Transcript Zebra fish

Insertional mutagenesis in zebrafish
rapidly identifies genes essential for
early vertebrate
development
Arnaldur Hall
Freyr Ævarsson
Þorkell Guðjónsson
Gregory Colling, Adam
Amsterdam, Zhaoxia Sun,
Marcelo Antonelli, Ernesto
Maldonado, Wenbiao Chen,
Shawn Burgess, Maryann
Haldi, Karen Artzt, Sarah
Farrington, Shuh-Yow Lin,
Robert M. Nissen & Nancy
Hopkins
Why are zebrafish (Danio rerio) ideal models for
development and disease research?
• Zebrafish are vertebrates. Like humans, they have a
backbone.
• Zebrafish have features that make them easy to
maintain, manipulate, and observe in the lab.
• The embryos develop outside the mother's body, so
you can have easy access to them.
• Zebrafish embryos are transparent. This means you
can watch development as it happens in living
embryos.
• The embryos develop quickly.
• You can physically manipulate the embryos.
Introduction
• It has been estimated that roughly 800 genes
can be mutaded to yield specific or localized
defects during development in zebrafish
• Approximately 1600 additional genes can be
mutaded to yield less specific phenotypes or
recurring syndromes
• Identification of these 2,400 genes would
contribute significantly to understanding
vertebrate development.
Indroduction
• More than 500 insertional mutants have been
isolated.
• First 75 insertional mutants, for which the
disrupted genes have been identified are
described in this article.
• The genes underlying about 50 mutants had
been reported when this article was published
(june 2002)
Experimental Questions
• How many genes are essential for the
development of a vertebrate?
• What is the role of each gene?
• How serious are the defects caused by
mutated genes?
Identification of retrovirusinduced mutations
Methods
• Mutagenesis: Method of insertional mutagenesis
for zebrafish was designed, using a Moloney
murine leukemia−based retroviral vector as a
mutagen.
Plus +
Minus
Integrates into many different
sites in mammalian and avian
chromosomes
Less efficient than chemicals
Integrates without
rearrangement of its own
sequences or significant
alterations to host DNA
-
Seldom, if ever, integrates
entirely randomly
Identification of retrovirus-induced mutations
• DNA flanking the insert cloned by inverse PCR
• If candidate gene was not found small chromosomal walk was used
• RT-PCR and RACE was then used to obtain the rest of the cDNA
• To confirm that the correct junction fragment (and gene) have been
cloned, linkage analysis was carried out
• Primers were designed to amplify different-sized products from
chromosomes with or without the putative mutagenic insert in a
PCR-based assay
Inverse PCR
• Inverse PCR is used to amplify and clone unknown DNA
that flanks one end of a known DNA sequence and for
which no primers are available.
• The technique involves digestion by a restriction enzyme
of a preparation of DNA containing the known sequence
and its flanking region.
• The individual restriction fragments are converted into
circles by intramolecular ligation, and the circularized
DNA is then used as a template in PCR.
• The unknown sequence is amplified by two primers that
bind specifically to the known sequence and point in
opposite direction.
Identification of retrovirus-induced mutations
Methods
Genotyping embryos:
• embryos were sorted from heterozygous parents into
phenotypically wildtype and mutant groups
• mutant embryos are homozygous with respect to the
mutagenic insertion
• almost all of the mutants are recessive-lethals
• 24 embryos of each group were genotyped by PCR
• Pair of genomic primers flanking the responsible
mutagenic viral insertion and a viral-specific primer were
used in a single reaction
• A viral insertion leads to amplification between the viralspecific primer and one of the genomic primers
Identification of retrovirus-induced mutations
• If no recombinants are seen, the insert
should lie no further than 3 cM (2 Mb) from
the mutation responsible for the mutant
phenotype.
• The screen is not perfect
• It is possible that a proviral insert could be
linked to a mutation, but not be its cause.
Identification of retrovirus-induced mutations
• Further evidence that the correct gene had been
identified obteined by use of RT-PCR or in situ
hybridization
• In this screen, all embryos with mutant phenotypes were
kept visible in a dissecting microscope by five days postfertilization
Classification of mutant phenotypes
• Specific developmental
defects
• brain, eyes, jaw, arches
or cartilages, midline, ear,
fins, liver, gut, kidney,
muscle, pigment, body
shape, motility or touch
insensitivity and motility
or altered touch
sensitivity in combination
with some degree of
visible morphological
defects
• General developmental
defects
• extensive cell death in the
central nervous system
(CNS), small head and
eyes, embryos that show
retardation, mutants that
have several defects and
mutants which fail to
inflate the swim bladder
Examples of specific mutants
• b & d) hi954 mutant
embryo showed cartilage
defects
• e) A mutation affecting
pigment is represented by
hi923 (bottom)
• f) In hi2092 mutants, the
posterior portion of the
body was significantly
reduced (bottom)
• h),j) & l) hi904 mutant
embryo had a severe
morphological defect in
the brain and CNS
Genes required for early vertebrate development
• 320 insertional
mutants found so far
• 205 loci represented by
a single allele
• 37 loci represented by
two alleles
• 10 loci by three alleles
• 1 locus by four alleles
• 1 locus by seven alleles
No. of loci
Discussion
250
200
150
100
50
0
205
37
1
2
10
1
0
0
1
3
4
5
6
7
No. of alleles
Discussion
• The data do not fit a Poisson distribution
• The allele distribution in large-scale ENU
mutagenesis screens also did not fit a
Poisson distribution
• => All genes are not mutated with equal
frequency with either mutagen
• => Retroviruses may be no more biased in
the genes they mutate than are chemical
mutagens
The end
•