An efficient CRISPR-based strategy to insert small and large fragments of DNA using short homology arms

  1. Oguz Kanca
  2. Jonathan Zirin
  3. Jorge Garcia-Marques
  4. Shannon Marie Knight
  5. Donghui Yang-Zhou
  6. Gabriel Amador
  7. Hyunglok Chung
  8. Zhongyuan Zuo
  9. Liwen Ma
  10. Yuchun He
  11. Wen-Wen Lin
  12. Ying Fang
  13. Ming Ge
  14. Shinya Yamamoto
  15. Karen L Schulze
  16. Yanhui Hu
  17. Allan C Spradling
  18. Stephanie E Mohr
  19. Norbert Perrimon
  20. Hugo J Bellen  Is a corresponding author
  1. Baylor College of Medicine, United States
  2. Harvard Medical School, United States
  3. Janelia Research Campus, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, United States
  4. Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Carnegie Institution for Science, United States

Abstract

We previously reported a CRISPR-mediated knock-in strategy into introns of Drosophila genes, generating an attP-FRT-SA-T2A-GAL4-polyA-3XP3-EGFP-FRT-attP transgenic library for multiple uses (Lee et al., 2018b). The method relied on double stranded DNA (dsDNA) homology donors with ~1 kb homology arms. Here, we describe three new simpler ways to edit genes in flies. We create single stranded DNA (ssDNA) donors using PCR and add 100 nt of homology on each side of an integration cassette, followed by enzymatic removal of one strand. Using this method, we generated GFP-tagged proteins that mark organelles in S2 cells. We then describe two dsDNA methods using cheap synthesized donors flanked by 100 nt homology arms and gRNA target sites cloned into a plasmid. Upon injection, donor DNA (1 to 5 kb) is released from the plasmid by Cas9. The cassette integrates efficiently and precisely in vivo. The approach is fast, cheap, and scalable.

Data availability

All the fly lines and cell lines generated in this manuscript will be made available through Bloomington Drosophila Stock center and Drosophila Genomics Resource Center

The following previously published data sets were used

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Oguz Kanca

    Department of Molecular and Human Genetics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-5438-0879
  2. Jonathan Zirin

    Department of Genetics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  3. Jorge Garcia-Marques

    Janelia Research Campus, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Ashburn, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  4. Shannon Marie Knight

    Department of Genetics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  5. Donghui Yang-Zhou

    Department of Genetics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  6. Gabriel Amador

    Department of Genetics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  7. Hyunglok Chung

    Department of Molecular and Human Genetics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  8. Zhongyuan Zuo

    Department of Molecular and Human Genetics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  9. Liwen Ma

    Department of Molecular and Human Genetics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  10. Yuchun He

    Department of Molecular and Human Genetics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  11. Wen-Wen Lin

    Department of Molecular and Human Genetics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  12. Ying Fang

    Department of Molecular and Human Genetics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  13. Ming Ge

    Department of Molecular and Human Genetics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  14. Shinya Yamamoto

    Department of Molecular and Human Genetics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  15. Karen L Schulze

    Department of Molecular and Human Genetics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-1368-729X
  16. Yanhui Hu

    Department of Genetics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  17. Allan C Spradling

    Department of Embryology, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Carnegie Institution for Science, Baltimore, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-5251-1801
  18. Stephanie E Mohr

    Department of Genetics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-9639-7708
  19. Norbert Perrimon

    Department of Genetics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-7542-472X
  20. Hugo J Bellen

    Department of Molecular and Human Genetics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    For correspondence
    hbellen@bcm.edu
    Competing interests
    Hugo J Bellen, Reviewing editor, eLife.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-5992-5989

Funding

NIH Office of the Director (R01GM067858)

  • Hugo J Bellen

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Reviewing Editor

  1. K VijayRaghavan, National Centre for Biological Sciences, Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, India

Version history

  1. Received: September 9, 2019
  2. Accepted: October 31, 2019
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: November 1, 2019 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: November 14, 2019 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2019, Kanca et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 33,395
    views
  • 3,372
    downloads
  • 104
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Oguz Kanca
  2. Jonathan Zirin
  3. Jorge Garcia-Marques
  4. Shannon Marie Knight
  5. Donghui Yang-Zhou
  6. Gabriel Amador
  7. Hyunglok Chung
  8. Zhongyuan Zuo
  9. Liwen Ma
  10. Yuchun He
  11. Wen-Wen Lin
  12. Ying Fang
  13. Ming Ge
  14. Shinya Yamamoto
  15. Karen L Schulze
  16. Yanhui Hu
  17. Allan C Spradling
  18. Stephanie E Mohr
  19. Norbert Perrimon
  20. Hugo J Bellen
(2019)
An efficient CRISPR-based strategy to insert small and large fragments of DNA using short homology arms
eLife 8:e51539.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.51539

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.51539

Further reading

    1. Chromosomes and Gene Expression
    Pei-Tseng Lee, Jonathan Zirin ... Hugo J Bellen
    Tools and Resources Updated

    We generated a library of ~1000 Drosophila stocks in which we inserted a construct in the intron of genes allowing expression of GAL4 under control of endogenous promoters while arresting transcription with a polyadenylation signal 3’ of the GAL4. This allows numerous applications. First, ~90% of insertions in essential genes cause a severe loss-of-function phenotype, an effective way to mutagenize genes. Interestingly, 12/14 chromosomes engineered through CRISPR do not carry second-site lethal mutations. Second, 26/36 (70%) of lethal insertions tested are rescued with a single UAS-cDNA construct. Third, loss-of-function phenotypes associated with many GAL4 insertions can be reverted by excision with UAS-flippase. Fourth, GAL4 driven UAS-GFP/RFP reports tissue and cell-type specificity of gene expression with high sensitivity. We report the expression of hundreds of genes not previously reported. Finally, inserted cassettes can be replaced with GFP or any DNA. These stocks comprise a powerful resource for assessing gene function.

    1. Genetics and Genomics
    2. Neuroscience
    Céline Petitgas, Laurent Seugnet ... Serge Birman
    Research Article

    Adenine phosphoribosyltransferase (APRT) and hypoxanthine-guanine phosphoribosyltransferase (HGPRT) are two structurally related enzymes involved in purine recycling in humans. Inherited mutations that suppress HGPRT activity are associated with Lesch–Nyhan disease (LND), a rare X-linked metabolic and neurological disorder in children, characterized by hyperuricemia, dystonia, and compulsive self-injury. To date, no treatment is available for these neurological defects and no animal model recapitulates all symptoms of LND patients. Here, we studied LND-related mechanisms in the fruit fly. By combining enzymatic assays and phylogenetic analysis, we confirm that no HGPRT activity is expressed in Drosophila melanogaster, making the APRT homolog (Aprt) the only purine-recycling enzyme in this organism. Whereas APRT deficiency does not trigger neurological defects in humans, we observed that Drosophila Aprt mutants show both metabolic and neurobehavioral disturbances, including increased uric acid levels, locomotor impairments, sleep alterations, seizure-like behavior, reduced lifespan, and reduction of adenosine signaling and content. Locomotor defects could be rescued by Aprt re-expression in neurons and reproduced by knocking down Aprt selectively in the protocerebral anterior medial (PAM) dopaminergic neurons, the mushroom bodies, or glia subsets. Ingestion of allopurinol rescued uric acid levels in Aprt-deficient mutants but not neurological defects, as is the case in LND patients, while feeding adenosine or N6-methyladenosine (m6A) during development fully rescued the epileptic behavior. Intriguingly, pan-neuronal expression of an LND-associated mutant form of human HGPRT (I42T), but not the wild-type enzyme, resulted in early locomotor defects and seizure in flies, similar to Aprt deficiency. Overall, our results suggest that Drosophila could be used in different ways to better understand LND and seek a cure for this dramatic disease.