Skip to main content
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2013 Jul 28.
Published in final edited form as: Nat Methods. 2012 Jan 30;9(2):117–118. doi: 10.1038/nmeth.1865

Improved Mos1-mediated transgenesis in C. elegans

Christian Frøkjær-Jensen 1,2, M Wayne Davis 1, Michael Ailion 1,3, Erik M Jorgensen 1
PMCID: PMC3725292  NIHMSID: NIHMS486650  PMID: 22290181

To the Editor:

The ability to add or delete genes to the genome of genetic model organisms is essential. Previously, we developed methods based on the Mos1 transposon1 to make targeted transgene insertions (Mos1-mediated Single Copy transgene Insertions, MosSCI2) and targeted deletions (Mos1-mediated deletions, MosDEL3) in Caenorhabditis elegans, the latter reported in your pages. Here, we present new reagents that improve the efficiency, facilitate the selection for transgenic strains and expand the set of MosSCI insertion sites.

The Mos1 transposase is expressed from a helper plasmid co-injected with template DNA. Increased transposase expression would be expected to improve both single copy insertions and targeted gene deletions. We tested several promoters driving transposase expression for their effect on MosSCI and MosDEL efficiency (Fig. 1a and Supplementary Fig. 1). Relative to the glh-2 promoter, the most effective promoter (eft-3) resulted in a more than 6-fold improvement in transgene insertion efficiency (from 8% to 54% of injected animals) and gene deletion efficiency (from 3%, n=66 injected animals2 to 20%, n=30 injected animals, Fig. 1b).

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Improvements to Mos1-based genome manipulation. (a) A plasmid expressing transposase under the indicated promoters was coinjected with low DNA concentration (32.5 ng/ul) of a 4.4 kb transgene. The plot shows insertion frequency into the ttTi5605 locus. (b) The plot shows the frequency of a 5 kb targeted deletion of dpy-13. Pglh-2 data from Frøkjær-Jensen et al (2010)2) using the indicated selection markers (see Supplementary Methods for discussion). (c) Insertion frequency with higher total DNA concentrations (~100 ng/ul) and in the presence of the negative selection marker peel-1. Error bars, 95 % confidence intervals, significance was determined with Fischer’s exact test

An effective, inducible negative selection marker would facilitate identification of transgenic strains. We developed a negative selection marker (Phsp16-2∷peel-1) based on the toxin peel-1 4. Array animals carrying the peel-1 plasmid are killed by a two-hour heat-shock at 34°C with approximately 10% false positives (2/19 transgenic animals) (Fig. 1c and Supplementary Fig. 2). A positive selection marker is critical for identifying transgenic animals with insertions or deletions and we have used unc-119(+) extensively. Recently, antibiotic selection markers have been developed for nematode transgenesis5,6. Targeted dpy-13 deletions were generated with Neomycin/G418 selection at frequencies comparable to unc-119 selection (24%, 12/51 injected animals, Fig. 1b), see Supplementary Methods for a discussion of the recommended use of selection markers.

Multiple insertion sites are important for generating complex genotypes. We have expanded the number of MosSCI insertion sites from two to six (Supplementary Fig. 3) with a full set of outcrossed strains containing the Mos1 insertion and targeting vectors (three-way Gateway or multiple cloning site compatible) based on unc-119 selection and for one site, unc-18 selection (Table 1). All sites readily generate MosSCI inserts and express in somatic tissue. Three of the insertion sites (ttTi4348 I, ttTi5605 II and cxTi10816 IV) express robustly in the germline from a ubiquitous promoter (Supplementary Fig. 4). Because MosSCI reagents are important for expression in the germline, we generated an expression vector that coexpresses GFP-histone for confirmation of expression (Supplementary Fig. 5). All strains are available from the Caenorhabditis elegans Genetics Center (CGC) and targeting plasmids (targeting, transposase and negative selection vectors) from Addgene.

Table 1.

MosSCI insertion sites.

Locus Genetic
position
Insertion
strain1
Gateway
vector2
MCS
vector
Germline
expression3
Insertion
frequency4
Balancer
strain
unc-119 ttTi4348 I: −5.32 EG6701 pCFJ210 pCFJ352 yes 25% (3/12) EG6173
ttTi4391 I: 7.93 EG6702 pCFJ604 pCFJ353 no 29% (4/21) EG6171
ttTi5605 II: 0.77 EG6699 pCFJ150 pCFJ350 yes 43% (6/14) EG6070
cxTi10816 IV: 1.41 EG6703 pCFJ212 pCFJ356 yes 20% (2/10) EG6401
cxTi10882 IV: −0.05 EG6700 pCFJ201 pCFJ351 variable 29% (4/14) EG5568
ttTi14024 X:22.84 EG6705 pCFJ606 pCFJ355 no 21% (3/14) EG6109
unc-18 ttTi4348 I: −5.32 EG6032 pCFJ448 pCFJ676 yes N.D. EG6173
1)

4× outcrossed strain, distributed with extrachromosomal unc-119 rescue to facilitate handling and maintenance

2)

pDESTR4-R3, three-way Gateway Compatible vector

3)

Based on germline expression of Pdpy-30∷GFP transgene

4)

Insertion frequency of Pdpy-30∷GFP∷H2B transgene

Supplementary Material

Supplementary Data
02

Acknowledgements

CFJ was funded by postdoctoral stipends from the Lundbeck foundation and the Carlsberg foundation. This research was funded by the National Institutes of Health (1R01GM095817) and by the Howard Hughes Medical Institute.

Footnotes

Competing financial interests:

Yes, the authors declare competing financial interests.

References

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Supplementary Data
02

RESOURCES