Pyrosequencing pp 221-239 | Cite as

Limiting Dilution Bisulfite Pyrosequencing®: A Method for Methylation Analysis of Individual DNA Molecules in a Single or a Few Cells

Part of the Methods in Molecular Biology book series (MIMB, volume 1315)

Abstract

Bisulfite-based methods for DNA methylation analysis of small amounts of DNA from a limited number of cells are technologically challenging. Degradation of genomic DNA by bisulfite treatment, contamination with foreign DNA, and biases in the amplification of individual DNA molecules can generate results, which are not representative of the starting sample. Limiting dilution (LD) bisulfite Pyrosequencing® (BSP) is a relatively simple technique to circumvent these problems. The bisulfite-treated DNA of a single or a few cells is diluted to an extent, that only a single DNA target molecule is present in the reaction. Then each individual DNA molecule in the starting sample is separately amplified and analyzed by Pyrosequencing. This allows the detection of rare alleles that are easily masked when pools of DNA target molecules are analyzed. Amplicons containing a heterozygous single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) allow one to delineate the parental origin of the recovered molecules in addition to their methylation status. The number of cells (DNA target molecules) in the starting sample determines the dilution level and the number of reactions that have to be performed. LD-BSP allows methylation analysis of small cell pools (i.e., 5–10 microdissected cells) and even individual cells. The primers and PCR conditions described here have been successfully employed to analyze the methylation status of up to eight target genes in individual 2–16 cell embryos, germinal vesicle (GV) oocytes, and haploid sperms.

Key words

Allele-specific methylation Bisulfite conversion DNA methylation Imprinted gene Limiting dilution Single cell analysis Pyrosequencing® 

References

  1. 1.
    Ronaghi M (2001) Pyrosequencing sheds light on DNA sequencing. Genome Res 11:3–11PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ronaghi M, Uhlén M, Nyrén P (1998) A sequencing method based on real-time pyrophosphate. Science 281:363–365PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Colella S, Shen L, Baggerly KA et al (2003) Sensitive and quantitative universal pyrosequencing methylation analysis of CpG sites. Biotechniques 35:146–150PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Tost J, Dunker J, Gut IG (2003) Analysis and quantification of multiple methylation variable positions in CpG islands by pyrosequencing. Biotechniques 35:152–156PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Uhlmann K, Brinckmann A, Toliat M et al (2002) Evaluation of a potential epigenetic biomarker by quantitative methyl-single nucleotide polymorphism analysis. Electrophoresis 23:4072–4079PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Warnecke PM, Stirzaker C, Melki JR et al (1997) Detection and measurement of PCR bias in quantitative methylation analysis of bisulphite-treated DNA. Nucleic Acids Res 25:4422–4426PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Frommer M, McDonald LE, Millar DS et al (1992) A genomic sequencing protocol that yields a positive display of 5-methylcytosine residues in individual DNA strands. Proc Natl Acad U S A 89:1827–1831CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Arányi T, Váradi A, Simon I et al (2006) The BiSearch web server. BMC Bioinformatics 7:431PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tusnády GE, Simon I, Váradi A et al (2005) BiSearch: primer-design and search tool for PCR on bisulfite-treated genomes. Nucleic Acids Res 33:e9PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lucifero D, Mertineit C, Clarke HJ et al (2002) Methylation dynamics of imprinted genes in mouse germ cells. Genomics 79:530–538PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hiura H, Obata Y, Komiyama J et al (2006) Oocyte growth-dependent progression of maternal imprinting in mice. Genes Cells 11:353–361PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Anckaert E, Romero S, Adriaenssens T et al (2010) Effects of low methyl donor levels in culture medium during mouse follicle culture on oocyte imprinting establishment. Biol Reprod 83:377–386PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tomizawa S, Kobayashi H, Watanabe T et al (2011) Dynamic stage-specific changes in imprinted differentially methylated regions during early mammalian development and prevalence of non-CpG methylation in oocytes. Development 138:811–820PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fauque P, Jouannet P, Lesaffre C et al (2007) Assisted reproductive technology affects developmental kinetics, H19 imprinting control region methylation and H19 gene expression in individual mouse embryos. BMC Dev Biol 7:116PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Market-Velker BA, Zhang L, Magri LS et al (2010) Dual effects of superovulation: loss of maternal and paternal imprinted methylation in a dose-dependent manner. Hum Mol Genet 19:36–51PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hajkova P, El-Maarri O, Engemann S et al (2002) DNA-methylation analysis by the bisulfite-assisted genomic sequencing method. Methods Mol Biol 200:143–154PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Geuns E, de Rycke M, van Steirteghem A et al (2003) Methylation imprints of the imprint control region of the SNRPN-gene in human gametes and preimplantation embryos. Hum Mol Genet 12:2873–2879PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mill J, Petronis A (2009) Profiling DNA methylation from small amounts of genomic DNA starting material: efficient sodium bisulfite conversion and subsequent whole-genome amplification. Methods Mol Biol 507:371–381PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kantlehner M, Kirchner R, Hartmann P et al (2011) A high-throughput DNA methylation analysis of a single cell. Nucleic Acids Res 3:e44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lorthongpanich C, Cheow LF, Balu S et al (2013) Single-cell DNA-methylation analysis reveals epigenetic chimerism in preimplantation embryos. Science 341:1110–1112PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    El Hajj N, Trapphoff T, Linke M et al (2011) Limiting dilution bisulfite (pyro)sequencing reveals parent-specific methylation patterns in single early mouse embryos and bovine oocytes. Epigenetics 6:1176–1188PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sontag LB, Lorincz MC, Luebeck GE (2006) Dynamics, stability and inheritance of somatic DNA methylation imprints. J Theor Biol 242:890–899PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Weber M, Hellmann I, Stadler MB et al (2007) Distribution, silencing potential and evolutionary impact of promoter DNA methylation in the human genome. Nat Genet 39:457–466PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Daser A, Thangavelu M, Pannell R et al (2006) Interrogation of genomes by molecular copy-number counting (MCC). Nat Methods 3:447–453PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Trapphoff T, El Hajj N, Zechner U et al (2010) DNA integrity, growth pattern, spindle formation, chromosomal constitution and imprinting patterns of mouse oocytes from vitrified pre-antral follicles. Hum Reprod 25:3025–3042PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Li LC, Dahiya R (2002) MethPrimer: designing primers for methylation PCRs. Bioinformatics 18:1427–1431PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Diederich M, Hansmann T, Heinzmann J et al (2012) DNA methylation and mRNA expression profiles in bovine oocytes derived from prepubertal and adult donors. Reproduction 144:319–330PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Heinzmann J, Hansmann T, Herrmann D et al (2011) Epigenetic profile of developmentally important genes in bovine oocytes. Mol Reprod Dev 78:188–201PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Reik W, Constância M, Fowden A et al (2003) Regulation of supply and demand for maternal nutrients in mammals by imprinted genes. J Physiol 547:35–44PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kelsey G (2007) Genomic imprinting – roles and regulation in development. Endocr Dev 12:99–112PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Human GeneticsJulius-Maximilians University WürzburgWürzburgGermany
  2. 2.Institute of Human GeneticsJulius-Maximilians University WürzburgWürzburgGermany

Personalised recommendations