Integration, stability and expression of the E. coli phytase transgene in the Cassie line of Yorkshire Enviropig™
- 1.7k Downloads
The genomic structure and generational stability of the transgene carried by the Cassie (CA) line of the transgenic Enviropig™, a prospective food animal, are reported here. This transgene is composed of the Escherichia coli phytase coding sequence regulated by the mouse parotid secretory protein promoter to direct secretion of phytase in the saliva. In the CA line the transgene integrated in chromosome 4 is present as a concatemer of three copies, two in a head to tail orientation and the third in a reverse orientation 3′ to the other copies with a 6 kbp deletion in the 5′ promoter region. The overall size of the integrated transgene complex is 46 kbp. During integration a 66 kbp segment of the chromosome was deleted, but a BLAST search of the segment from a GenBank clone did not reveal any essential genes. The transgene integration site was stable through 9 generations analyzed. Phytase activity in the saliva was similar among 11 day old hemizygous boars and gilts and remained relatively constant through nine generations of hemizygous pigs. However, as the pigs grew there generally was a gradual decrease in activity that stabilized when pigs reached the finisher phase of growth (4–6 months old). Homozygous pigs exhibited 1.5 fold higher phytase activity (P < 0.0001) than that of hemizygous littermates. Moreover, no differential salivary phytase activity was seen in hemizygotes arising from CA-Yorkshire and CA-Duroc breed outcrosses, suggesting that expression of the transgene is unaffected by genetic background. This data demonstrates that an exogenous phytase gene can be stably transmitted and expressed in the salivary glands of a domestic food animal.
KeywordsTransgenic Porcine Saliva Phytase Phosphorus
This study was funded by research grants from Ontario Pork Producers’ Marketing Board, the Natural Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada, and the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture and Food.
- Corring T (1980) Endogenous secretions in the pig. In: Low AG, Partridge IG (eds) Current concepts of digestion and absorption in pigs. National Institute for Research in Dairying, Reading, pp 136–150Google Scholar
- Higuchi R (1989) Simple and rapid preparation of samples for PCR. In: Erlich HA (ed) PCR technology: principles and applications for DNA amplification. MacMillan Publishers; Stockton Press, New York, pp 31–38Google Scholar
- Key N, McBride WD, Ribaudo M, Sneeringer S (2011) Trends and developments in hog manure management: 1998–2009. 81:1–33. USDA (http://www.ers.usda.gov/Publications/EIB81/)
- Lam JS, Mutharia LM (1994) Antigen-antibody reactions. In: Gerhardt P, Murray RGE, Wood WA, Krieg NR (eds) Methods for general and molecular bacteriology. American Society for Microbiology, Washington DC, pp 104–132Google Scholar