger and TALE nuclease technology

Zinc finger nucleases (ZFNs) and Transcription Activator-Like Effector Nucleases (TALENs) are engineered DNA-binding proteins that facilitate targeted editing of the genome by creating double-strand breaks in DNA at user-specified locations. Double strand breaks are important for site-specific mutagenesis in that they stimulate the cell's natural DNA-repair processes, namely homologous recombination and non-homologous end joining. When the cell uses the non-homologous end joining pathway to repair the double-strand break, the inherent inaccuracy of the repair often generates precisely targeted mutations. This results in embryos with targeted gene knockout. [6] [20] Standard microinjection techniques allow this technology to make knockout rats in 4–6 months. A major advantage of ZFN- and TALEN-mediated gene knockout relative to the use of mobile DNA is that a particular gene can be uniquely and specifically targeted for knockout. In contrast, knockouts made using mobile DNA technology are random and are therefore unlikely to target the gene of interest.

Mobile DNA technology

Mobile DNA (jumping gene) technology uses retrotransposons and transposons for the production of knockout rat models. This platform technology meets all of the criteria for a successful gene knockout approach in mammals by permitting random mutagenesis directly in the germ cells (sperm and oocytes) of mammalian model organisms, including rats. Using this technology, genes are disrupted completely and in a stable manner, are knocked out at a high frequency, and are randomly disrupted throughout the entire genome. The genomic location of mutations can be easily mapped, creating a library of knockout rats for later use. Once the random knockout mutations are created, more refined mutations such as conditional mutations can be created by breeding knockout lines with rat lines expressing CRE recombinase in a tissue specific manner. Knock-ins can be produced by recombination mediated cassette exchange.

piggyBac (PB) DNA transposons

piggyBac transposon technology PB lifecycle2.jpg
piggyBac transposon technology

piggyBac (PB) DNA transposons mobilize via a "cut-and-paste" mechanism whereby a transposase enzyme (PB transposase), encoded by the transposon itself, excises and re-integrates the transposon at other sites within the genome. PB transposase specifically recognizes PB inverted terminal repeats (ITRs) that flank the transposon; it binds to these sequences and catalyzes excision of the transposon. PB then integrates at TTAA sites [21] throughout the genome, in a relatively random fashion. For the creation of gene trap mutations (or adapted for generating transgenic animals), the transposase is supplied in trans on one plasmid and is co-transfected with a plasmid containing donor transposon, a recombinant transposon comprising a gene trap flanked by the binding sites for the transposase (ITRs). The transposase will catalyze the excision of the transposon from the plasmid and subsequent integration into the genome. Integration within a coding region will capture the elements necessary for gene trap expression. PB possesses several ideal properties: (1) it preferentially inserts within genes (50 to 67% of insertions hit genes) (2) it exhibits no local hopping (widespread genomic coverage) (3) it is not sensitive to over-production inhibition in which elevated levels of the transposase cause decreased transposition 4) it excises cleanly from a donor site, leaving no “footprint,” unlike Sleeping Beauty. [22] [23]

Sleeping beauty (SB) transposons

Sleeping Beauty transposon technology Sleeping Beauty transposon.jpg
Sleeping Beauty transposon technology

The sleeping beauty (SB) transposon is a derivative of the Tc1/mariner superfamily of DNA transposons prevalent among both vertebrate and invertebrate genomes. However, endogenous DNA transposons from this family are completely inactive in vertebrate genomes. An active Tc1/mariner transposon, synthesized from alignment of inactive transposons from the salmonid subfamily of elements, was “awoken” to form the transposon named Sleeping Beauty. [24] SB, like other DNA transposons, mobilizes itself via a cut-and-paste mechanism whereby a transposase enzyme, encoded by the transposon itself, excises and re-integrates the transposon at other sites within the genome. The 340 amino acid SB protein recognizes inverted terminal repeats (ITRs) that flank the transposon; it binds to these sequences and catalyzes excision of the transposon. SB then integrates into random sites within the genome, although some studies report very slight preferences for transcriptional units. [25] [26] There is also a simple requirement of a TA-dinucleotide at the target site, like all Tc1/mariner transposons. [27]

The SB transposon is a powerful tool for insertional mutagenesis in many vertebrate species. It recently exhibited especial utility for germ line mutagenesis in both mice and rats. [28] [29] [30] [31] [32] [33] [34] There are several advantages that make SB a highly attractive mutagen geared toward gene discovery: 1) it has little bias for inserting within particular genomic regions or within specific recognition sequences, 2) de novo insertions of the transposon provide a “tagged” sequence marker for rapid identification of the specific mutation by simple PCR cloning methods, 3) in vivo SB insertional mutagenesis allows multiple mutations to be quickly and easily generated in a single animal, and in a single tissue, such as an adenomatous polyp.

LINE1 (L1) retrotransposons

L1 retrotransposon technology L1 Retrotransposon.jpg
L1 retrotransposon technology

Transposons and retrotransposons are valuable tools for unbiased gene discovery as mobile pieces of DNA used for gene disruption. Retrotransposons, such as LINEs (long interspersed nuclear elements), mobilize via a “copy and paste” mechanism and are abundant in many eukaryotic species. Several L1 retrotransposons have remained active in mice and humans. L1s contain a small internal promoter within a 5’ untranslated region to drive expression, two open reading frames (ORFs), and a 3’ untranslated region containing sequences for polyadenylation. The two ORFs encode proteins necessary for autonomous retrotransposition; ORF1 encodes an RNA-binding protein while ORF2 encodes a protein containing endonuclease (EN) and reverse transcriptase (RT) activity, which nick a site in DNA, then produce a copy via RT. These proteins exhibit an overwhelming specificity for binding to and acting on the transcript that encodes them, enabling near exclusive mobilization of the parental L1 RNA. Using the RT activity of the ORF2 protein, the transcribed L1 RNA is copied into DNA by a process termed target primed reverse transcription (TPRT), [35] and integrated into the genome. Integration occurs with little bias for any particular genomic region, requiring a simple consensus sequence, 5’TTTT’A-3’ (along with minor variations of this sequence). Integrated L1 sequences are often truncated at the 5’ end, with an average total size of 1 Kb, many containing only 3’ terminal sequences.

The nature of retrotransposition endows the L1 with some unique advantages; L1 retrotransposons have an essentially unlimited supply of the insertional mutagen since it is continually transcribed from a promoter, which would be useful for applications where large numbers of mutations are needed in a single cell. L1 elements also demonstrate widespread genomic coverage, with a largely random distribution of insertions. [36] [37] [38] L1 insertions at genomic sites are also irreversible, and thus any mutagenic event caused by an L1 insertion is “tagged” by L1 sequences.

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Transposable element</span> Semiparasitic DNA sequence

A transposable element is a nucleic acid sequence in DNA that can change its position within a genome, sometimes creating or reversing mutations and altering the cell's genetic identity and genome size. Transposition often results in duplication of the same genetic material. In the human genome, L1 and Alu elements are two examples. Barbara McClintock's discovery of them earned her a Nobel Prize in 1983. Its importance in personalized medicine is becoming increasingly relevant, as well as gaining more attention in data analytics given the difficulty of analysis in very high dimensional spaces.

Gene knockouts are a widely used genetic engineering technique that involves the targeted removal or inactivation of a specific gene within an organism's genome. This can be done through a variety of methods, including homologous recombination, CRISPR-Cas9, and TALENs.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Retrotransposon</span> Type of genetic component

Retrotransposons are a type of genetic component that copy and paste themselves into different genomic locations (transposon) by converting RNA back into DNA through the reverse transcription process using an RNA transposition intermediate.

A transposase is any of a class of enzymes capable of binding to the end of a transposon and catalysing its movement to another part of a genome, typically by a cut-and-paste mechanism or a replicative mechanism, in a process known as transposition. The word "transposase" was first coined by the individuals who cloned the enzyme required for transposition of the Tn3 transposon. The existence of transposons was postulated in the late 1940s by Barbara McClintock, who was studying the inheritance of maize, but the actual molecular basis for transposition was described by later groups. McClintock discovered that some segments of chromosomes changed their position, jumping between different loci or from one chromosome to another. The repositioning of these transposons allowed other genes for pigment to be expressed. Transposition in maize causes changes in color; however, in other organisms, such as bacteria, it can cause antibiotic resistance. Transposition is also important in creating genetic diversity within species and generating adaptability to changing living conditions.

P elements are transposable elements that were discovered in Drosophila as the causative agents of genetic traits called hybrid dysgenesis. The transposon is responsible for the P trait of the P element and it is found only in wild flies. They are also found in many other eukaryotes.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mobile genetic elements</span> DNA sequence whose position in the genome is variable

Mobile genetic elements (MGEs), sometimes called selfish genetic elements, are a type of genetic material that can move around within a genome, or that can be transferred from one species or replicon to another. MGEs are found in all organisms. In humans, approximately 50% of the genome is thought to be MGEs. MGEs play a distinct role in evolution. Gene duplication events can also happen through the mechanism of MGEs. MGEs can also cause mutations in protein coding regions, which alters the protein functions. These mechanisms can also rearrange genes in the host genome generating variation. These mechanism can increase fitness by gaining new or additional functions. An example of MGEs in evolutionary context are that virulence factors and antibiotic resistance genes of MGEs can be transported to share genetic code with neighboring bacteria. However, MGEs can also decrease fitness by introducing disease-causing alleles or mutations. The set of MGEs in an organism is called a mobilome, which is composed of a large number of plasmids, transposons and viruses.

In molecular biology, insertional mutagenesis is the creation of mutations in DNA by the addition of one or more base pairs. Such insertional mutations can occur naturally, mediated by viruses or transposons, or can be artificially created for research purposes in the lab.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Gene targeting</span> Genetic technique that uses homologous recombination to change an endogenous gene

Gene targeting is a biotechnological tool used to change the DNA sequence of an organism. It is based on the natural DNA-repair mechanism of Homology Directed Repair (HDR), including Homologous Recombination. Gene targeting can be used to make a range of sizes of DNA edits, from larger DNA edits such as inserting entire new genes into an organism, through to much smaller changes to the existing DNA such as a single base-pair change. Gene targeting relies on the presence of a repair template to introduce the user-defined edits to the DNA. The user will design the repair template to contain the desired edit, flanked by DNA sequence corresponding (homologous) to the region of DNA that the user wants to edit; hence the edit is targeted to a particular genomic region. In this way Gene Targeting is distinct from natural homology-directed repair, during which the ‘natural’ DNA repair template of the sister chromatid is used to repair broken DNA. The alteration of DNA sequence in an organism can be useful in both a research context – for example to understand the biological role of a gene – and in biotechnology, for example to alter the traits of an organism.

In the fields of bioinformatics and computational biology, Genome survey sequences (GSS) are nucleotide sequences similar to expressed sequence tags (ESTs) that the only difference is that most of them are genomic in origin, rather than mRNA.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">SETMAR</span> Protein-coding gene in the species Homo sapiens

Histone-lysine N-methyltransferase SETMAR is an enzyme that in humans is encoded by the SETMAR gene.

Transposon mutagenesis, or transposition mutagenesis, is a biological process that allows genes to be transferred to a host organism's chromosome, interrupting or modifying the function of an extant gene on the chromosome and causing mutation. Transposon mutagenesis is much more effective than chemical mutagenesis, with a higher mutation frequency and a lower chance of killing the organism. Other advantages include being able to induce single hit mutations, being able to incorporate selectable markers in strain construction, and being able to recover genes after mutagenesis. Disadvantages include the low frequency of transposition in living systems, and the inaccuracy of most transposition systems.

Transposons are semi-parasitic DNA sequences which can replicate and spread through the host's genome. They can be harnessed as a genetic tool for analysis of gene and protein function. The use of transposons is well-developed in Drosophila and in Thale cress and bacteria such as Escherichia coli.

The Sleeping Beauty transposon system is a synthetic DNA transposon designed to introduce precisely defined DNA sequences into the chromosomes of vertebrate animals for the purposes of introducing new traits and to discover new genes and their functions. It is a Tc1/mariner-type system, with the transposase resurrected from multiple inactive fish sequences.

A knockout mouse, or knock-out mouse, is a genetically modified mouse in which researchers have inactivated, or "knocked out", an existing gene by replacing it or disrupting it with an artificial piece of DNA. They are important animal models for studying the role of genes which have been sequenced but whose functions have not been determined. By causing a specific gene to be inactive in the mouse, and observing any differences from normal behaviour or physiology, researchers can infer its probable function.

The PiggyBac (PB) transposon system employs a genetically engineered transposase enzyme to insert a gene into a cell's genome. It is built upon the natural PiggyBac (PB) transposable element (transposon), enabling the back and forth movement of genes between chromosomes and genetic vectors such as plasmids through a "cut and paste" mechanism. During transposition, the PB transposase recognizes transposon-specific inverted terminal repeat sequences (ITRs) located on both ends of the transposon vector and efficiently moves the contents from the original sites and integrates them into TTAA chromosomal sites. The powerful activity of the PiggyBac transposon system enables genes of interest between the two ITRs in the PB vector to be easily mobilized into target genomes. The TTAA-specific transposon piggyBac is rapidly becoming a highly useful transposon for genetic engineering of a wide variety of species, particularly insects. They were discovered in 1989 by Malcolm Fraser at the University of Notre Dame.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mutagenesis (molecular biology technique)</span>

In molecular biology, mutagenesis is an important laboratory technique whereby DNA mutations are deliberately engineered to produce libraries of mutant genes, proteins, strains of bacteria, or other genetically modified organisms. The various constituents of a gene, as well as its regulatory elements and its gene products, may be mutated so that the functioning of a genetic locus, process, or product can be examined in detail. The mutation may produce mutant proteins with interesting properties or enhanced or novel functions that may be of commercial use. Mutant strains may also be produced that have practical application or allow the molecular basis of a particular cell function to be investigated.

Transposable elements are short strands of repetitive DNA that can self-replicate and translocate within the eukaryotic genome, and are generally perceived as parasitic in nature. Their transcription can lead to the production of dsRNAs, which resemble retroviruses transcripts. While most host cellular RNA has a singular, unpaired sense strand, dsRNA possesses sense and anti-sense transcripts paired together, and this difference in structure allows an host organism to detect dsRNA production, and thereby the presence of transposons. Plants lack distinct divisions between somatic cells and reproductive cells, and also have, generally, larger genomes than animals, making them an intriguing case-study kingdom to be used in attempting to better understand the epigenetics function of transposable elements.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Conservative transposition</span>

Transposition is the process by which a specific genetic sequence, known as a transposon, is moved from one location of the genome to another. Simple, or conservative transposition, is a non-replicative mode of transposition. That is, in conservative transposition the transposon is completely removed from the genome and reintegrated into a new, non-homologous locus, the same genetic sequence is conserved throughout the entire process. The site in which the transposon is reintegrated into the genome is called the target site. A target site can be in the same chromosome as the transposon or within a different chromosome. Conservative transposition uses the "cut-and-paste" mechanism driven by the catalytic activity of the enzyme transposase. Transposase acts like DNA scissors; it is an enzyme that cuts through double-stranded DNA to remove the transposon, then transfers and pastes it into a target site.

DNA transposons are DNA sequences, sometimes referred to "jumping genes", that can move and integrate to different locations within the genome. They are class II transposable elements (TEs) that move through a DNA intermediate, as opposed to class I TEs, retrotransposons, that move through an RNA intermediate. DNA transposons can move in the DNA of an organism via a single-or double-stranded DNA intermediate. DNA transposons have been found in both prokaryotic and eukaryotic organisms. They can make up a significant portion of an organism's genome, particularly in eukaryotes. In prokaryotes, TE's can facilitate the horizontal transfer of antibiotic resistance or other genes associated with virulence. After replicating and propagating in a host, all transposon copies become inactivated and are lost unless the transposon passes to a genome by starting a new life cycle with horizontal transfer. It is important to note that DNA transposons do not randomly insert themselves into the genome, but rather show preference for specific sites.

Tc1/mariner is a class and superfamily of interspersed repeats DNA transposons. The elements of this class are found in all animals, including humans. They can also be found in protists and bacteria.

References

  1. ↑ Abbott A: Laboratory animals: the Renaissance rat. Nature 2004, 428:464-466.
  2. ↑ Zhou Q, Renard JP, Le Friec G, Brochard V, Beaujean N, Cherifi Y, Fraichard A, Cozzi J: Generation of fertile cloned rats by regulating oocyte activation. Science 2003, 302:1179.
  3. ↑ Justice MJ, Noveroske JK, Weber JS, Zheng B, Bradley A: Mouse ENU mutagenesis. Hum Mol Genet 1999, 8:1955–1963.
  4. ↑ Kitada K, Ishishita S, Tosaka K, Takahashi R, Ueda M, Keng VW, Horie K, Takeda J: Transposon-tagged mutagenesis in the rat. Nat Methods 2007, 4:131-133.
  5. 1 2 Rat Genome Sequencing Project Consortium, Genome sequence of the brown rat yields insights into mammalian evolution. Nature, 2004. 428(6982): p. 493-521.
  6. 1 2 Guerts, A.M., et. al, Knockout Rats via Embryo Microinjection of Zinc-Finger Nucleases. Science. Vol 325: 433 (24 July 2009) Geurts, A. M.; Cost, G. J.; Freyvert, Y.; Zeitler, B.; Miller, J. C.; Choi, V. M.; Jenkins, S. S.; Wood, A.; Cui, X.; Meng, X.; Vincent, A.; Lam, S.; Michalkiewicz, M.; Schilling, R.; Foeckler, J.; Kalloway, S.; Weiler, H.; Menoret, S.; Anegon, I.; Davis, G. D.; Zhang, L.; Rebar, E. J.; Gregory, P. D.; Urnov, F. D.; Jacob, H. J.; Buelow, R. (2009). "Knockout Rats via Embryo Microinjection of Zinc-Finger Nucleases". Science. 325 (5939): 433. Bibcode:2009Sci...325..433G. doi:10.1126/science.1172447. PMC   2831805 . PMID   19628861.
  7. ↑ Wiecek, Andrew. "Year of the rat", BioTechniques , 2009-10-01.
  8. ↑ "Sigma-Aldrich develops Parkinson's disease models" Archived 2009-10-08 at the Wayback Machine , LaboratoryTalk
  9. ↑ International Human Genome Sequencing Consortium, Initial sequencing and analysis of the human genome. Nature, 2001. 409(6822): p. 860-921.
  10. ↑ Mouse Genome Sequencing Consortium, Initial sequencing and comparative analysis of the mouse genome. Nature, 2002. 420(6915): p. 520-62.
  11. ↑ Abbott, A., Laboratory animals: the Renaissance rat. Nature, 2004. 428(6982): p. 464-6.
  12. ↑ Lindblad-Toh, K., Genome sequencing: three's company. Nature, 2004. 428(6982): p. 475-6.
  13. ↑ Zambrowicz, 1998; Skarnes et al., 2004; To et al., 2004; Nord et al., 2006
  14. ↑ Cohen-Tannoudji, M. and C. Babinet, Beyond 'knock-out' mice: new perspectives for the programmed modification of the mammalian genome. Molecular Human Reproduction, 1998. 4(10): p. 929-38.
  15. ↑ Zhou, Q., J.P. Renard, G. Le Friec, V. Brochard, N. Beaujean, Y. Cherifi, A. Fraichard, and J. Cozzi, Generation of fertile cloned rats by regulating oocyte activation. Science, 2003. 302(5648): p. 1179.
  16. ↑ Hitotsumachi, S., D.A. Carpenter, and W.L. Russell, Dose-repetition increases the mutagenic effectiveness of N-ethyl-N-nitrosourea in mouse spermatogonia. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 1985. 82(19): p. 6619-21.
  17. ↑ Brown, S.D. and R.E. Hardisty, Mutagenesis strategies for identifying novel loci associated with disease phenotypes. Seminars in Cell & Developmental Biology, 2003. 14(1): p. 19-24.
  18. ↑ Chen, Y., D. Yee, K. Dains, A. Chatterjee, J. Cavalcoli, E. Schneider, J. Om, R.P. Woychik, and T. Magnuson, Genotype-based screen for ENU-induced mutations in mouse embryonic stem cells. Nature Genetics, 2000. 24(3): p. 314-7.
  19. ↑ Zan, Y., J.D. Haag, K.S. Chen, L.A. Shepel, D. Wigington, Y.R. Wang, R. Hu, C.C. Lopez-Guajardo, H.L. Brose, K.I. Porter, R.A. Leonard, A.A. Hitt, S.L. Schommer, A.F. Elegbede, and M.N. Gould, Production of knockout rats using ENU mutagenesis and a yeast-based screening assay. Nature Biotechnology, 2003. 21(6): p. 645-51.
  20. ↑ Tesson et al., Knockout rats generated by embryo microinjection of TALENs. Nature Biotechnology Vol 29:695-96 (5 August 2011) Tesson, L.; Usal, C.; Ménoret, S. V.; Leung, E.; Niles, B. J.; Remy, S. V.; Santiago, Y.; Vincent, A. I.; Meng, X.; Zhang, L.; Gregory, P. D.; Anegon, I.; Cost, G. J. (2011). "Knockout rats generated by embryo microinjection of TALENs". Nature Biotechnology. 29 (8): 695–696. doi: 10.1038/nbt.1940 . PMID   21822240.
  21. ↑ Fraser, M.J., et al., Precise excision of TTAA-specific lepidopteran transposons piggyBac (IFP2) and tagalong (TFP3) from the baculovirus genome in cell lines from two species of Lepidoptera. Insect Mol Biol, 1996. 5(2): p. 141-51.
  22. ↑ Mitra, R., J. Fain-Thornton, and N.L. Craig, piggyBac can bypass DNA synthesis during cut and paste transposition. EMBO J, 2008.
  23. ↑ Ding, S., et al., Efficient transposition of the piggyBac (PB) transposon in mammalian cells and mice. Cell, 2005. 122(3): p. 473-83.
  24. ↑ Ivics, Z., et al., Molecular reconstruction of Sleeping Beauty, a Tc1-like transposon from fish, and its transposition in human cells. Cell, 1997. 91(4): p. 501-10.
  25. ↑ Vigdal, T.J., et al., Common physical properties of DNA affecting target site selection of sleeping beauty and other Tc1/mariner transposable elements. J Mol Biol, 2002. 323(3): p. 441-52.
  26. ↑ Yant, S.R., et al., High-resolution genome-wide mapping of transposon integration in mammals. Mol Cell Biol, 2005. 25(6): p. 2085-94.
  27. ↑ Plasterk, R.H., Z. Izsvak, and Z. Ivics, Resident aliens: the Tc1/mariner superfamily of transposable elements. Trends Genet, 1999. 15(8): p. 326-32.
  28. ↑ Geurts, A.M., et al., Gene mutations and genomic rearrangements in the mouse as a result of transposon mobilization from chromosomal concatemers. PLoS Genet, 2006. 2(9): p. e156.
  29. ↑ Horie, K., et al., Characterization of Sleeping Beauty transposition and its application to genetic screening in mice. Mol Cell Biol, 2003. 23(24): p. 9189-207.
  30. ↑ Keng, V.W., et al., Region-specific saturation germline mutagenesis in mice using the Sleeping Beauty transposon system. Nat Methods, 2005. 2(10): p. 763-9.
  31. ↑ Kitada, K., et al., Transposon-tagged mutagenesis in the rat. Nat Methods, 2007. 4(2): p. 131-3.
  32. ↑ Geurts, A.M., et al., Conditional gene expression in the mouse using a Sleeping Beauty gene-trap transposon. BMC Biotechnol, 2006. 6: p. 30.
  33. ↑ Dupuy, A.J., S. Fritz, and D.A. Largaespada, Transposition and gene disruption in the male germline of the mouse. Genesis, 2001. 30(2): p. 82-8.
  34. ↑ Dupuy, A.J., et al., Mammalian germ-line transgenesis by transposition. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2002. 99(7): p. 4495-9.
  35. ↑ Luan, D.D., M.H. Korman, J.L. Jakubczak, and T.H. Eickbush, Reverse transcription of R2Bm RNA is primed by a nick at the chromosomal target site: a mechanism for non-LTR retrotransposition. Cell, 1993. 72(4): p. 595-605.
  36. ↑ Ostertag, E.M., et al., A mouse model of human L1 retrotransposition. Nat Genet, 2002. 32(4): p. 655-60.
  37. ↑ Babushok, D.V., et al., L1 integration in a transgenic mouse model. Genome Res, 2006. 16(2): p. 240-50.
  38. ↑ Cost, G.J. and J.D. Boeke, Targeting of human retrotransposon integration is directed by the specificity of the L1 endonuclease for regions of unusual DNA structure. Biochemistry, 1998. 37(51): p. 18081-93.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.