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.

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

  • 34,127
    views
  • 3,442
    downloads
  • 121
    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. Cancer Biology
    2. Genetics and Genomics
    Joakim W Karlsson, Vasu R Sah ... Jonas A Nilsson
    Research Article

    Uveal melanoma (UM) is a rare melanoma originating in the eye’s uvea, with 50% of patients experiencing metastasis predominantly in the liver. In contrast to cutaneous melanoma, there is only a limited effectiveness of combined immune checkpoint therapies, and half of patients with uveal melanoma metastases succumb to disease within 2 years. This study aimed to provide a path toward enhancing immunotherapy efficacy by identifying and functionally validating tumor-reactive T cells in liver metastases of patients with UM. We employed single-cell RNA-seq of biopsies and tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) to identify potential tumor-reactive T cells. Patient-derived xenograft (PDX) models of UM metastases were created from patients, and tumor sphere cultures were generated from these models for co-culture with autologous or MART1-specific HLA-matched allogenic TILs. Activated T cells were subjected to TCR-seq, and the TCRs were matched to those found in single-cell sequencing data from biopsies, expanded TILs, and in livers or spleens of PDX models injected with TILs. Our findings revealed that tumor-reactive T cells resided not only among activated and exhausted subsets of T cells, but also in a subset of cytotoxic effector cells. In conclusion, combining single-cell sequencing and functional analysis provides valuable insights into which T cells in UM may be useful for cell therapy amplification and marker selection.