SummaryRMgm-4813
|
Successful modification | The parasite was generated by the genetic modification |
The mutant contains the following genetic modification(s) | Gene disruption |
Reference (PubMed-PMID number) |
Reference 1 (PMID number) : 32273496 |
MR4 number | |
top of page | |
Parent parasite used to introduce the genetic modification | |
Rodent Malaria Parasite | P. yoelii |
Parent strain/line | P. y. yoelii 17XNL |
Name parent line/clone | Not applicable |
Other information parent line | |
top of page | |
The mutant parasite was generated by | |
Name PI/Researcher | Jiang Y, Yuan J |
Name Group/Department | State Key Laboratory of Cellular Stress Biology, Innovation Center for Cell Signaling Network |
Name Institute | School of Life Sciences, Xiamen University |
City | Xiamen, Fujian |
Country | China |
top of page | |
Name of the mutant parasite | |
RMgm number | RMgm-4813 |
Principal name | Δ1116300 |
Alternative name | |
Standardized name | |
Is the mutant parasite cloned after genetic modification | Yes |
top of page | |
Phenotype | |
Asexual blood stage | Not different from wild type |
Gametocyte/Gamete | Normal gametocyte production; no exflagellation; no fertile males and male gametes are produced; |
Fertilization and ookinete | No gamete formation, absence of ookinete formation |
Oocyst | No gamete formation, absence of ookinete formation; no oocyst formation |
Sporozoite | No gamete formation, absence of ookinete formation; no oocyst formation, no sporozoite formation |
Liver stage | Not tested |
Additional remarks phenotype | Mutant/mutation Additional information To further confirm the phenotype of Δgep1, we generated three additional gep1 mutant parasites (Δgep1n, Δgep1fl, and Δgep1mScarlet). The Δgep1n parasite had a 464 bp deletion at the 5’ coding region, causing a frameshift for the remaining coding region. The Δgep1fl parasite had the whole gep1 coding region deleted, and the Δgep1mScarlet parasite had its gep1 coding regions replaced with a gene encoding red florescent protein mScarlet. These mutant parasites displayed developmental phenotypes similar to those of Δgep1 in both mouse and mosquito stages. To investigate protein expression and localization, we tagged the endogenous GEP1 with 6HA at N-terminus, generating 6HA::gep1 parasite that had normal development throughout the life cycle. The GEP1 protein is expressed in gametocytes and ookinetes, but not in asexual blood stages and other mosquito stages of the 6HA::gep1 parasite. We also tagged the GEP1 protein with quadruple Myc (4Myc) and observed similar expression pattern in the 4Myc::gep1 parasite. In addition, mScarlet fluorescent signals driven by the endogenous gep1 promoter were detected only in gametocytes, but not in asexual blood stages of the Δgep1mScarlet parasite. Co-staining 6HA::gep1 gametocytes with anti-α-Tubulin (male gametocyte specific) and anti-HA antibody showed that GEP1 was expressed in both male and female gametocytes. Interestingly, GEP1 is not expressed in plasma membrane, but in punctate dots in the cytoplasm of gametocytes and ookinetes. Deletion of P. berghei gep1 gene (PBANKA_1115100) resulted in parasite clones that failed to form XA-stimulated ECs 9exflagellation centers) in vitro and midgut oocyst in mosquitoes. We next performed genetic crosses between Δgep1 and Δmap2 (male gamete-deficient) or Δnek4 (female gamete-deficient) parasites. No midgut oocyst was observed in mosquitoes from the Δgep1 × Δmap2 or Δgep1 × Δnek4 cross day 7 post infection (pi), whereas the Δmap2 × Δnek4 cross produced slightly fewer oocysts than the WT parasite, suggesting no functional male and female gametes in the Δgep1 parasite. Together, these results demonstrate that GEP1 is essential for both male and female gametogenesis. Evidence is presented that:
|
top of page | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Details of the target gene | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gene Model of Rodent Parasite | PY17X_1116300 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gene Model P. falciparum ortholog | PF3D7_0515500 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gene product | gametogenesis essential protein 1, putative | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gene product: Alternative name | GEP1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
top of page | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Details of the genetic modification | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Inducable system used | No | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Additional remarks inducable system | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Type of plasmid/construct used | CRISPR/Cas9 construct: integration through double strand break repair | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
PlasmoGEM (Sanger) construct/vector used | No | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Modified PlasmoGEM construct/vector used | No | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Plasmid/construct map | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Plasmid/construct sequence | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Restriction sites to linearize plasmid | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Partial or complete disruption of the gene | Complete | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Additional remarks partial/complete disruption | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Selectable marker used to select the mutant parasite | hdhfr/yfcu | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Promoter of the selectable marker | eef1a | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Selection (positive) procedure | pyrimethamine | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Selection (negative) procedure | No | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Additional remarks genetic modification | CRISPR/Cas9 plasmid pYCm was used for all the genetic modifications. For gene deleting, 5’-genomic and 3’-genomic segments (400 to 700 bp) of the target genes were amplified as left and right homologous arms, respectively, using gene specific primers. The PCR products were digested with appropriate restriction enzymes and the digested products were inserted into matched restriction sites of pYCm. Oligonucleotides for sgRNAs were annealed and ligated into pYCm17. For each deletion modification, two sgRNAs were designed to disrupt the coding region of a target gene using the online program ZiFit47. For gene tagging, a 400 to 800 bp segment from N-terminal or C-terminal of the coding region and 400 to 800 bp sequences from 5’UTR or 3’UTR of a target gene were amplified and fused with a DNA fragment encoding 6HA or 4Myc in frame at N-terminal or C-terminal of the gene. For each tagging modification, two sgRNAs were designed to target sites close to the C-terminal or N-terminal of the gene coding region. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Additional remarks selection procedure | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Primer information: Primers used for amplification of the target sequences
Primer information: Primers used for amplification of the target sequences
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
top of page |