2019
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-50733-9
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Optimised insert design for improved single-molecule imaging and quantification through CRISPR-Cas9 mediated knock-in

Abstract: The use of CRISPR-Cas9 genome editing to introduce endogenously expressed tags has the potential to address a number of the classical limitations of single molecule localisation microscopy. In this work we present the first systematic comparison of inserts introduced through CRISPR-knock in, with the aim of optimising this approach for single molecule imaging. We show that more highly monomeric and codon optimised variants of mEos result in improved expression at the TubA1B locus, despite the use of identical … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
18
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 22 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 49 publications
0
18
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We have reported changes in expression following genome editing that depends on the tag sequence (Khan et al, 2019); however, here this appears unlikely since the two HEK293 cell lines expressing genome-edited CXCR4/LgBiT did not show comparable effects, and analysis of ARRB2 expression showed no observable differences following editing. An alternative explanation is that changes in expression are due to on/off-target effects of the editing (Zhang et al, 2015), or due to the subsequent cloning procedure resulting in amplification of a founder cell with acquired changes to the cellular proteome.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 68%
“…We have reported changes in expression following genome editing that depends on the tag sequence (Khan et al, 2019); however, here this appears unlikely since the two HEK293 cell lines expressing genome-edited CXCR4/LgBiT did not show comparable effects, and analysis of ARRB2 expression showed no observable differences following editing. An alternative explanation is that changes in expression are due to on/off-target effects of the editing (Zhang et al, 2015), or due to the subsequent cloning procedure resulting in amplification of a founder cell with acquired changes to the cellular proteome.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 68%
“…The multiple applications of CRISPR/Cas9 system are described in a nature video [93]. Khan et al [94] introduced endogenously expressed tags for advanced Single Molecule Localization Microscopy (such as halotags), suggesting that the CRISPR mediated labeling (CRISPR-PALM) could have quantitative benefits. In another work, this technology has been used to study the induction and repair of DNA lesions occurring in specified genome sites, by targeting locations of the Cas9 nuclease [95].…”
Section: Encoding Fluorescence Labeled Proteins Using Crispr/cas9mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Each of these technologies has their limitations and are not readily transferrable to endogenously expressing systems where GPCRs are expressed at low levels. Gene editing techniques, such as CRISPR/Cas9 2 , have allowed labelling of proteins 3 , including GPCRs 4,5 , at endogenous levels but the fluorophore used can dramatically alter expression levels 6 . An orthogonal approach to protein labelling uses ligand-directed chemistry whereby connecting a fluorophore via a highly reactive, electrophilic linker to a ligand that binds to the protein of interest.…”
Section: Figurementioning
confidence: 99%