Enzymatic engineering of the porcine genome with transposons and recombinases
© Clark et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2007
Received: 28 February 2007
Accepted: 17 July 2007
Published: 17 July 2007
Swine is an important agricultural commodity and biomedical model. Manipulation of the pig genome provides opportunity to improve production efficiency, enhance disease resistance, and add value to swine products. Genetic engineering can also expand the utility of pigs for modeling human disease, developing clinical treatment methodologies, or donating tissues for xenotransplantation. Realizing the full potential of pig genetic engineering requires translation of the complete repertoire of genetic tools currently employed in smaller model organisms to practical use in pigs.
Application of transposon and recombinase technologies for manipulation of the swine genome requires characterization of their activity in pig cells. We tested four transposon systems- Sleeping Beauty, Tol2, piggyBac, and Passport in cultured porcine cells. Transposons increased the efficiency of DNA integration up to 28-fold above background and provided for precise delivery of 1 to 15 transgenes per cell. Both Cre and Flp recombinase were functional in pig cells as measured by their ability to remove a positive-negative selection cassette from 16 independent clones and over 20 independent genomic locations. We also demonstrated a Cre-dependent genetic switch capable of eliminating an intervening positive-negative selection cassette and activating GFP expression from episomal and genome-resident transposons.
We have demonstrated for the first time that transposons and recombinases are capable of mobilizing DNA into and out of the porcine genome in a precise and efficient manner. This study provides the basis for developing transposon and recombinase based tools for genetic engineering of the swine genome.
Recent developments in livestock transgenesis, including somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT, cloning) , and stem cell biology [2, 3] have energized plans to engineer the pig genome for both agricultural and emerging biomedical markets. Although pronuclear injection (PNI) and SCNT are proven methods for gene supplementation and gene targeting, respectively, more sophisticated methods for manipulating the pig genome have been lacking. Tandem gene targeting and SCNT provides a method for the precise introduction of transgenes or alternate alleles, but the inherent inefficiency of homologous recombination and donor-cell senescence limits its efficiency. Transgenesis by random integration of naked DNA has proven much more efficient for gene supplementation, whether using PNI or SCNT. However, random integration of naked DNA is often accompanied by transgene instability [4, 5], transgene concatemerization [6, 7], loss of transgene expression due to methylation [8–13], and short deletions, inversions and duplications at the site of transgene integration [14–25]. In addition, the lack of precision associated with random integration of naked DNA limits transgene manipulation and control post-integration.
DNA "cut and paste" transposons have been widely used for precise and efficient delivery of DNA expression cassettes into invertebrate and plant genomes. Over the past ten years, several DNA cut and paste transposon systems have been shown to function in vertebrate cells, including Sleeping Beauty (SB) [26, 27], Passport (PP) [28, 29], Tol2 [30, 31], and piggyBac (PB) [32–34]. In addition, transposons have been used for germline transgenesis of fish [35–37], frogs [38–40], and mice [32, 41–43] and for transgenesis of mouse somatic and embryonic stem cells [44–46]. It is noteworthy that although transposons function in a wide array of cell types, their efficiency can differ from species to species or even within various cell types of one species. The function and efficacy of vertebrate transposons in pig cells had not previously been examined. Demonstration that one or more transposon systems functions efficiently in porcine cells would provide a rationale for investigating their use in PNI and SCNT. In addition, the precision of transpositional transgenesis (TnT) provides a segue to the development of conditional expression systems for application in pigs and porcine cells.
Many genes have roles in multiple tissues and/or at multiple times during growth and development. Due to a requirement for strict regulation, global ectopic transgene-expression or gene-knockout will be an implausible approach for many targets. To overcome these limitations, binary systems based on transcriptional transactivation or DNA recombination have been developed and applied in model organisms for conditional gene-expression or silencing . Although the tetracycline transcriptional activator system  has been demonstrated to function in transgenic pigs [49, 50], recombinases have not. Cre and Flp recombinases catalyze a conservative DNA recombination event between two short recombinase recognition sites (RRS), loxP and FRT, respectively . This results in the deletion or inversion of the DNA between two RRS- depending on their orientation. Deletion or inversion of sequences in transgenes can be used as genetic switches to activate or silence gene expression in specific cells, at particular times, or under prescribed conditions. Applications beyond conditional gene expression include the removal/recycling of selectable markers or transgenes  or chromosome engineering . The successful application of recombinase technologies to porcine genetics requires the demonstration of Cre and/or Flp activity in porcine cells and the efficient delivery of RRS sites and recombinase-based expression vectors to the porcine genome.
In order to assess the utility of DNA transposons and recombinases for enzymatic engineering of the porcine genome, we tested four transposon systems and two recombinases. The SB, PP, Tol2, and PB transposon systems were able to function in cells derived from pig tissues and significantly improved the rate of transgenesis in vitro. Cre and Flp recombinases were capable of removing antibiotic selection cassettes in porcine cells and conditionally activating transgenes in porcine cells, demonstrating the potential for their applications to "leave no trace" and/or conditional porcine genetic engineering.
Sleeping Beauty activity in porcine cells
Multiple transposon systems function in porcine cells
Molecular characterization of transposition
CRE/FLP activity in porcine cells
CRE-activated gene expression
To further examine the efficiency of Cre recombinase in transiently transfected cells, conditional removal of the PTK/triple stop expression cassette was assessed by selection in puromycin following co-transfection of PEGE cells with pTC-loxPTK-G and either Cre, β-galactosidase, SB, or Cre + SB. Transfected cells were plated under puromycin selection for 9–12 days, stained with methylene blue, and enumerated to quantify the efficiency of PTK/triple stop elimination prior to or after integration into the genome (Fig. 6C). Addition of pPGK-nlsCRE to the transfection, alone or in combination with pKUb-SB11 reduced puromycin-resistant colony counts to levels significantly lower than that observed for pKUb-SB11 or pCMV-β, which alone result in TnT and non-transpositional transgenesis with an intact PTK gene expression cassette, respectively. Therefore, Cre recombinase excision activity in transiently transfected PEGE cells approaches 100%, especially with regard to plasmids available for transposition by SB transposase.
pTC-loxPTK-G clones were generated to analyze the efficiency of recombinase-directed selection-cassette recycling and the conditional activation of gene expression from a variety of porcine genomic loci. Puromycin resistant clones were transfected with pPGK-nlsCRE and scored for gancylovir resistance (Fig 7C). All gancylovir resistant clones expressed GFP, although variation in the intensity of GFP was observed (data not shown) depending on the parental clone source. This expression variance is expected due to the influence of porcine sequence adjacent to the sites of transposon integration, a phenomenon commonly referred to as "position effect". A significant increase in the efficiency of selection cassette recycling was demonstrated in the presence of single copy inserts when compared to multicopy concatemers (Fig 7C vs 5C). In addition, activation of GFP expression upon recombinase-based excision from integrated transposons demonstrates the efficacy of Cre-dependent conditional gene expression in transgenic porcine cells.
Multiple transposons and recombinases are active in porcine cells
This work demonstrates for the first time the capability of four DNA transposon systems, SB, Tol2, PB, and PP, to enzymatically facilitate precise and efficient transpositional transgenesis in porcine cells. We have also established for the first time that Cre and Flp DNA recombinases are active in porcine cells. The combination of these DNA directed enzyme systems provides for the delivery and removal of gene expression cassettes to the porcine genome for the purpose of cellular transgenesis, selection cassette recycling and conditional gene expression based on transposons and recombinases. In these studies, the Tol2 and PB transposon systems were more efficient than SB, which was more efficient than PP at mediating TnT in PEGE cells, although these relative efficiencies should not be over-interpreted. Although we used favorable conditions for each transposon system by our selection of promoters and transposase/transposon ratios, our focus here was on testing their function, not on determining their relative activities in PEGE cells, an immortalized cell line unsuitable for generating pigs by SCNT. Indeed, it is well established that the rate of TnT in any cell type is likely to depend not only on intrinsic transposase activity, but also on the presence or absence of cellular co-factors and DNA repair enzymes, the method of DNA introduction, and the amount of transposase produced/provided in the specific cell type. Transposon activity varies not only between cells from different species, but also between different cell types from the same species [26, 27, 34]. Future studies will focus on the efficiency of different transposon systems and recombinases in pig fibroblasts (applicable to SCNT), pig stem cells (for functional genomics and SCNT), and porcine embryos (for direct transgenesis by PNI).
In addition to potential differences in efficiency, the integration behavior of each transposon may be an important factor in determining the appropriate transposon system for a specific task. For instance, PB appears to preferentially integrate into transcription units [32, 61]. Consistent with this observation, in our limited examination of integration sites in the pig genome, flanking sequence from two of seven PB insertions matched porcine cDNAs. In addition, PB primarily leaves no footprint when remobilized . Therefore, PB may be most suitable for functional genomics studies in pigs or pig cells, where mutations due to the interruption of genes, and the potential for precise transposition-based rescue is desirable [62–65]. SB does not integrate into transcription units at a rate much higher than what would be expected by random integration , so it may represent a better choice for animal transgenesis, transposon-based DNA vaccination, or other somatic therapies. Alternatively transposon systems engineered to target specific genomic locations may be developed and could provide the safest choice for these applications [34, 67, 68]. The integration profiles of Tol2 and PP are not well characterized in any organism or cell type, and the integration predilections of any transposon system remains to be addressed in specific swine cells being considered for engineering.
Advantages of transposition for pig transgenesis and genetics
There are several advantages of transpositional versus unguided transgenesis. First, the enzymatic activity of the transposase increases the efficiency of transgene integration (Fig. 1 and 2). Secondly, transposase-mediated transgenesis precisely integrates a single copy of the transposon into one or more locations in the genome. Consequently, transposition avoids the integration of G/C-rich prokaryotic elements of the vector and avoids transgene concatemerization, both of which can lead to shutdown of gene expression [5, 6]. In addition, concatemerization is problematic for selection cassette recycling (Fig. 5) and the implementation of more complex genetic rearrangements with recombinases. We propose the use of transposon systems for transgenesis of porcine cells prior to their use for the creation of pigs by SCNT to enable increased efficiency, better precision, reliable expression, and selection cassette recycling. In addition, SB and PB dramatically improved the transgenesis rate in mice by PNI [32, 69], providing a clear rationale for improving the efficiency of transgenic pig production via this method.
Recombinases in swine genetics- selection-cassette recycling and conditional alleles
There are several immediate applications for recombinases in swine genetics. First, as shown in Fig 5, 6, 7, recombinases can be combined with a positive/negative selectable marker like PTK for selection cassette recycling . Currently, most, if not all transgenic animals produced by SCNT contain a selectable marker (e.g. neoR, puroR, GFP) in addition to an experimental transgene. This selectable marker is useful for the proper identification of nuclear donor cells, but generally is undesirable in the transgenic animal. This could be particularly important for removal of xenogenic elements after gene knockout or manipulation preceding the introgression of engineered germplasm into agricultural production herds. The flanking of selectable markers with RRS provides the opportunity to eliminate them in culture or by breeding to Cre expressing pigs, leaving behind only a single 34-basepair RRS footprint.
Recombinases also permit the creation of conditional alleles for activation or inhibition of gene function in response to Cre or Flp recombinase activity, as illustrated in Figures 6, 7. In addition, the effectiveness of homologous recombination constructs can be improved to allow selection cassette recycling, thereby avoiding 'selection cassette interference', whereby the exogenous regulatory elements in the selection cassette can interfere with the expression of genes in the vicinity of the targeted mutation . As has been elegantly demonstrated in mice, recombinases can also be used to create conditional knock-outs in pigs when tissue specific ablation is desired, or when traditional knockout results in embryonic lethality. The availability of an assortment of transposon and recombinase systems should also permit serial cellular transgenesis and recombination to achieve complex genomic rearrangements in the pig. Serial transgenesis provides a direct method for the production of pigs that express several gene products. Given the dramatic long-range conservation of synteny between pig and human genomes, far more extensive than for mouse and human, engineered chromosomal rearrangements between serially provided RRS in the pig could provide superior large animal models of human congenital and cancer related chromosomal abnormalities .
Pork represents the single most economically important meat product in the world and pigs are playing an increasingly critical role in biomedicine. An armamentarium of effective genetic tools will be required to capture the value and potential of this species for human nutrition and health. Here we have tested four transposon and two recombinase systems for activity in pig cells. SB, PP, Tol2, and PB and transposons are capable of precise transpositional transgenesis of porcine cells, increasing efficiency by 4–28 fold. We have also demonstrated that Cre and Flp recombinases function efficiently in the nucleus of pig cells for selection-cassette recycling and conditional regulation of transgene expression. The combination of these tools will significantly improve the efficiency and sophistication of porcine genetic manipulation for enhancing pig production and human nutrition, as well as modeling and treating human disease.
Sequence information, maps, and material requests for these constructs can be found on our web site .
pT2-Floxp-PTK- To generate a multiple cloning sequence flanked by FRT and loxP recombinase recognition sequences (FRT-loxP MCS), two oligonucleotides with overlapping sequence (shown in bold) were designed, FRT-loxP Upper [ATACCGGCCGGAAGTTCCTATTCCGAAGTTCCTATTCTCTAGAAAGTATAGGAACTTCATAACTTCGTATAATGTATGCTATACGAAGTTATCTCGAGAATTCCCGGGAGGCCTACTAGT], and FRT-loxP Lower [GTATTCATGAGAAGTTCCTATACTTTCTAGAGAATAGGAACTTCGGAATAGGAACTTCATAACTTCGTATAGCATACATTATACGAAGTTATCCATGGACTAGTAGGCCTCCCGGGAA]. These oligonucleotides were annealed and elongated by PCR using Pwo polymerase. The 218 base pair PCR fragment was cloned into pCR4 using the ZERO Blunt TOPO PCR Cloning Kit (Invitrogen, USA) to create pCR4 FRT-loxP MCS, and its sequence was verified. FRT-loxP MCS was subsequently excised with EagI and BspHI and cloned into pT2/BH  cleaved with EagI and NcoI to produce pT2-FRT-loxP MCS. Finally, a completely filled XhoI fragment, containing the mouse PGK promoter, the PTK fusion protein, and bovine growth hormone poly(A) signal from YTC37, a kind gift from the laboratory of A. Bradley , was cloned into Sma1 cleaved pT2-FRT-loxP MCS to produce pT2-FloxP-PTK.
pKUb-SB11- A 1.0 kb fragment of the SB11 transposase from pCMV-SB11 , which had been amplified with CDS-SB11-F1 [CACCATGGGAAAATCAAAAGAAATCAGCC] and CDS-SB11-R1 [GGATCCCAATTTAAAGGCAATGCTACCAAATACTAG] primers and subcloned into an intermediate vector adding a 5' BglII site and the sequence [AGATCTGAT], was cloned into the BamHI site of pKUb to make pKUb-SB11. pKUb was made by cloning nucleotides 3561–4771 of the human UbC gene (genbank accession D63791), which contains the UbC promoter, non-coding exon 1, and intron 1, into pK-SV40(A) between intact BglII and NheI restriction endonuclease sites. pK-SV40(A) was made by cloning a single copy of the SV40 poly(A) signal amplified by PCR with oligos KJC-SV40(A)-F1 [CATTGATGAGTTTGGACAAACCACA] and KJC-SV40(A)-R1 [ACCACATTTGTAGAGGTTTTACTTGCT] into pK-A10 opened with XmnI. pK-A10 was made by cloning KJC-Adapter 10 [CTGAGATCTTAAGCTAGCAGGATCCAGAATTCATTCAG] into pK digested with PvuII creating a multiple cloning site with PvuII, BglII, AflII, NheI, BamHI, EcoRI, XmnI, and PvuII recognition sites. pK was made by joining an 0.8 kb PCR product of pBluescriptSK- (Stratagene), containing the pUC_ORI amplified with oligos KJC-pUC_ORI-F1 [CTGTTCCGCTTCCTCGCTCACTGACT] and KJC-pUC_ORI-R1 [AAAAGGATCTAGGTGAAGATCCTTTTTGAT], to a 0.9 kb PCR product of pENTR-D-TOPO (Invitrogen), which contains the kanamycin resistance gene amplified by oligos KJC-KanR-F1 [CTGCATCATGAACAATAAAACTGTCTGCT] and KJC-KanR-R1 [TGCCAGTGTTACAACCAATTAACCAAT]. The junction of ORI-F1 to KanR-R1 created a single PvuII site.
pCMV-β is available from Clontech (Mountainview, CA).
pPGK(nls)CRE was a kind gift of Dr. David Largaespada's lab at the University of Minnesota.
pKT2P-(nls)FLP- A Flp open reading frame containing the large T antigen nuclear localization signal (bold) and a Kozak consensuses sequence was generated by amplifying the Flp open reading frame using primers CDS Kozak-NLS Flp 5' [ATATCTCGAGGCCACCATGGCTCCCAAGAAGAAGAGGAAGGTGATGAGTCAATTTGATATATTATGTAAAAC] and CDS Flp 3' [ATATAGATCTTTATATGCGTCTATTTATGTAGG] using pOG44 (Invitrogen, USA) as template. The resulting PCR product was cloned into pCR4 using the ZERO Blunt TOPO PCR Cloning Kit (Invitrogen, USA) creating pCR4-nlsFlp. The nlsFlp open reading frame was subsequently excised with XhoI and BglII and inserted into XhoI-BglII cleaved pKT2-PGKi to produce pKT2P-nlsFlp. pKT2-PGKi contains the human PGK promoter, a kind gift of Dr. Scott McIvor (University of Minnesota) in front of the mini-intron, MCS, and rabbit beta-globin 3'UTR found in mini-CAGs.
pKT2C-EGFP was made by cloning a 0.7 kb XhoI to BglII fragment of pKT2P-GeN into pKT2-mCAG opened from BglII to XhoI. pKT2-mCAG was made by cloning a 2.2 kb BamHI to KpnI fragment of pSBT-mCAG  into pK-A3 opened from BamHI to KpnI. pKT2P-GeN was made by cloning EGFP as a 0.75 kb EcoRI fragment from pCR4-EGFP into the EcoRI site of pKT2P-eNeo. pCR4-EGFP was made by cloning a PCR fragment of EGFP from pEGFP-N1 (Clontech) amplified with primers KJC-EGFP-F3 [CCGAATTCTACCATGGTGAGCAAGGGCGAG] and KJC-EGFP-R2 [CCAGATCTTTACTTGTACAGCTCGTCCATGC] into pCR4-TOPO (Invitrogen). pKT2P-eNeo contains the encephalomyocarditis virus internal ribosome entry site and neomycin resistance gene amplified from pGT-Neo  with KJC-BactinSA-F1 [CACTGAAGTGTTGACTTCCCTGACAGC] and KJC-Bgeo-R1 [TTCAATTGTTAGAAGAACTCGTCAAGAAGGCGA]. The eNeo cassette was subcloned and acquired a modified sequence at the 3' end [GTTAACTT] to [GTTAAGTCTAGA] including a BglII site. The 1.4 kb eNeo cassette was isolated with EcoRI and BglII and moved into pKT2-PGKi opened from BglII to EcoRI.
pKT2P-PTK was made by cloning a 2.7 kb PvuII fragment from pKP-PTK_TS into pKT2-RV opened with EcoRV. pKT2-RV was made by cloning a 0.6 kb BamHI to KpnI fragment of pSBT-RV  into pK-A3 opened with BamHI and KpnI. pK-A3 was made by opening pK with PvuII and inserting KJC-Adapter 3 [CTGGATCCAGATCTGGTACCATTTAAAT] creating a small multiple cloning site with PvuII, BamHI, BglII, KpnI, and SwaI sites. pKP-PTK_TS was made by cloning a 2.3 kb BglII to EcoRI fragment of pCR4-PGK-PTK into the MCS of pK-SV40(×2) opened with EcoRI and BglII. pCR4-PGK-PTK was made by cloning a 2.3 kb PCR product of pT2-FloxP-PTK amplified with PuroΔTK-F1 [TTAGATCTGGCCTCGCACACATTCCACAT] and PuroΔTK-R1 [TGGTTCTTTCCGCCTCAGAAGCCAT] into pCR4-TOPO (Invitrogen). pK-SV40(×2) was made by cloning two copies of the SV40 poly(A) signal amplified by PCR with oligos KJC-SV40(A)-F1 [CATTGATGAGTTTGGACAAACCACA] and KJC-SV40(A)-R1 [ACCACATTTGTAGAGGTTTTACTTGCT] into pK-A10 opened with XmnI.
pPBTP-PTK was made by cloning a 2.7 kb PvuII fragment of pKP-PTK_TS into pPBT-SE opened from SmaI to EcoRV. pPBT-SE was made by cloning the 102 bp PCR product containing an outward facing T7 polymerase site, the SE multiple cloning site, and an outward facing T3 polymerase site into pPBT cut with MscI. The PCR product was amplified from pKT2-SE using T7-RevComp [TCTCCCTATAGTGAGTCGTATTA] and T3-RevComp [TCTCCCTTTAGTGAGGGTTAATT] primers. pPBT was made by cloning the PB LTR1 and LTR2 into pKT2-SE from KpnI to BamHI. LTR1 and LTR 2 from PB were amplified from pXL-Bac-II, a kind gift of Malcolm Fraser (Notre Dame University), using PB-LTR1-F1 [TGGATCCCAATCCTTAACCCTAGAAAGATAATCATATTG] and PB-LTR1-R1 [GTGGCCATAAAAGTTTTGTTACTTTATAGAAG] or PB-LTR2-F1 [TTGGCCATAAGTTATCACGTAAGTAGAACATG] and PB-LTR2-R1 [TGGTACCTAGATTAACCCTAGAAAGATAGTCTG], respectively. LTR1 and LTR2 PCR products were cloned into pCR4 vector (Invitrogen) and subsequently excised by BamHI and MscI or MscI and KpnI digestion, respectively. pKT2-SE was made by cloning the 0.7 kb BamHI to KpnI fragment containing the SB inverted repeats and SE multiple cloning site from pSBT-SE  into pK-A3 opened from KpnI to BamHI.
pKC-PB was made by inserting the 2.1 kb NheI to BamHI fragment of p3XP3-DsRed, a kind gift of Dr. Malcolm Fraser (Notre Dame University), containing the PB transposase coding sequence into the 3.2 kb BamHI to NheI fragment of pKC-SB11, which resulted in the exchange of SB11 with PB transposase.
pPTnP-PTK- A 2.7 kb PvuII to PvuII fragment of pKP-PTK_TS was cloned into the EcoRV site of pPTn2-RV to make pPTnP-PTK. pPTn2-RV was made by cloning KJC-Adapter 4 [TCTCCCTTTAGTGAGGGTTAATTGATATCTAATACGACTCACTATAGGGAGA] into the MscI site of prePTn2(-1) creating T7 and T3 polymerase binding sites orientated out towards the inverted repeats of the PTn transposon and separated by an EcoRV site. prePPTn2(-1) was made by cloning a 0.5 kb BamHI to KpnI fragment of pCR4-PPTN2A into pK-A3 opened from KpnI to BamHI. pCR4-PPTN2A was created by topo cloning a 0.5 kb PCR product amplified from prePPTN2(-2) using oligos PPTN-F1 (BamHI) [AAGGATCCGATTACAGTGCCTTGCATAAGTAT] and PPTN-R1 (KpnI) [AAGGTACCGATTACAGTGCCTTGCATAAGTATTC] into pCR4-Topo (Invitrogen). prePPTN2(-2) was created by amplifying the majority of pBluKS-PPTN5 , a kind gift of Dr. Michael Leaver (University of Stirling, UK), with oligos PPTN-OL2 [CCATCTTTGTTAGGGGTTTCACAGTA] and PPTN-OR1 [CCAGGTTCTACCAAGTATTGACACA]. The PCR fragment was then self-ligated to produce an empty transposon with a single MscI site in its interior.
pKC-PTs1 was made by cloning a 1.0 kb NheI to EcoRI fragment of pKUb-PTs1 that contained the PPTN transposase (PTs) into pK-mCAG opened from EcoRI to NheI. pK-mCAG was made by cloning the mCAG promoter from pSBT-mCAG  as a 0.96 kb SmaI to EcoRI (filled) fragment into pK-SV40(A) × 2 opened with AflII (filled). pKUb-PTs1 was made by replacing the SB11 gene from pKUb-SB11 with PTs by cloning a 1.0 kb BamHI to NheI fragment from pCR4-PPTs1B into pKUb-SB11 from NheI to BamHI. pCR4-PPTs1B was made by cloning a PCR fragment of pBluKS-PPTN4 , a kind gift of Dr. Michael Leaver (University of Stirling, UK), amplified with primers CDS-PPTs-F1 [AAAGCTAGCATGAAGACCAAGGAGCTCACC] and CDS-PPTs-R1 [AAGGATCCTCAATACTTGGTAGAACC] into pCR4-Topo (Invitrogen).
pKT2C-loxPTK-G was made by cloning a 2.3 kb PvuII fragment of pK-PTK_TS into the MscI site of pKT2C-lox-GFP. pK-PTK_TS was made by cloning a 1.9 kb BglII to EcoRI fragment of pCR4-PTK into the MCS of pK-SV40(×2) opened with EcoRI and BglII. pCR4-PTK was made by cloning a 1.9 kb PCR product of pT2-FloxP-PTK using oligos PuroΔTK-F2 [TTAGATCTACCATGACCGAGTACAAGCCCA] and PuroΔTK-R1 [TGGTTCTTTCCGCCTCAGAAGCCAT] into pCR4-TOPO (Invitrogen). pKT2C-lox-GFP was made by cloning 0.1 kb EcoRI fragment of pCR4-loxP, which contains two direct repeat loxP sites separated with a MscI site, into pKT2C-EGFP opened with EcoRI. pCR4-loxP was made by topo cloning the annealed and extended oligos loxP-F1 [ATAACTTCGTATAATGTATGCTATACGAAGTTATCTCGAGTGGCCA] and loxP-R1 [ATAACTTCGTATAGCATACATTATACGAAGTTATTGGCCACTCGAG] into pCR4-TOPO (Invitrogen).
Cell Culture and transposition/recombinase assays
Pig fibroblasts were isolated from 43 day old embryos. The tissue was dissociated using a collagenase/DNAse I treatment as well as mechanical disruption. The cells from the female piglet #8 were cultured in DMEM enriched with 10%FBS and 2× antibiotic/antimycotic solution (Gibco #15240-022). The cells were passaged in DMEM high glucose media enriched with 10% FBS, 2 mm L-glutamine, 1× P/S until spontaneously establishing line PF8. A subpopulation of porcine endometrial gland epithelium cells  were spontaneously immortalized, strain PEGE. The PEGE cells were maintained in DMEM supplemented with 10% FCS, 1× Penn/Strep, 10 μg/ml Insulin (Sigma, USA), and 1× L-Glutamine.
For transposition assays cells were plated in each well of a six well plate to achieve 60–80% confluence within 6–24 hours. Cells were transfected using TransIT-LT1 (Mirus Bio Corporation, WI) transfection reagent according to the manufactures instructions with a ratio of 3:1 lipid: μg DNA. Each transfection contained a total of 1.15 to 1.5 μg of plasmid DNA. Wells 1–3 contained transposon plus transposase, well 4 contained transposon with no transposase, well 5 contained SB plus SB transposase and well 6 contained pKT2C-EGFP only. Molar amounts of each transposon were fixed at 1.5 × 10-13 moles of transposon (0.75 × 10-13 Moles for Tol2) while transposase plasmid was added at a molar ratio of 1:1 for SB, Tol2, and PB, and 1:0.5 for PP. The choice of the promoters and transfection ratios for SB and PP was based on the highest transposition activity observed in human HT1080 cells (data not shown). Strong promoters (CMV & miniCAGs) and transfection conditions for Tol2 and PB were selected based on previously published data and the observation that these transposon systems seem less susceptible to overexpression inhibition than SB and PP.[34, 61, 74] Total DNA weight was adjusted using pCMV-β plasmid. Forty-eight hours after transfection cells were trypsinized, and two replicates of 60,000 cells were plated onto 100 mm plates in media containing 0.3 μg/ml puromycin and selected for 9–12 days. Colonies were visualized by methylene blue staining and counted. A minimum of two six-well plates were transfected for each experiment. The mean colony number and standard error are shown in figures.
Several independent puromycin resistant PEGE foci for each transposon were aspirated and grown to confluence on a 100 mm plate. Genomic DNA was extracted using standard methods and approximately 10 μg was digested with SspI (Tol2 clones) or AseI (SB, PB, and PP) clones. Digested DNA was separated on 0.7% agarose gel and transferred to positively charged nylon membranes (GE Osmotics, USA). Membranes were probed with a random primed 1524 bp XmaI fragment of pKP-PTK-TS that contained the bulk of the PTK gene and visualized by autoradiography or phosphor imaging.
Cloning transposon junctions
Genomic DNA was isolated from pooled, fixed, and stained puromycin resistant clones for each transposon. For splinkerette PCR DNA was cut with Sau3AI or NlaIII and junctions were cloned as described . For blocked linker-mediated PCR, DNA was cut with NspI for Tol2 and SB, and a cocktail of enzymes including XbaI, AvrII, NheI and SpeI for PB and PP. The NspI digested DNA was ligated to the blocked linker-SphI that was created by annealing primerette-long [CCTCCACTACGACTCACTGAAGGGCAAGCAGTCCTAACAACCATG] and blink-SphI [5'P- GTTGTTAGGACTGCTTGC-3'P]. Whereas the DNA digested with the cocktail was ligated to the blocked linker-XbaI that was produced by annealing primerette long to blink-XbaI [5'P-CTAGCATGGTTGTTAGGACTGCTTGC-3'P]. Following ligation the junction sequences were amplified by nested PCR. The primary PCR used the common primer primerette-short [CCTCCACTACGACTCACTGAAGGGC] with transposon-specific primers SB_IRDR(L)-O1 [ATTTTCCAAGCTGTTTAAAGGCACAGTCAAC], Tol2(L)-O1 [AATTAAACTGGGCATCAGCGCAATT], PB-LTR(R)-O1 [ACAGACCGATAAAACACATGCGTCAA], and PTn-IRDR(R)-O1 [GGGTGAATACTTATGCACCCAACAGATG]. The secondary PCR reactions used the common primer primerette-nested [GGGCAAGCAGTCCTAACAACCATG] with transposon-specific primers SB_IRDR(L)-O2 [GACTTGTGTCATGCACAAAGTAGATGTCCT], Tol2(L)-O2 [GCGCAATTCAATTGGTTTGGTAATAGC], PB-LTR(R)-O2 [TCCTAAATGCACAGCGACGGATTC], and PTn-IRDR(R)-O2 [CAGTACATAATGGGAAAAAGTCCAAGGG]. To generate unique sequences serial dilutions (1:50 and 1:500) of the ligation reaction were used as template for the primary PCR. The primary PCR was diluted 1:50 and used as template in the secondary PCR reaction. The PCR fragments were shotgun cloned and sequenced.
Porcine endometrial glandular epithelium
Green fluorescent protein
Recombinase recognition site
Somatic cell nuclear transfer
Inverted terminal repeat
We would like to thank Mr. Andrew R. Bents for assistance with tissue culture and blocked linker-mediated PCR. This work was supported by grants from the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation (JDRF#7-2005-1167) and a faculty development grant from the Academic Health Center of the University of Minnesota (SCF).
- Lai L, Prather RS: Creating genetically modified pigs by using nuclear transfer. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2003, 1: 82-10.1186/1477-7827-1-82.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Zeng L, Rahrmann E, Hu Q, Lund T, Sandquist L, Felten M, O'Brien TD, Zhang J, Verfaillie C: Multipotent adult progenitor cells from swine bone marrow. Stem cells (Dayton, Ohio). 2006, 24 (11): 2355-2366. 10.1634/stemcells.2005-0551.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Price EM, Prather RS, Foley CM: Multipotent adult progenitor cell lines originating from the peripheral blood of green fluorescent protein transgenic Swine. Stem Cells Dev. 2006, 15 (4): 507-522. 10.1089/scd.2006.15.507.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Pravtcheva DD, Wise TL: Transgene instability in mice injected with an in vitro methylated Igf2 gene. Mutat Res. 2003, 529 (1–2): 35-50.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Scrable H, Stambrook PJ: A genetic program for deletion of foreign DNA from the mammalian genome. Mutat Res. 1999, 429 (2): 225-237.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Garrick D, Fiering S, Martin DI, Whitelaw E: Repeat-induced gene silencing in mammals. Nat Genet. 1998, 18 (1): 56-59. 10.1038/ng0198-56.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Henikoff S: Conspiracy of silence among repeated transgenes. Bioessays. 1998, 20 (7): 532-535. 10.1002/(SICI)1521-1878(199807)20:7<532::AID-BIES3>3.0.CO;2-M.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Dalle B, Rubin JE, Alkan O, Sukonnik T, Pasceri P, Yao S, Pawliuk R, Leboulch P, Ellis J: eGFP reporter genes silence LCRbeta-globin transgene expression via CpG dinucleotides. Mol Ther. 2005, 11 (4): 591-599. 10.1016/j.ymthe.2004.11.012.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Hammer RE, Pursel VG, Rexroad CE, Wall RJ, Bolt DJ, Ebert KM, Palmiter RD, Brinster RL: Production of transgenic rabbits, sheep and pigs by microinjection. Nature. 1985, 315 (6021): 680-683. 10.1038/315680a0.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Krumlauf R, Hammer RE, Tilghman SM, Brinster RL: Developmental regulation of alpha-fetoprotein genes in transgenic mice. Mol Cell Biol. 1985, 5 (7): 1639-1648.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Ornitz DM, Palmiter RD, Hammer RE, Brinster RL, Swift GH, MacDonald RJ: Specific expression of an elastase-human growth hormone fusion gene in pancreatic acinar cells of transgenic mice. Nature. 1985, 313 (6003): 600-602. 10.1038/313600a0.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Palmiter RD, Norstedt G, Gelinas RE, Hammer RE, Brinster RL: Metallothionein-human GH fusion genes stimulate growth of mice. Science. 1983, 222 (4625): 809-814. 10.1126/science.6356363.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Townes TM, Chen HY, Lingrel JB, Palmiter RD, Brinster RL: Expression of human beta-globin genes in transgenic mice: effects of a flanking metallothionein-human growth hormone fusion gene. Mol Cell Biol. 1985, 5 (8): 1977-1983.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Mark WH, Signorelli K, Blum M, Kwee L, Lacy E: Genomic structure of the locus associated with an insertional mutation in line 4 transgenic mice. Genomics. 1992, 13 (1): 159-166. 10.1016/0888-7543(92)90216-F.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Chen CM, Choo KB, Cheng WT: Frequent deletions and sequence aberrations at the transgene junctions of transgenic mice carrying the papillomavirus regulatory and the SV40 TAg gene sequences. Transgenic research. 1995, 4 (1): 52-59. 10.1007/BF01976502.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Pravtcheva DD, Wise TL: A postimplantation lethal mutation induced by transgene insertion on mouse chromosome 8. Genomics. 1995, 30 (3): 529-544. 10.1006/geno.1995.1274.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Nakanishi T, Kuroiwa A, Yamada S, Isotani A, Yamashita A, Tairaka A, Hayashi T, Takagi T, Ikawa M, Matsuda Y, et al: FISH analysis of 142 EGFP transgene integration sites into the mouse genome. Genomics. 2002, 80 (6): 564-574. 10.1006/geno.2002.7008.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Bishop JO: Chromosomal Insertion of Foreign DNA. Transgenic animals: generation and use. Edited by: Houdebine L-M. 1997, Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Harwood Academic Publishers, 219-223.Google Scholar
- Covarrubias L, Nishida Y, Mintz B: Early postimplantation embryo lethality due to DNA rearrangements in a transgenic mouse strain. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1986, 83 (16): 6020-6024. 10.1073/pnas.83.16.6020.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Gordon JW, Ruddle FH: DNA-mediated genetic transformation of mouse embryos and bone marrow – a review. Gene. 1985, 33 (2): 121-136. 10.1016/0378-1119(85)90087-3.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Hamada T, Sasaki H, Seki R, Sakaki Y: Mechanism of chromosomal integration of transgenes in microinjected mouse eggs: sequence analysis of genome-transgene and transgene-transgene junctions at two loci. Gene. 1993, 128 (2): 197-202. 10.1016/0378-1119(93)90563-I.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Overbeek PA, Lai SP, Van Quill KR, Westphal H: Tissue-specific expression in transgenic mice of a fused gene containing RSV terminal sequences. Science. 1986, 231 (4745): 1574-1577. 10.1126/science.3006249.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Rohan RM, King D, Frels WI: Direct sequencing of PCR-amplified junction fragments from tandemly repeated transgenes. Nucleic acids research. 1990, 18 (20): 6089-6095. 10.1093/nar/18.20.6089.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Takano M, Egawa H, Ikeda JE, Wakasa K: The structures of integration sites in transgenic rice. Plant J. 1997, 11 (3): 353-361. 10.1046/j.1365-313X.1997.11030353.x.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Wilkie TM, Palmiter RD: Analysis of the integrant in MyK-103 transgenic mice in which males fail to transmit the integrant. Mol Cell Biol. 1987, 7 (5): 1646-1655.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Ivics Z, Hackett PB, Plasterk RH, Izsvak Z: Molecular reconstruction of Sleeping Beauty, a Tc1-like transposon from fish, and its transposition in human cells. Cell. 1997, 91 (4): 501-510. 10.1016/S0092-8674(00)80436-5.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Izsvak Z, Ivics Z, Plasterk RH: Sleeping Beauty, a wide host-range transposon vector for genetic transformation in vertebrates. J Mol Biol. 2000, 302 (1): 93-102. 10.1006/jmbi.2000.4047.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Clark KJ, Leaver MJ, Foster LK, Carlson DF, Fahrenkrug SC: Passport, a native Tc1/mariner transposon from Pleuronectes platessa, functions in vertebrate cells. in preparation.
- Leaver MJ: A family of Tc1-like transposons from the genomes of fishes and frogs: evidence for horizontal transmission. Gene. 2001, 271 (2): 203-214. 10.1016/S0378-1119(01)00530-3.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Koga A, Iida A, Kamiya M, Hayashi R, Hori H, Ishikawa Y, Tachibana A: The medaka fish Tol2 transposable element can undergo excision in human and mouse cells. J Hum Genet. 2003, 48 (5): 231-235. 10.1007/s10038-003-0016-4.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Koga A, Suzuki M, Inagaki H, Bessho Y, Hori H: Transposable element in fish. Nature. 1996, 383 (6595): 30-10.1038/383030a0.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Ding S, Wu X, Li G, Han M, Zhuang Y, Xu T: Efficient transposition of the piggyBac (PB) transposon in mammalian cells and mice. Cell. 2005, 122 (3): 473-483. 10.1016/j.cell.2005.07.013.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Fraser MJ, Ciszczon T, Elick T, Bauser C: Precise excision of TTAA-specific lepidopteran transposons piggyBac (IFP2) and tagalong (TFP3) from the baculovirus genome in cell lines from two species of Lepidoptera. Insect Mol Biol. 1996, 5 (2): 141-151.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Wu SC, Meir YJ, Coates CJ, Handler AM, Pelczar P, Moisyadi S, Kaminski JM: piggyBac is a flexible and highly active transposon as compared to sleeping beauty, Tol2, and Mos1 in mammalian cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2006, 103 (41): 15008-15013. 10.1073/pnas.0606979103.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Davidson AE, Balciunas D, Mohn D, Shaffer J, Hermanson S, Sivasubbu S, Cliff MP, Hackett PB, Ekker SC: Efficient gene delivery and gene expression in zebrafish using the Sleeping Beauty transposon. Dev Biol. 2003, 263 (2): 191-202. 10.1016/j.ydbio.2003.07.013.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Kawakami K, Koga A, Hori H, Shima A: Excision of the tol2 transposable element of the medaka fish, Oryzias latipes, in zebrafish, Danio rerio. Gene. 1998, 225 (1–2): 17-22. 10.1016/S0378-1119(98)00537-X.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Kawakami K, Shima A, Kawakami N: Identification of a functional transposase of the Tol2 element, an Ac-like element from the Japanese medaka fish, and its transposition in the zebrafish germ lineage. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2000, 97 (21): 11403-11408. 10.1073/pnas.97.21.11403.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Hamlet MR, Yergeau DA, Kuliyev E, Takeda M, Taira M, Kawakami K, Mead PE: Tol2 transposon-mediated transgenesis in Xenopus tropicalis. Genesis. 2006, 44 (9): 438-445. 10.1002/dvg.20234.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Kawakami K, Imanaka K, Itoh M, Taira M: Excision of the Tol2 transposable element of the medaka fish Oryzias latipes in Xenopus laevis and Xenopus tropicalis. Gene. 2004, 338 (1): 93-98. 10.1016/j.gene.2004.05.013.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Sinzelle L, Vallin J, Coen L, Chesneau A, Du Pasquier D, Pollet N, Demeneix B, Mazabraud A: Generation of trangenic Xenopus laevis using the Sleeping Beauty transposon system. Transgenic research. 2006, 15 (6): 751-760. 10.1007/s11248-006-9014-6.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Dupuy AJ, Fritz S, Largaespada DA: Transposition and gene disruption in the male germline of the mouse. Genesis. 2001, 30 (2): 82-88. 10.1002/gene.1037.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Fischer SE, Wienholds E, Plasterk RH: Regulated transposition of a fish transposon in the mouse germ line. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2001, 98 (12): 6759-6764. 10.1073/pnas.121569298.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Horie K, Kuroiwa A, Ikawa M, Okabe M, Kondoh G, Matsuda Y, Takeda J: Efficient chromosomal transposition of a Tc1/mariner- like transposon Sleeping Beauty in mice. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2001, 98 (16): 9191-9196. 10.1073/pnas.161071798.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Kawakami K, Noda T: Transposition of the Tol2 element, an Ac-like element from the Japanese medaka fish Oryzias latipes, in mouse embryonic stem cells. Genetics. 2004, 166 (2): 895-899. 10.1534/genetics.166.2.895.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Luo G, Ivics Z, Izsvak Z, Bradley A: Chromosomal transposition of a Tc1/mariner-like element in mouse embryonic stem cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1998, 95 (18): 10769-10773. 10.1073/pnas.95.18.10769.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Yant SR, Meuse L, Chiu W, Ivics Z, Izsvak Z, Kay MA: Somatic integration and long-term transgene expression in normal and haemophilic mice using a DNA transposon system. Nat Genet. 2000, 25 (1): 35-41. 10.1038/75568.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Lewandoski M: Conditional control of gene expression in the mouse. Nat Rev Genet. 2001, 2 (10): 743-755. 10.1038/35093537.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Gossen M, Bujard H: Tight control of gene expression in mammalian cells by tetracycline-responsive promoters. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1992, 89 (12): 5547-5551. 10.1073/pnas.89.12.5547.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Choi BR, Koo BC, Ahn KS, Kwon MS, Kim JH, Cho SK, Kim KM, Kang JH, Shim H, Lee H, et al: Tetracycline-inducible gene expression in nuclear transfer embryos derived from porcine fetal fibroblasts transformed with retrovirus vectors. Mol Reprod Dev. 2006, 73 (10): 1221-1229. 10.1002/mrd.20543.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Kues WA, Schwinzer R, Wirth D, Verhoeyen E, Lemme E, Herrmann D, Barg-Kues B, Hauser H, Wonigeit K, Niemann H: Epigenetic silencing and tissue independent expression of a novel tetracycline inducible system in double-transgenic pigs. Faseb J. 2006, 20 (8): 1200-1202. 10.1096/fj.05-5415fje.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Branda CS, Dymecki SM: Talking about a revolution: The impact of site-specific recombinases on genetic analyses in mice. Dev Cell. 2004, 6 (1): 7-28. 10.1016/S1534-5807(03)00399-X.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Abuin A, Bradley A: Recycling selectable markers in mouse embryonic stem cells. Mol Cell Biol. 1996, 16 (4): 1851-1856.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Yu Y, Bradley A: Engineering chromosomal rearrangements in mice. Nat Rev Genet. 2001, 2 (10): 780-790. 10.1038/35093564.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Chen YT, Bradley A: A new positive/negative selectable marker, puDeltatk, for use in embryonic stem cells. Genesis. 2000, 28 (1): 31-35. 10.1002/1526-968X(200009)28:1<31::AID-GENE40>3.0.CO;2-K.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Plasterk RH, Izsvak Z, Ivics Z: Resident aliens: the Tc1/mariner superfamily of transposable elements. Trends Genet. 1999, 15 (8): 326-332. 10.1016/S0168-9525(99)01777-1.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Kempken F, Windhofer F: The hAT family: a versatile transposon group common to plants, fungi, animals, and man. Chromosoma. 2001, 110 (1): 1-9.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Sarkar A, Sim C, Hong YS, Hogan JR, Fraser MJ, Robertson HM, Collins FH: Molecular evolutionary analysis of the widespread piggyBac transposon family and related "domesticated" sequences. Mol Genet Genomics. 2003, 270 (2): 173-180. 10.1007/s00438-003-0909-0.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Hackett CS, Geurts AM, Wangensteen KJ, Balciunas D, Ekker SC, Hackett PB: Predicting transposon chromosomal insertion sites: implications for functional genomics and gene therapy. Genome Biology.
- Altschul SF, Gish W, Miller W, Myers EW, Lipman DJ: Basic local alignment search tool. J Mol Biol. 1990, 215 (3): 403-410.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Vallier L, Mancip J, Markossian S, Lukaszewicz A, Dehay C, Metzger D, Chambon P, Samarut J, Savatier P: An efficient system for conditional gene expression in embryonic stem cells and in their in vitro and in vivo differentiated derivatives. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2001, 98 (5): 2467-2472. 10.1073/pnas.041617198.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Wilson MH, Coates CJ, George AL: PiggyBac Transposon-mediated Gene Transfer in Human Cells. Mol Ther. 2007, 15 (1): 139-145. 10.1038/sj.mt.6300028.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Clark KJ, Geurts AM, Bell JB, Hackett PB: Transposon vectors for gene-trap insertional mutagenesis in vertebrates. Genesis. 2004, 39 (4): 225-233. 10.1002/gene.20049.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Collier LS, Carlson CM, Ravimohan S, Dupuy AJ, Largaespada DA: Cancer gene discovery in solid tumours using transposon-based somatic mutagenesis in the mouse. Nature. 2005, 436 (7048): 272-276. 10.1038/nature03681.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Dupuy AJ, Akagi K, Largaespada DA, Copeland NG, Jenkins NA: Mammalian mutagenesis using a highly mobile somatic Sleeping Beauty transposon system. Nature. 2005, 436 (7048): 221-226. 10.1038/nature03691.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Geurts AM, Wilber A, Carlson CM, Lobitz PD, Clark KJ, Hackett PB, McIvor RS, Largaespada DA: Conditional gene expression in the mouse using a Sleeping Beauty gene-trap transposon. BMC Biotechnol. 2006, 6: 30-10.1186/1472-6750-6-30.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Yant SR, Wu X, Huang Y, Garrison B, Burgess SM, Kay MA: High-resolution genome-wide mapping of transposon integration in mammals. Mol Cell Biol. 2005, 25 (6): 2085-2094. 10.1128/MCB.25.6.2085-2094.2005.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Ivics Z, Katzer A, Stuwe EE, Fiedler D, Knespel S, Izsvak Z: Targeted sleeping beauty transposition in human cells. Mol Ther. 2007, 15 (6): 1137-1144.Google Scholar
- Yant SR, Huang Y, Akache B, Kay MA: Site-directed transposon integration in human cells. Nucleic acids research. 2007, 35 (7): e50-10.1093/nar/gkm089.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Dupuy AJ, Clark K, Carlson CM, Fritz S, Davidson AE, Markley KM, Finley K, Fletcher CF, Ekker SC, Hackett PB, et al: Mammalian germ-line transgenesis by transposition. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2002, 99 (7): 4495-4499. 10.1073/pnas.062630599.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Fahrenkrug Lab Home Page. [http://primer.ansci.umn.edu/Fahrenkruglab]
- Hackett Lab Plasmid Info. [http://www.cbs.umn.edu/labs/perry/plasmids/plasmid.html]
- Geurts AM, Yang Y, Clark KJ, Liu G, Cui Z, Dupuy AJ, Bell JB, Largaespada DA, Hackett PB: Gene transfer into genomes of human cells by the sleeping beauty transposon system. Mol Ther. 2003, 8 (1): 108-117. 10.1016/S1525-0016(03)00099-6.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Ohlfest JR, Frandsen JL, Fritz S, Lobitz PD, Perkinson SG, Clark KJ, Nelsestuen G, Key NS, McIvor RS, Hackett PB, et al: Phenotypic correction and long-term expression of factor VIII in hemophilic mice by immunotolerization and nonviral gene transfer using the Sleeping Beauty transposon system. Blood. 2005, 105 (7): 2691-2698. 10.1182/blood-2004-09-3496.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Balciunas D, Wangensteen KJ, Wilber A, Bell J, Geurts A, Sivasubbu S, Wang X, Hackett PB, Largaespada DA, McIvor RS, et al: Harnessing a high cargo-capacity transposon for genetic applications in vertebrates. PLoS Genet. 2006, 2 (11): e169-10.1371/journal.pgen.0020169.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Parinov S, Kondrichin I, Korzh V, Emelyanov A: Tol2 transposon-mediated enhancer trap to identify developmentally regulated zebrafish genes in vivo. Dev Dyn. 2004, 231 (2): 449-459. 10.1002/dvdy.20157.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Deachapunya C, Palmer-Densmore M, O'Grady SM: Insulin stimulates transepithelial sodium transport by activation of a protein phosphatase that increases Na-K ATPase activity in endometrial epithelial cells. J Gen Physiol. 1999, 114 (4): 561-574. 10.1085/jgp.114.4.561.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.