Abstract
Targeted nucleases allow the production of many types of genetic mutations directly in the early embryo. However, the outcome of their activity is a repair event of unpredictable nature, and the founder animals that are produced are generally of a mosaic nature. Here, we present the molecular assays and genotyping strategies that will support the screening of the first generation for potential founders and the validation of positive animals in the subsequent generation, according to the type of mutation generated.
Key words
- Genotyping
- Allele QC
- CRISPR-Cas9
- Genome editing
- Embryo/zygote engineering
- Genetic engineering
- Mouse models
- Transgenesis
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsSpringer Nature is developing a new tool to find and evaluate Protocols. Learn more
References
Burgio G, Teboul L (2020) Anticipating and identifying collateral damage in genome editing. Trends Genet 36:905–914
Mizuno S, Dinh TTH, Kato K et al (2014) Simple generation of albino C57BL/6J mice with G291T mutation in the tyrosinase gene by the CRISPR/Cas9 system. Mamm Genome 25:327–334
Renaud J-B, Boix C, Charpentier M et al (2016) Improved genome editing efficiency and flexibility using modified oligonucleotides with TALEN and CRISPR-Cas9 Nucleases. Cell Rep 14:2263–2272
Mianné J, Codner GF, Caulder A et al (2017) Analysing the outcome of CRISPR-aided genome editing in embryos: screening, genotyping and quality control. Methods 121–122:68–76
Pickar-Oliver A, Gersbach CA (2019) The next generation of CRISPR-Cas technologies and applications. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 20:490–507
Komor AC, Kim YB, Packer MS et al (2016) Programmable editing of a target base in genomic DNA without double-stranded DNA cleavage. Nature 533:420–424
Anzalone AV, Randolph PB, Davis JR et al (2019) Search-and-replace genome editing without double-strand breaks or donor DNA. Nature 576:149–157
Shin HY, Wang C, Lee HK et al (2017) CRISPR/Cas9 targeting events cause complex deletions and insertions at 17 sites in the mouse genome. Nat Commun 8:15464–15464
Green MR, Sambrook J (2019) Agarose gel electrophoresis. Cold Spring Harb Protoc 2019(1). https://doi.org/10.1101/pdb.prot100404
McCabe CV, Codner GF, Allan AJ et al (2019) Application of long-read sequencing for robust identification of correct alleles in genome edited animals. bioRxiv preprint. https://doi.org/10.1101/838193
Fernández A, Morín M, Muñoz-Santos D et al (2020) Simple protocol for generating and genotyping genome-edited mice with CRISPR-Cas9 reagents. Curr Protoc Mouse Biol 10:e69
Lanza DG, Gaspero A, Lorenzo I et al (2018) Comparative analysis of single-stranded DNA donors to generate conditional null mouse alleles. BMC Biol 16:69–69
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding authors
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature
About this protocol
Cite this protocol
Mackenzie, M., Fower, A., Allan, A.J., Codner, G.F., Bunton-Stasyshyn, R.K., Teboul, L. (2023). Genotyping Genome-Edited Founders and Subsequent Generation. In: Saunders, T.L. (eds) Transgenesis. Methods in Molecular Biology, vol 2631. Humana, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-0716-2990-1_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-0716-2990-1_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Humana, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-0716-2989-5
Online ISBN: 978-1-0716-2990-1
eBook Packages: Springer Protocols