2019
DOI: 10.1128/aem.00990-19
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A New Suite of Allelic-Exchange Vectors for the Scarless Modification of Proteobacterial Genomes

Abstract: Despite the advent of new techniques for genetic engineering of bacteria, allelic exchange through homologous recombination remains an important tool for genetic analysis. Currently, sacB-based vector systems are often used for allelic exchange, but counterselection escape, which prevents isolation of cells with the desired mutation, occasionally limits their utility. To circumvent this, we engineered a series of “pTOX” allelic-exchange vectors. Each plasmid encodes one of a set of inducible toxins, chosen for… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
46
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 35 publications
(46 citation statements)
references
References 45 publications
0
46
0
Order By: Relevance
“…5) and 6) The donor plasmid is used for Gene Doctoring as described by Lee et al [1] Although we have retained the original Flp recombinase-based technique for removal of the selectable marker in our experiments, scarless genome editing is possible using tetA as a counterselection marker [18]. Alternatively, any other selectable marker(s) can be used instead, to suit individual experimental requirements [19][20][21][22][23]. Regions HR1 and HR2 will vary between experiments and can easily be produced either as chemically synthesised DNA fragments, PCR products (with BsaI sites included on the primers) or from genetic parts libraries.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…5) and 6) The donor plasmid is used for Gene Doctoring as described by Lee et al [1] Although we have retained the original Flp recombinase-based technique for removal of the selectable marker in our experiments, scarless genome editing is possible using tetA as a counterselection marker [18]. Alternatively, any other selectable marker(s) can be used instead, to suit individual experimental requirements [19][20][21][22][23]. Regions HR1 and HR2 will vary between experiments and can easily be produced either as chemically synthesised DNA fragments, PCR products (with BsaI sites included on the primers) or from genetic parts libraries.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Phenotypic screening markers can be used as an alternative to drug R selectable markers. Expression of chromoproteins such as amilCP or magenta tsPurple results in blue and purple colonies respectively, enabling selection by colony coloring (Lazarus et al, 2019). While a palette of engineered chromoproteins was recently assessed in E. coli, it is noteworthy that optimal conditions for attaining intense coloring, low fitness cost, and fast maturation have not yet been described (Liljeruhm et al, 2018).…”
Section: Selection and Counter-selection Recombineering Strategiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Of note, in difficult-to-transform bacterial strains (e.g., Serratia marcescens), conjugation constitutes an alternative approach to introduce the plasmid DNA editing substrates (Snyder et al, 2013). Here, the plasmid DNA is transferred from a donor strain to a recipient strain in a process dependent on a pilus structure (Lazarus et al, 2019).…”
Section: Gene Insertion Deletion or Mutation Via Endogenous Recombinmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A gentamicin-resistant mutant of E. coli O157:H7 strain EDL933 (∆lacI::aacC1) (22) was used in all experiments in this study as the wild-type (WT). All mutants were constructed in this strain background using standard allelic exchange techniques (60) with the pTOX plasmid system (61) or lambda-red recombineering (62).…”
Section: D-1-thiogalactopyranoside (Iptg)mentioning
confidence: 99%