Plant Genome Editing with CRISPR Systems pp 121-143 | Cite as
An Agrobacterium-Mediated CRISPR/Cas9 Platform for Genome Editing in Maize
- 4 Citations
- 4k Downloads
Abstract
Precise genome engineering can be efficiently made using the revolutionary tool named CRISPR/Cas (clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeat/CRISPR-associated protein) systems. Adapted from the bacterial immune system, CRISPR/Cas systems can generate highly specific double-strand breaks (DSBs) at the target site, and desired sequence modifications can be introduced during the DSB repair process, such as nonhomologous end-joining (NHEJ) or homology-directed repair (HDR) pathways. CRISPR/Cas9 is the most widely used genome editing tool for targeted mutagenesis, precise sequence modification, transcriptional reprogramming, epigenome editing, disease treatment, and many more. The ease of use and high specificity make CRISPR/Cas9 a great tool not only for basic researches but also for crop trait improvements, such as higher grain yield, better tolerance to abiotic stresses, enhanced disease resistance, and better nutritional contents. In this protocol, we present a step-by-step guide to the CRISPR/Cas9-mediated targeted mutagenesis in maize Hi II genotype. Detailed procedures will guide through the essential steps including gRNA design, CRISPR/Cas9 vector construction, Agrobacterium-mediated maize immature embryo transformation, and molecular analysis of the transgenic plants to identify desired mutant lines.
Key words
Agrobacterium-mediated transformation CRISPR/Cas9 Genome editing Maize Targeted mutagenesisNotes
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to thank Marcy Main, Daniel Little, and Minjeong Kang for their contributions to this work. This project was partially supported by the US National Science Foundation (BREAD #1543888 to K.W. and B.Y.); by the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture, Hatch project number # IOW05162; by the State of Iowa funds; and by the Crop Bioengineering Center of Iowa State University.
References
- 1.Kim H, Kim ST, Kim SG, Kim JS (2015) Targeted genome editing for crop improvement. Plant Breed Biotechnol 3:283–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 2.Yang N, Wang R, Zhao Y (2017) Revolutionize genetic studies and crop improvement with high-through and genome-scale CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing technology. Mol Plant 10:1141–1143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 3.Gao C (2018) The future of CRISPR technologies in agriculture. Nat Rev 19:275–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 4.Jinek M, Chylinski K, Fonfara I, Hauer M, Doudna JA, Charpentier E (2012) A programmable dual-RNA-guided DNA endonuclease in adaptive bacterial immunity. Science 337:816–821CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 5.Cong L, Ran FA, Cox D, Lin S, Barretto R, Habib N, Hsu PD, Wu X, Jiang W, Marraffini LA, Zhang F (2013) Multiplex genome engineering using CRISPR/Cas systems. Science 339:819–823CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.Mali P, Yang L, Esvelt KM, Aach J, Guell M, DiCarlo JE, Norville JE, Church GM (2013) RNA-guided human genome engineering via Cas9. Science 339:823–826CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 7.Kleinstiver BP, Pattanayak V, Prew MS, Tsai SQ, Nguyen NT, Zheng Z, Joung JK (2016) High-fidelity CRISPR-Cas9 nucleases with no detectable genome-wide off-target effects. Nature 529:490–495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8.Slaymaker IM, Gao L, Zetsche B, Scott DA, Yan WX, Zhang F (2016) Rationally engineered Cas9 nucleases with improved specificity. Science 351:84–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 9.Gilbert LA, Larson MH, Morsut L, Liu Z, Brar GA, Torres SE, Stern-Ginossar N, Brandman O, Whitehead EH, Doudna JA, Lim WA et al (2013) CRISPR-mediated modular RNA-guided regulation of transcription in eukaryotes. Cell 154:442–451CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.Mali P, Esvelt KM, Church GM (2013b) Cas9 as a versatile tool for engineering biology. Nat Methods 10:957–963CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.Tanenbaum ME, Gilbert LA, Qi LS, Weissman JS, Vale RD (2014) A protein tagging system for signal amplification in gene expression and fluorescence imaging. Cell 159:635–646CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.Konermann S, Brigham MD, Trevino AE, Joung J, Abudayyeh OO, Barcena C, Hsu PD, Habib N, Gootenberg JS, Nishimasu H et al (2015) Genome-scale transcriptional activation by an engineered CRISPR-Cas9 complex. Nature 517:583–588CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 13.Chavez A, Scheiman J, Vora S, Pruitt BW, Tuttle M, Iyer E, Lin S, Kiani S, Guzman CD, Wiegand DJ et al (2015) Highly-efficient Cas9-mediated transcriptional programming. Nat Methods 12:326–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.Richardson CD, Ray GJ, DeWitt MA, Curie GL, Corn JE (2016) Enhancing homology-directed genome editing by catalytically active and inactive CRISPRCas9 using asymmetric donor DNA. Nat Biotechnol 34:339–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 15.Sun Y, Zhang X, Wu C, He Y, Ma Y, Hou H, Guo X, Du W, Zhao Y, Xia L (2016) Engineering herbicide-resistant rice plants through CRISPR/Cas9-mediated homologous recombination of acetolactate synthase. Mol Plant 9:628–631CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.Zhang JP, Li XL, Li GH, Chen W, Arakaki C, Botimer GD, Baylink D, Zhang L, Wen W, Fu YW et al (2017) Efficient precise knockin with a double cut HDR donor after CRISPR/Cas9-mediated double-stranded DNA cleavage. Genome Biol 18:35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 17.Hilton IB, D’Ippolito AM, Vockley CM, Thakore PI, Crawford GE, Reddy TE, Gersbach CA (2015) Epigenome editing by a CRISPR/Cas9-based acetyltransferase activates genes from promoters and enhancers. Nat Biotechnol 33:510–517CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 18.Thakore PI, D’Ippolito AM, Song L, Safi A, Shivakumar NK, Kabadi AM, Reddy TE, Crawford GE, Gersbach CA (2015) Highly specific epigenome editing by CRISPR-Cas9 repressors for silencing of distal regulatory elements. Nat Methods 12:1143–1149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 19.Komor AC, Kim YB, Packer MS, Zuris JA, Liu DR (2016) Programmable editing of a target base in genomic DNA without double-stranded DNA cleavage. Nature 533:420–424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 20.Nishida K, Arazoe T, Yachie N, Banno S, Kakimoto M, Tabata M, Mochizuki M, Miyabe A, Araki M, Hara KY et al (2016) Targeted nucleotide editing using hybrid prokaryotic and vertebrate adaptive immune systems. Science 353:aaf8729CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 21.Kim YB, Komor AC, Levy JM, Packer MS, Zhao KT, Liu DR (2017) Increasing the genome-targeting scope and precision of base editing with engineered Cas9-cytidine deaminase fusions. Nat Biotechnol 35:371–376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 22.Kuscu C, Parlak M, Tufan T, Yang J, Szlachta K, Wei X, Mammadov R, Adli M (2017) CRISPR-STOP: gene silencing through base-editing-induced nonsense mutations. Nat Methods 14:710–712CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 23.Chen B, Gilbert LA, Cimini BA, Schnitzbauer J, Zhang W, Li GW, Park J, Blackburn EH, Weissman JS, Qi LS et al (2013) Dynamic imaging of genomic loci in living human cells by an optimized CRISPR/Cas system. Cell 155:1479–1491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 24.Deng W, Shi X, Tjian R, Lionnet T, Singer RH (2015) CASFISH: CRISPR/Cas9-mediated in situ labeling of genomic loci in fixed cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 112:11870–11875CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 25.Ma H, Tu LC, Naseri A, Huisman M, Zhang S, Grunwald D, Pederson T (2016) Multiplexed labeling of genomic loci with dCas9 and engineered sgRNAs using CRISPRainbow. Nat Biotechnol 34:528–530CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 26.Wu Y, Liang D, Wang Y, Bai M, Tang W, Bao S, Yan Z, Li D, Li J (2013) Correction of a genetic disease in mouse via use of CRISPR-Cas9. Cell Stem Cell 13:659–662CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 27.Yin H, Wen X, Chen S, Bogorad RL, Benedetti E, Grompe M, Koteliansky V, Sharp PA, Jacks T, Anderson DG (2014) Genome editing with Cas9 in adult mice corrects a disease mutation and phenotype. Nat Biotechnol 32:551–553CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 28.Wu Y, Zhou H, Fan X, Zhang Y, Zhang M, Wang Y, Xie Z, Bai M, Yin Q, Liang D (2015) Correction of a genetic disease by CRISPR-Cas9-mediated gene editing in mouse spermatogonial stem cells. Cell Res 25:67–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 29.Morgens DW, Wainberg M, Boyle EA, Orsu O, Araya CL, Tsui CK, Haney MS, Hess GT, Han K, Jeng EE et al (2017) Genome-scale measurement of off-target activity using Cas9 toxicity in high-throughput screens. Nat Commun 8:15178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 30.Bibikova M, Golic M, Golic KG, Carroll D (2002) Targeted chromosomal cleavage and mutagenesis in Drosophila using zinc-finger nucleases. Genetics 161:1169–1175PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 31.Svitashev S, Young JK, Schwartz C, Gao H, Falco SC, Cigan AM (2015) Targeted mutagenesis, precise gene editing, and site-specific gene insertion in maize using Cas9 and guide RNA. Plant Physiol 169:931–945CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 32.Feng C, Yuan J, Wang R, Liu Y, Birchler JA, Han F (2016) Efficient targeted genome modification in maize using CRISPR/Cas9 system. J Genet Genomics 43:37–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 33.Zhu J, Song N, Sun S, Yang W, Zhao H, Song W, Lai J (2016) Efficiency and inheritance of targeted mutagenesis in maize using CRISPR-Cas9. J Genet Genomics 43:25–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 34.Char SN, Neelakandan AK, Nahanpun H, Frame B, Main M, Spalding MH, Becraft PW, Meyers BC, Walbot V, Wang K, Yang B (2017) An Agrobacterium-delivered CRISPR/Cas9 system for high-frequency targeted mutagenesis in maize. Plant Biotechnol J 15:257–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 35.Li C, Liu C, Qi X, Wu Y, Fei X, Mao L, Cheng B, Li X, Xie C (2017) RNA-guided Cas9 as an in vivo desired-target mutator in maize. Plant Biotechnol J 15:1566–1576CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 36.Feng C, Su H, Han B, Wang R, Liu Y, Guo X, Liu C, Zhang J, Yuan J, Birchler JA, Han F (2018) High efficiency genome editing using a dmc1 promoter-controlled CRISPR/Cas9 system in maize. Plant Biotechnol J. https://doi.org/10.1111/pbi.12920CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 37.Hood EE, Helmer GL, Fraley RT, Chilton MD (1986) The hypervirulence of Agrobacterium tumefaciens A281 is encoded in a region of pTiBo542 outside of T-DNA. J Bacteriol 168:1291–1301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 38.Hood EE, Gelvin SB, Melchers LS, Hoekema A (1993) New Agrobacterium helper plasmids for gene transfer to plants. Transgenic Res 2:208–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 39.Yoo SD, Cho YH, Sheen J (2007) Arabidopsis mesophyll protoplasts: a versatile cell system for transient gene expression analysis. Nat Protoc 2:1565–1572CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 40.White J, Chang SY, Bibb MJ, Bibb MJ (1990) A cassette containing the bar gene of Streptomyces hygroscopicus: a selectable marker for plant transformation. Nucleic Acids Res 18:1062CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 41.Bertani G (2004) Lysogeny at mid-twentieth century: P1, P2, and other experimental systems. J Bacteriol 186:595–600CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 42.Hanahan D (1983) Studies on transformation of Escherichia coli with plasmids. J Mol Biol 166:557–580CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 43.Song T, Toma C, Nakasone N, Iwanaga M (2004) Aerolysin is activated by metalloprotease in Aeromonas veronii biovar sobria. J Med Microbiol 53:477–482CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 44.Brazelton VA Jr, Zarecor S, Wright DA, Wang Y, Liu J, Chen K, Yang B, Lawrence-Dill CJ (2015) A quick guide to CRISPR sgRNA design tools. GM Crops Food 6:266–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 45.Ding Y, Hong L, Chen LL, Xie K (2016) Recent advances in genome editing using CRISPR/Cas9. Front Plant Sci 7:703. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2016.00703CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 46.Park JP, Bae S, Kim JS (2015) Cas-Designer: a web-based tool for choice of CRISPR-Cas9 target sites. Bioinformatics 31:4014–4016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 47.Andorf CM, Cannon EK, Portwood JL 2nd, Gardiner JM, Harper LC, Schaeffer ML, Braun BL, Campbell DA, Vinnakota AG, Sribalusu VV et al (2016) MaizeGDB update: new tools, data and interface for the maize model organism database. Nucleic Acids Res 44:D1195–D1201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 48.Li JF, Aach J, Norville JE, McCormack M, Zhang D, Bush J, Church GM, Sheen J (2013) Multiplex and homologous recombination-mediated plant genome editing via guide RNA/Cas9. Nat Biotechnol 31:688–691CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 49.Hofgen R, Willmitzer L (1988) Storage of competent cells for Agrobacterium transformation. Nucleic Acids Res 16:9877CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 50.Frame B, Warnberg K, Main M, Wang K (2015) Maize (Zea mays L.). In: Wang K (ed) Agrobacterium protocols. Springer, New York, pp 101–117Google Scholar
- 51.Allen GC, Flores-Vergara MA, Krasynanski S, Kumar S, Thompson WF (2006) A modified protocol for rapid DNA isolation from plant tissues using cetyltrimethylammonium bromide. Nat Protoc 1:2320–2325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 52.Brinkman EK, Chen T, Amendola M, van Steensel B (2014) Easy quantitative assessment of genome editing by sequence trace decomposition. Nucleic Acids Res 42:e168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 53.Liu W, Xie X, Ma X, Li J, Chen J, Liu YG (2015) DSDecode: A web-based tool for decoding sequencing chromatograms for genotyping of targeted mutations. Mol Plant 8:1431–1433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 54.Oltmanns H, Frame B, Lee LY, Johnson S, Li B, Wang K, Gelvin SB (2010) Generation of “backbone” free, low transgene copy plants by launching T-DNA from the Agrobacterium chromosome. Plant Physiol 152:1158–1166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 55.Velten J, Velten L, Hain R, Schell J (1984) Isolation of a dual plant promoter fragment from the Ti plasmid of Agrobacterium tumefaciens. EMBO J 3:2723–2730CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 56.Armstrong CL, Green CE, Phillips RL (1991) Development and availability of germplasm with high Type II culture formation response. Maize Genet Coop Newsl 65:92–93Google Scholar