Skip to main content
Nucleic Acids Research logoLink to Nucleic Acids Research
. 2013 Nov 15;42(Database issue):D574–D580. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkt1131

DEG 10, an update of the database of essential genes that includes both protein-coding genes and noncoding genomic elements

Hao Luo 1, Yan Lin 1, Feng Gao 1, Chun-Ting Zhang 1,*, Ren Zhang 2,*
PMCID: PMC3965060  PMID: 24243843

Abstract

The combination of high-density transposon-mediated mutagenesis and high-throughput sequencing has led to significant advancements in research on essential genes, resulting in a dramatic increase in the number of identified prokaryotic essential genes under diverse conditions and a revised essential-gene concept that includes all essential genomic elements, rather than focusing on protein-coding genes only. DEG 10, a new release of the Database of Essential Genes (available at http://www.essentialgene.org), has been developed to accommodate these quantitative and qualitative advancements. In addition to increasing the number of bacterial and archaeal essential genes determined by genome-wide gene essentiality screens, DEG 10 also harbors essential noncoding RNAs, promoters, regulatory sequences and replication origins. These essential genomic elements are determined not only in vitro, but also in vivo, under diverse conditions including those for survival, pathogenesis and antibiotic resistance. We have developed customizable BLAST tools that allow users to perform species- and experiment-specific BLAST searches for a single gene, a list of genes, annotated or unannotated genomes. Therefore, DEG 10 includes essential genomic elements under different conditions in three domains of life, with customizable BLAST tools.

INTRODUCTION

Delineating a set of essential genomic elements and proteins that make up a living organism helps to understand critical cellular processes that sustain life (1–3). Identification of essential genes is especially useful to studies of synthetic biology (4), which seeks to make an artificial self-sustainable living cell, with addable gene circuitries that encode desirable traits. Bacterial essential genes, because of their lethality phenotype, are attractive drug targets, and this is especially important for those having multidrug resistance (5).

Reverse genetics (from gene disruption to phenotypic characterization) has been extensively used to experimentally determine essential genes. One standard method is to perform targeted mutagenesis in a particular gene of interest. Classical examples include essential gene determination in Bacillus subtilis (6) and Escherichia coli (7), in which all protein-coding genes are deleted one by one. This method gives a clear-cut answer on gene lethality, but it is labor-intensive, time-consuming and requires detailed genome annotation. Single-gene knockout screens can overlook genes causing synthetic lethality, which refers to lethal phenotypes caused by genetic interactions of genes that are nonessential when deleted separately (3). Indeed, duplicated genes are less likely to be essential than singletons (8). Another method is to construct a random transposon-insertion library, followed by determination of insertion sites by DNA hybridization (9) or microarray (10), which suffers from some shortcomings including missing low-abundance transcripts, low resolution in locating insertion sites, and narrow ranges in counting probe density. An advantage of global transposon mutagenesis is that it can simultaneously identify essential noncoding elements in addition to protein-coding genes.

The combination of high-density transposon-mediated mutagenesis and high-throughput sequencing has resulted in significant advancements in the study of essential genes (11). This method, however, has in fact been gradually developed for more than 10 years. In 1999, Venter and coworkers first performed Sanger sequencing to determine transposon insertion sites (12), and later, various versions of combining transposon mutagenesis and next-generation sequencing were developed, such as TraDIS (13), INSeq (14), HITS (15), Tn-seq (16) and Tn-seq Circle (17), here collectively referred to as Tn-seq. The application of Tn-seq has allowed for significant advancements in studies on essential genes over the past few years, resulting in (i) a dramatic increase in the number of prokaryotic species with gene essentiality screens; (ii) a revision of the essential-gene concept that includes all essential genomic elements, such as noncoding RNAs, rather than focusing on protein-coding genes only and (iii) gene essentiality screens in a wide array of experimental conditions in vitro and in vivo, rather than focusing only on rich media in cell culture.

We constructed a database of essential genes (DEG) in 2004 (18), and DEG 5.0 included essential genes of both bacteria and eukaryotes (19). In addition to DEG, other essential gene databases include EGGS (Essential Genes on Genome Scale, http://www.nmpdr.org/FIG/eggs.cgi) and OGEE (online gene essentiality database) (20), where the former hosts microbial gene essentiality data experimentally obtained from published genome-scale gene essentiality screens and the latter hosts essential-gene data obtained from large-scale experiments with associated gene features and text-mining results. Because of text-mining results, OGEE has most essential-gene records, while DEG entries are human curated and is the only one supporting BLAST searches. We have constructed DEG 10 to accommodate the quantitative and qualitative advancements in identifying essential genes by genome-wide essentiality screens in recent years, and the following is a summary of new database developments.

  1. In addition to protein-coding genes, DEG 10 now harbors essential genomic elements, including noncoding RNAs, promoters, regulatory sequences and replication origins (21,22).

  2. The number of bacteria with saturated genome-wide gene essentiality screens has nearly tripled, compared with that in DEG 5 (19).

  3. DEG 10 contains essential genomic elements determined not only in vitro (culture dishes), but also in vivo (intact mice) (14), not only for survival but also for pathogenesis (23), not only in rich media, but also in more diverse conditions, such as those required for cholesterol catabolism (24), antibiotic resistance (17), bile acid tolerance (13,25) and bacteriophage infection (26).

  4. DEG 10 hosts archaeal essential genes determined from the first gene essentiality screen in an archaeal genome (27).

  5. DEG 10 hosts both essential and nonessential protein-coding genes.

  6. DEG 10 is integrated with customizable BLAST tools that allow users to perform species- and experiment-specific searches for a single gene, a list of genes, annotated or unannotated genomes.

Therefore, DEG 10 (www.essentialgene.org) reflects the progress of the research on essential genes by including essential genomic elements under different conditions in three domains of life, with customizable BLAST tools.

DATABASE NEW DEVELOPMENTS

Increased number of bacterial species with genome-wide essentiality screens

The combination of high-throughput sequencing and high-density transposon mutagenesis has largely accelerated the process in determining essential genes. Compared to DEG 5 (19), the number of bacteria with saturated genome-wide gene essentiality screens has nearly tripled in DEG 10, which has data for 31 bacteria. DEG 10 contains more than 12 000 bacterial essential genes, more than twice the number of those in DEG 5. The figures corresponding to newly added essential genes are highlighted in Table 1.

Table 1.

Contents in DEG 10

Domain of life Organism No. of essential genomic elements
Coding Noncoding Methoda Saturated Ref.
Bacteria Acinetobacter baylyi 499 Single-gene knockout Yes (50)
Bacillus subtilis 261 2 Single-gene knockout Yes (6,51)
Bacteroides thetaiotaomicron 325 INSeq Yes (14)
Burkholderia thailandensis 406 Tn-seq Yes (52)
Campylobacter jejuni 233 Transposon mutagenesis Yes (53)
Caulobacter crescentus 480 532 Tn-seq Yes (22)
Escherichia coli 620 Genetic footprinting Yes (54)
Escherichia coli 303 Single-gene knockout Yes (7)
Francisella novicida 396 Tn-seq Yes (55)
Haemophilus influenzae 667 Genetic footprinting Yes (56)
Helicobacter pylori 344 Transposon mutagenesis followed by by microarray (MATT) Yes (57)
Mycobacterium tuberculosis 614 Transposon mutagenesis followed by hybridization (TraSH) Yes (58)
Mycobacterium tuberculosis 774 Tn-seq Yes (24)
Mycobacterium tuberculosis 742 35 Tn-seq Yes (21)
Mycoplasma genitalium 382 Transposon mutagenesis followed by Sanger sequencing, Single-gene knockout Yes (12,59)
Mycoplasma pulmonis 321 Transposon mutagenesis followed by Sanger sequencing Yes (60)
Porphyromonasgingivalis 463 Tn-seq Yes (42)
Pseudomonas aeruginosa 335 Transposon mutagenesis followed by genetic footprinting Yes (61)
Pseudomonas aeruginosa 117 Tn-seq Yes (17)
Salmonella entericaserovar Typhi 356 TraDIS Yes (13)
Salmonella enterica Typhimurium 306 15 TraDIS Yes (29)
Salmonella entericaserovar Typhimurium 105 Tn-seq Yes (25)
Salmonella entericaserovar Typhimurium SL1344 353 23 TraDIS Yes (29)
Salmonella entericaserovar Typhi Ty2 358 24 TraDIS Yes (29)
Salmonella typhimurium 490 Insertion-duplication Yes (62)
Shewanella oneidensis 403 Transposon mutagenesis followed by microarray Yes (63)
Sphingomonas wittichii 579 32 Tn-seq Yes (64)
Staphylococcus aureus 302 Antisense RNA; Allelic Replacement Mutagenesis No (65-67)
Staphylococcus aureus 351 Transposon-Mediated Differential Hybridisation (TMDH) Yes (68)
Streptococcus pneumoniae 244 Insertion-duplication, allelic replacement mutagenesis No (69,70)
Streptococcus pneumoniae 72 Tn-seq Yes (23)
Streptococcus sanguinis 218 Single-gene knockout Yes (41)
Vibrio cholerae 789 Tn-seq Yes (71)
Archaea Methanococcus maripaludis 519 Tn-seq Yes (27)
Eukaryotes Arabidopsis thaliana 358 Single-gene knockout No (48)
Aspergillus fumigatus 35 Conditional promoter replacement No (72)
Caenorhabditis elegans 294 RNA interference No (73)
Daniorerio 315 Insertional mutagenesis No (74)
Drosophila melanogaster 376 P-element insertion No (75)
Homo sapiens 2452 Orthologs and literature search No (76,77)
Mus musculus 2136 Single-gene knockout No (78)
Saccharomyces cerevisiae 1110 Single-gene knockout Yes (37)
Schizosaccharomyces pombe 1260 Single-gene knockout Yes (38)

Figures in bold denote newly added essential genes.

aGenetic footprinting is a method that performs transposon mutagenesis followed by PCR to determine transposon insertion sites (79). Tn-seq here collectively refers to a method that uses the next-generation sequencing to determine transposon insertion sites, including, TraDIS, INSeq, HITS, Tn-seq and Tn-seq Circle.

In addition to essential genes, in fact, nonessential genes can be determined as well in most genome-wide essentiality screens. Single-gene knockout experiments directly determine whether a particular gene is essential or nonessential. Genome-wide transposon mutagenesis determines nonessential genes first, because all recovered mutants only harbor transposon insertions in nonessential genes, while essential genes are, in fact, inferred. Therefore, nonessential genes can be reliably identified by both kinds of approaches. Because information about nonessential genes can be important as well, DEG 10 hosts nonessential genes, which are organized into a sub-database.

Determination of essential noncoding genomic elements

It is increasingly being recognized that bacterial genomes encode large amounts of noncoding RNAs (28). The use of high-density transposon mutagenesis and high-throughput sequencing makes identification of essential noncoding RNAs possible. In the genome of Caulobacter crescentus, 428 735 unique Tn5 insertions were generated and mapped in its 4 Mb genome. Therefore, in addition to identifying 480 essential protein-coding genes, 29 tRNAs and eight small noncoding RNAs were also found to be essential (22). In Mycobacterum tuberculosis, 36 488 transposon insertions were generated and mapped, and in addition to essential protein-coding genes, 25 nondisruptable genomic segments were found. These segments include 10 tRNAs and the RNA catalytic unit of RNaseP, which is required for tRNA processing (21). In a study with a similar method for the Salmonella serovars Typhimurium, 15 noncoding RNAs were found to be essential (29). It is noteworthy that RNaseP was again among the identified essential noncoding RNA, and therefore it is likely to be a widely required noncoding RNA among bacteria.

Mann et al. tested the hypothesis that some noncoding RNAs have niche-specific roles in virulence (23). Because increasing evidence suggests sRNAs are involved in pathogenesis, Mann et al. first performed RNA-seq to define the sRNA repertoire of S. pneumonia, a causative agent for pneumonia, and identified 89 sRNAs. To examine organ-specific roles in pneumococcal pathogenesis, they generated a pool of pneumococcal mutants by transposon mutagenesis, administrated the mutants in organs vital to the progression of pneumococcal diseases, the nasopharynx, lungs and bloodstream, and performed deep sequencing in DNA from recovered mutants. Consequently, 28 sRNAs in the lung, 26 in the nasopharynxand 18 in the blood were found to alter fitness in these host niches. Therefore, this study used Tn-seq to assay the role of sRNA in pathogenesis in a niche-specific manner (23).

In addition to noncoding RNAs, other noncoding elements of the genome can be essential as well. These include promoters of some essential protein-coding genes, regulatory sequences and replication origins. Indeed, Christen et al. identified 402 essential promoter regions and two essential elements in the replication origin of the Caulobacter genome, in addition to 91 essential intergenic sequences with unknown functions (22). Zhang et al. identified 35 intergenic elements for optimal growth of M. tuberculosis (21). DEG 10 collects the above identified noncoding genomic elements, with annotations from the Rfam database (30), if relevant annotations are available. Because of the apparent essential role of replication origins, DEG 10 also links to DoriC, which is a database of bacterial and archaeal replication origins (31).

Determination of essential genes under diverse conditions

The application of high-throughput sequencing makes it possible to determine and quantify contributions of essential genes to organism fitness under conditions that are not practical by using other methods, because of the digital nature of the next-generation sequencing. Therefore, in addition to regular rich medium in cell cultures, in the past several years, bacterial essential genes have been identified under a large number of different conditions, e.g. in intact mice.

One illustrative example is the study on genes required to establish a human gut symbiont (14). Goodman et al. first performed the INseq method (transposon mutagenesis followed by next generation sequencing) to identify a set of essential genes for the commensal B. thetaiotaomicron in vitro. Next, they examined the genes critical for fitness in vivo, i.e. in a mammalian gut ecosystem by colonizing bacterial mutants in germ-free mice. By comparing the input (before inoculation) and output (recovered bacteria), 280 genes showed underrepresentation, suggesting them to be critical for in vivo fitness. By changing the experimental conditions such as in the presence of human gut-associated bacteria, they identified five adjacent genes that conferred fitness disadvantages during monoassociation of germ-free mice, while showing no impact on bacterial growth in vitro, thus highlighting the importance of the in vivo context in determining gene essentiality (14).

In a large-scale study, van Opijnen and Camilli performed Tn-seq on the genome of S. pneumonia under 17 in vitro conditions (e.g. pH, temperature, antibiotic, heavy metal, stress, nutritional stimulation) and two in vivo conditions (carriage and infection), and have identified over 1,800 genotype-phenotype genetic interactions and associated pathways (32). Other condition-specific studies include the identification of essential genes for bile acid tolerance, a trait required of an enteric bacterium and for carriage of S. Typhi in the gall bladder (13,25), resistance to the aminoglycoside antibiotic tobramycin in Pseudomonas aeruginosa (17), bacteriophage infection of S. Typhi to assess for Vi polysaccharide capsule expression (26) and cholesterol metabolism in M. tuberculosis (24). In addition to those determined in rich medium only, DEG 10 harbors condition-specific essential genes as well.

Determination of essential genes in an archaeal genome

Archaea are prokaryotes that constitute a separate domain of life, in addition to bacteria and eukaryotes (33). Some archaea can survive in extreme conditions, such as highly salty or hot environments. Methanogenesis, a process to generate methane, is a specialized anaerobic respiration that requires distinctive biochemical reactions unique to methanogenic archaea, which are responsible for 80% of the methane in greenhouse gas (34).

By using the method of Tn-seq, Sarmiento et al. identified essential genes in hydrogenotrophic, methanogenic archaeon Methanococcusmaripaludis S2, and this was the first genome-wide gene essentiality screen in archaea (27). About 89 000 unique transposon inserts were mapped, and 526 genes were classified as essential in rich medium. Similar to bacteria, many essential genes encode fundamental cellular processes, such as transcription, translation and replication. Some essential genes, however, are unique to the archaeal or methanococcal lineages. For instance, the DNA polymerase PolD is essential, whereas the archaeal homolog of bacterial PolB is not (27).

Determination of essential eukaryotic genes

In contrast to prokaryotic essential genes, which have had a dramatic increase in past years, the number of eukaryotic essential genes, while climbing steadily, does not exhibit a drastic increase, apparently due to the lack of genome-wide mutagenesis strategies. To generate single-gene knockout, however, takes much more effort, and therefore usually requires multi-center collaborations. The aim of the International Knockout Mouse Consortium (IKMC), formed in 2007, is to generate mutant mouse lines with all genes deleted one by one (35). A recent report showed mouse gene deletion mutants have been obtained for ∼17 000 of the total 20 000 protein-coding genes (36). Therefore, in the near future, we expect to have a complete set of essential mouse protein-coding genes. With Saccharomyces cerevisiae being the first eukaryote to have all of its single-gene deletion mutants generated (37), DEG 10 has added essential genes of Schizosaccharomyces pombe, which is the second eukaryote that has a saturated gene deletion study (38).

Customizable BLAST tools

Performing homologous searches with the BLAST program (39) against DEG is common (40–43), and therefore to facilitate this use, we have developed a set of customizable BLAST tools. Users have the following four options.

  1. To perform BLAST search for a single gene. The major improvement for this option is that users now can perform species-specific BLAST search, in addition to having the option to change P-values. The output is unprocessed BLAST raw results.

  2. To perform BLAST search for a list of genes. Users can submit a list of protein or DNA sequences, and the BLAST output will be organized and processed to generate an XML file that is parsed by the Biopython module (44). The output includes how many genes among the queried gene set have DEG homologs, and how many homologous genes in DEG are found. All homologous genes are clickable by linking to corresponding alignments. The above function can also be done in a species-specific manner.

  3. To perform BLAST search for annotated genome sequences. Because of the increasing pace of genome sequencing, in many cases users need to analyze whole-genome sequences. By using this option, users can submit a whole-genome sequence or scaffold, with annotation information, i.e. either in the GenBank format or by uploading Protein Table Files (PTT format).

  4. To perform BLAST search for unannotated genome sequences. If users need to analyze whole-genome sequences that have not been annotated, DEG is integrated with two gene-finding programs, Zcurve (45) and Glimmer (46), for gene identification. Protein-coding genes are first identified by Zcurve or Glimmer, and then BLAST searches are performed against DEG. For both Options 3 and 4, the output is processed and organized to convey information on the number of homologs in DEG and in queried genomes, with linking to alignments. The XML files and resulting webpages are stored for 7 days on the server, and can be retrieved as needed.

With the aforementioned new tools, users can perform BLAST searches for single genes, multiple genes, annotated genomes or unannotated genomes with filters to restrict the search to a subset of species or experiments with desirable P-values.

FUTURE PERSPECTIVE

Recent breakthroughs in sequencing technology, i.e. the next-generation sequencing that parallelizes the process to sequence millions of reads concurrently, have fundamentally changed many areas of biological research, and the research on essential genes is no exception. Significant advancements have been made in essential-gene studies, for example, the concept of the essential gene has been revised to include all essential genomic elements, rather than focusing on protein-coding genes only. It is not difficult to envision that in the near future, genome-wide gene essentiality screens will be performed in a large number of bacteria and archaea, under increasingly diverse experimental conditions, and will result in dramatic increases in identified prokaryotic essential genomic elements. The accumulation of essential-gene information will be particular helpful in identifying bacterial drug targets (47) and in constructing the minimal genome in studies of synthetic biology (4). Without breakthroughs in genome-wide mutagenesis technology, however, there will likely be no dramatic increases in identified eukaryotic essential genes. Nevertheless, it is expected that single-gene knockout projects for the model organisms, such as mice and Arabidopsis thaliana (48), will soon be completed. It is increasingly being recognized that mammalian genomes have highly complex transcriptomes (49), and therefore we would expect that some eukaryotic noncoding elements, such as long noncoding RNAs, will be identified as essential. DEG will continue to incorporate newly discovered essential genomic elements in a timely manner to keep pace with this rapidly developing field.

FUNDING

Startup fund from Wayne State University (to R.Z.). Funding for open access charge: In part by the National Natural Science Foundation of China [31171238, 30800642 and 31200991]; Program for New Century Excellent Talents in University [No. NCET-12-0396].

Conflict of interest statement. None declared.

REFERENCES

  • 1.Koonin EV. How many genes can make a cell: the minimal-gene-set concept. Annu. Rev. Genomics Hum. Genet. 2000;1:99–116. doi: 10.1146/annurev.genom.1.1.99. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Koonin EV. Comparative genomics, minimal gene-sets and the last universal common ancestor. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2003;1:127–136. doi: 10.1038/nrmicro751. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Gerdes S, Edwards R, Kubal M, Fonstein M, Stevens R, Osterman A. Essential genes on metabolic maps. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 2006;17:448–456. doi: 10.1016/j.copbio.2006.08.006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Lartigue C, Glass JI, Alperovich N, Pieper R, Parmar PP, Hutchison CA, 3rd, Smith HO, Venter JC. Genome transplantation in bacteria: changing one species to another. Science. 2007;317:632–638. doi: 10.1126/science.1144622. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Galperin MY, Koonin EV. Searching for drug targets in microbial genomes. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 1999;10:571–578. doi: 10.1016/s0958-1669(99)00035-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Kobayashi K, Ehrlich SD, Albertini A, Amati G, Andersen KK, Arnaud M, Asai K, Ashikaga S, Aymerich S, Bessieres P, et al. Essential Bacillus subtilis genes. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 2003;100:4678–4683. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0730515100. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Baba T, Ara T, Hasegawa M, Takai Y, Okumura Y, Baba M, Datsenko KA, Tomita M, Wanner BL, Mori H. Construction of Escherichia coli K-12 in-frame, single-gene knockout mutants: the Keio collection. Mol. Syst. Biol. 2006;2:2006 0008. doi: 10.1038/msb4100050. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Chen WH, Trachana K, Lercher MJ, Bork P. Younger genes are less likely to be essential than older genes, and duplicates are less likely to be essential than singletons of the same age. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2012;29:1703–1706. doi: 10.1093/molbev/mss014. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Hensel M, Shea JE, Gleeson C, Jones MD, Dalton E, Holden DW. Simultaneous identification of bacterial virulence genes by negative selection. Science. 1995;269:400–403. doi: 10.1126/science.7618105. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Mazurkiewicz P, Tang CM, Boone C, Holden DW. Signature-tagged mutagenesis: barcoding mutants for genome-wide screens. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2006;7:929–939. doi: 10.1038/nrg1984. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Barquist L, Boinett CJ, Cain AK. Approaches to querying bacterial genomes with transposon-insertion sequencing. RNA Biol. 2013;10:1161–1169. doi: 10.4161/rna.24765. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Hutchison CA, Peterson SN, Gill SR, Cline RT, White O, Fraser CM, Smith HO, Venter JC. Global transposon mutagenesis and a minimal Mycoplasma genome. Science. 1999;286:2165–2169. doi: 10.1126/science.286.5447.2165. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Langridge GC, Phan MD, Turner DJ, Perkins TT, Parts L, Haase J, Charles I, Maskell DJ, Peters SE, Dougan G, et al. Simultaneous assay of every Salmonella Typhi gene using one million transposon mutants. Genome Res. 2009;19:2308–2316. doi: 10.1101/gr.097097.109. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Goodman AL, McNulty NP, Zhao Y, Leip D, Mitra RD, Lozupone CA, Knight R, Gordon JI. Identifying genetic determinants needed to establish a human gut symbiont in its habitat. Cell Host Microbe. 2009;6:279–289. doi: 10.1016/j.chom.2009.08.003. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Gawronski JD, Wong SM, Giannoukos G, Ward DV, Akerley BJ. Tracking insertion mutants within libraries by deep sequencing and a genome-wide screen for Haemophilus genes required in the lung. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 2009;106:16422–16427. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0906627106. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.van Opijnen T, Bodi KL, Camilli A. Tn-seq: high-throughput parallel sequencing for fitness and genetic interaction studies in microorganisms. Nat. Methods. 2009;6:767–772. doi: 10.1038/nmeth.1377. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Gallagher LA, Shendure J, Manoil C. Genome-scale identification of resistance functions in Pseudomonas aeruginosa using Tn-seq. MBio. 2011;2:e00315–e00310. doi: 10.1128/mBio.00315-10. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Zhang R, Ou HY, Zhang CT. DEG: a database of essential genes. Nucleic Acids Res. 2004;32:D271–D272. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkh024. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Zhang R, Lin Y. DEG 5.0, a database of essential genes in both prokaryotes and eukaryotes. Nucleic Acids Res. 2009;37:D455–D458. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkn858. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Chen WH, Minguez P, Lercher MJ, Bork P. OGEE: an online gene essentiality database. Nucleic Acids Res. 2012;40:D901–D906. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkr986. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Zhang YJ, Ioerger TR, Huttenhower C, Long JE, Sassetti CM, Sacchettini JC, Rubin EJ. Global assessment of genomic regions required for growth in Mycobacterium tuberculosis. PLoS Pathog. 2012;8:e1002946. doi: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1002946. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Christen B, Abeliuk E, Collier JM, Kalogeraki VS, Passarelli B, Coller JA, Fero MJ, McAdams HH, Shapiro L. The essential genome of a bacterium. Mol. Syst. Biol. 2011;7:528. doi: 10.1038/msb.2011.58. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Mann B, van Opijnen T, Wang J, Obert C, Wang YD, Carter R, McGoldrick DJ, Ridout G, Camilli A, Tuomanen EI, et al. Control of virulence by small RNAs in Streptococcus pneumoniae. PLoS Pathog. 2012;8:e1002788. doi: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1002788. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Griffin JE, Gawronski JD, Dejesus MA, Ioerger TR, Akerley BJ, Sassetti CM. High-resolution phenotypic profiling defines genes essential for mycobacterial growth and cholesterol catabolism. PLoS Pathog. 2011;7:e1002251. doi: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1002251. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Khatiwara A, Jiang T, Sung SS, Dawoud T, Kim JN, Bhattacharya D, Kim HB, Ricke SC, Kwon YM. Genome scanning for conditionally essential genes in Salmonella enterica Serotype Typhimurium. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2012;78:3098–3107. doi: 10.1128/AEM.06865-11. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Pickard D, Kingsley RA, Hale C, Turner K, Sivaraman K, Wetter M, Langridge G, Dougan G. A genomewide mutagenesis screen identifies multiple genes contributing to Vi capsular expression in Salmonella enterica serovar Typhi. J. Bacteriol. 2013;195:1320–1326. doi: 10.1128/JB.01632-12. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Sarmiento F, Mrazek J, Whitman WB. Genome-scale analysis of gene function in the hydrogenotrophic methanogenic archaeon Methanococcus maripaludis. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 2013;110:4726–4731. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1220225110. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Weinberg Z, Perreault J, Meyer MM, Breaker RR. Exceptional structured noncoding RNAs revealed by bacterial metagenome analysis. Nature. 2009;462:656–659. doi: 10.1038/nature08586. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Barquist L, Langridge GC, Turner DJ, Phan MD, Turner AK, Bateman A, Parkhill J, Wain J, Gardner PP. A comparison of dense transposon insertion libraries in the Salmonella serovars Typhi and Typhimurium. Nucleic Acids Res. 2013;41:4549–4564. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkt148. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Gardner PP, Daub J, Tate J, Moore BL, Osuch IH, Griffiths-Jones S, Finn RD, Nawrocki EP, Kolbe DL, Eddy SR, et al. Rfam: Wikipedia, clans and the “decimal” release. Nucleic Acids Res. 2011;39:D141–D145. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkq1129. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Gao F, Luo H, Zhang CT. DoriC 5.0: an updated database of oriC regions in both bacterial and archaeal genomes. Nucleic Acids Res. 2013;41:D90–D93. doi: 10.1093/nar/gks990. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.van Opijnen T, Camilli A. A fine scale phenotype-genotype virulence map of a bacterial pathogen. Genome Res. 2012;22:2541–2551. doi: 10.1101/gr.137430.112. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Woese CR, Kandler O, Wheelis ML. Towards a natural system of organisms: proposal for the domains Archaea, Bacteria, and Eucarya. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 1990;87:4576–4579. doi: 10.1073/pnas.87.12.4576. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Reeburgh WS. Oceanic methane biogeochemistry. Chem Rev. 2007;107:486513. doi: 10.1021/cr050362v. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Ringwald M, Iyer V, Mason JC, Stone KR, Tadepally HD, Kadin JA, Bult CJ, Eppig JT, Oakley DJ, Briois S, et al. The IKMC web portal: a central point of entry to data and resources from the International Knockout Mouse Consortium. Nucleic Acids Res. 2011;39:D849–D855. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkq879. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Dolgin E. Mouse library set to be knockout. Nature. 2011;474:262–263. doi: 10.1038/474262a. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Giaever G, Chu AM, Ni L, Connelly C, Riles L, Veronneau S, Dow S, Lucau-Danila A, Anderson K, Andre B, et al. Functional profiling of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae genome. Nature. 2002;418:387–391. doi: 10.1038/nature00935. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Kim DU, Hayles J, Kim D, Wood V, Park HO, Won M, Yoo HS, Duhig T, Nam M, Palmer G, et al. Analysis of a genome-wide set of gene deletions in the fission yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombe. Nat. Biotechnol. 2010;28:617–623. doi: 10.1038/nbt.1628. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Altschul SF, Madden TL, Schaffer AA, Zhang J, Zhang Z, Miller W, Lipman DJ. Gapped BLAST and PSI-BLAST: a new generation of protein database search programs. Nucleic Acids Res. 1997;25:3389–3402. doi: 10.1093/nar/25.17.3389. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Holman AG, Davis PJ, Foster JM, Carlow CK, Kumar S. Computational prediction of essential genes in an unculturable endosymbiotic bacterium, Wolbachia of Brugia malayi. BMC Microbiol. 2009;9:243. doi: 10.1186/1471-2180-9-243. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Xu P, Ge X, Chen L, Wang X, Dou Y, Xu JZ, Patel JR, Stone V, Trinh M, Evans K, et al. Genome-wide essential gene identification in Streptococcus sanguinis. Sci. Rep. 2011;1:125. doi: 10.1038/srep00125. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Klein BA, Tenorio EL, Lazinski DW, Camilli A, Duncan MJ, Hu LT. Identification of essential genes of the periodontal pathogen Porphyromonas gingivalis. BMC Genomics. 2012;13:578. doi: 10.1186/1471-2164-13-578. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Juhas M, Stark M, von Mering C, Lumjiaktase P, Crook DW, Valvano MA, Eberl L. High confidence prediction of essential genes in Burkholderia cenocepacia. PLoS One. 2012;7:e40064. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0040064. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Cock PJ, Antao T, Chang JT, Chapman BA, Cox CJ, Dalke A, Friedberg I, Hamelryck T, Kauff F, Wilczynski B, et al. Biopython: freely available Python tools for computational molecular biology and bioinformatics. Bioinformatics. 2009;25:1422–1423. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btp163. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Guo FB, Ou HY, Zhang CT. ZCURVE: a new system for recognizing protein-coding genes in bacterial and archaeal genomes. Nucleic Acids Res. 2003;31:1780–1789. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkg254. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Delcher AL, Bratke KA, Powers EC, Salzberg SL. Identifying bacterial genes and endosymbiont DNA with Glimmer. Bioinformatics. 2007;23:673–679. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btm009. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Aguero F, Al-Lazikani B, Aslett M, Berriman M, Buckner FS, Campbell RK, Carmona S, Carruthers IM, Chan AW, Chen F, et al. Genomic-scale prioritization of drug targets: the TDR Targets database. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2008;7:900–907. doi: 10.1038/nrd2684. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Meinke D, Muralla R, Sweeney C, Dickerman A. Identifying essential genes in Arabidopsis thaliana. Trends Plant Sci. 2008;13:483–491. doi: 10.1016/j.tplants.2008.06.003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Mercer TR, Gerhardt DJ, Dinger ME, Crawford J, Trapnell C, Jeddeloh JA, Mattick JS, Rinn JL. Targeted RNA sequencing reveals the deep complexity of the human transcriptome. Nat. Biotechnol. 2012;30:99–104. doi: 10.1038/nbt.2024. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.de Berardinis V, Vallenet D, Castelli V, Besnard M, Pinet A, Cruaud C, Samair S, Lechaplais C, Gyapay G, Richez C, et al. A complete collection of single-gene deletion mutants of Acinetobacter baylyi ADP1. Mol. Syst. Biol. 2008;4:174. doi: 10.1038/msb.2008.10. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Commichau FM, Pietack N, Stulke J. Essential genes in Bacillus subtilis: a re-evaluation after ten years. Mol. Biosyst. 2013;9:1068–1075. doi: 10.1039/c3mb25595f. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Baugh L, Gallagher LA, Patrapuvich R, Clifton MC, Gardberg AS, Edwards TE, Armour B, Begley DW, Dieterich SH, Dranow DM, et al. Combining functional and structural genomics to sample the essential Burkholderia structome. PLoS One. 2013;8:e53851. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0053851. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Metris A, Reuter M, Gaskin DJ, Baranyi J, van Vliet AH. In vivo and in silico determination of essential genes of Campylobacter jejuni. BMC Genomics. 2011;12:535. doi: 10.1186/1471-2164-12-535. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Gerdes SY, Scholle MD, Campbell JW, Balazsi G, Ravasz E, Daugherty MD, Somera AL, Kyrpides NC, Anderson I, Gelfand MS, et al. Experimental determination and system level analysis of essential genes in Escherichia coli MG1655. J. Bacteriol. 2003;185:5673–5684. doi: 10.1128/JB.185.19.5673-5684.2003. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Gallagher LA, Ramage E, Jacobs MA, Kaul R, Brittnacher M, Manoil C. A comprehensive transposon mutant library of Francisella novicida, a bioweapon surrogate. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 2007;104:1009–1014. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0606713104. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Akerley BJ, Rubin EJ, Novick VL, Amaya K, Judson N, Mekalanos JJ. A genome-scale analysis for identification of genes required for growth or survival of Haemophilus influenzae. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 2002;99:966–71. doi: 10.1073/pnas.012602299. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Salama NR, Shepherd B, Falkow S. Global transposon mutagenesis and essential gene analysis of Helicobacter pylori. J. Bacteriol. 2004;186:7926–7935. doi: 10.1128/JB.186.23.7926-7935.2004. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Sassetti CM, Boyd DH, Rubin EJ. Genes required for mycobacterial growth defined by high density mutagenesis. Mol. Microbiol. 2003;48:77–84. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2958.2003.03425.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Glass JI, Assad-Garcia N, Alperovich N, Yooseph S, Lewis MR, Maruf M, Hutchison CA, 3rd, Smith HO, Venter JC. Essential genes of a minimal bacterium. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 2006;103:425–430. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0510013103. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.French CT, Lao P, Loraine AE, Matthews BT, Yu H, Dybvig K. Large-scale transposon mutagenesis of Mycoplasma pulmonis. Mol. Microbiol. 2008;69:67–76. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2958.2008.06262.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Liberati NT, Urbach JM, Miyata S, Lee DG, Drenkard E, Wu G, Villanueva J, Wei T, Ausubel FM. An ordered, nonredundant library of Pseudomonas aeruginosa strain PA14 transposon insertion mutants. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 2006;103:2833–2838. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0511100103. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62.Knuth K, Niesalla H, Hueck CJ, Fuchs TM. Large-scale identification of essential Salmonella genes by trapping lethal insertions. Mol. Microbiol. 2004;51:1729–1744. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2958.2003.03944.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Deutschbauer A, Price MN, Wetmore KM, Shao W, Baumohl JK, Xu Z, Nguyen M, Tamse R, Davis RW, Arkin AP. Evidence-based annotation of gene function in Shewanella oneidensis MR-1 using genome-wide fitness profiling across 121 conditions. PLoS Genet. 2011;7:e1002385. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1002385. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Roggo C, Coronado E, Moreno-Forero SK, Harshman K, Weber J, van der Meer JR. Genome-wide transposon insertion scanning of environmental survival functions in the polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon degrading bacterium Sphingomonas wittichii RW1. Environ. Microbiol. 2013 doi: 10.1111/1462-2920.12125. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65.Ko K, Lee J, Song J, Baek J, Oh W, Chun J, Yoon H. Screening of essential Genes in Staphylococcus aureus N315 using comparative genomics and allelic replacement mutagenesis. J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2006;16:623–632. [Google Scholar]
  • 66.Ji Y, Zhang B, Van Horn SF, Warren P, Woodnutt G, Burnham MK, Rosenberg M. Identification of critical staphylococcal genes using conditional phenotypes generated by antisense RNA. Science. 2001;293:2266–2269. doi: 10.1126/science.1063566. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67.Forsyth RA, Haselbeck RJ, Ohlsen KL, Yamamoto RT, Xu H, Trawick JD, Wall D, Wang L, Brown-Driver V, Froelich JM, et al. A genome-wide strategy for the identification of essential genes in Staphylococcus aureus. Mol. Microbiol. 2002;43:1387–1400. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2958.2002.02832.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 68.Chaudhuri RR, Allen AG, Owen PJ, Shalom G, Stone K, Harrison M, Burgis TA, Lockyer M, Garcia-Lara J, Foster SJ, et al. Comprehensive identification of essential Staphylococcus aureus genes using Transposon-Mediated Differential Hybridisation (TMDH) BMC Genomics. 2009;10:291. doi: 10.1186/1471-2164-10-291. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69.Thanassi JA, Hartman-Neumann SL, Dougherty TJ, Dougherty BA, Pucci MJ. Identification of 113 conserved essential genes using a high-throughput gene disruption system in Streptococcus pneumoniae. Nucleic Acids Res. 2002;30:3152–3162. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkf418. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 70.Song JH, Ko KS, Lee JY, Baek JY, Oh WS, Yoon HS, Jeong JY, Chun J. Identification of essential genes in Streptococcus pneumoniae by allelic replacement mutagenesis. Mol. Cells. 2005;19:365–374. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 71.Cameron DE, Urbach JM, Mekalanos JJ. A defined transposon mutant library and its use in identifying motility genes in Vibrio cholerae. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 2008;105:8736–8741. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0803281105. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 72.Hu W, Sillaots S, Lemieux S, Davison J, Kauffman S, Breton A, Linteau A, Xin C, Bowman J, Becker J, et al. Essential gene identification and drug target prioritization in Aspergillus fumigatus. PLoS Pathog. 2007;3:e24. doi: 10.1371/journal.ppat.0030024. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 73.Kamath RS, Fraser AG, Dong Y, Poulin G, Durbin R, Gotta M, Kanapin A, Le Bot N, Moreno S, Sohrmann M, et al. Systematic functional analysis of the Caenorhabditis elegans genome using RNAi. Nature. 2003;421:231–237. doi: 10.1038/nature01278. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 74.Amsterdam A, Nissen RM, Sun Z, Swindell EC, Farrington S, Hopkins N. Identification of 315 genes essential for early zebrafish development. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 2004;101:12792–12797. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0403929101. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 75.Spradling AC, Stern D, Beaton A, Rhem EJ, Laverty T, Mozden N, Misra S, Rubin GM. The Berkeley Drosophila Genome Project gene disruption project: single P-element insertions mutating 25% of vital Drosophila genes. Genetics. 1999;153:135–177. doi: 10.1093/genetics/153.1.135. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 76.Georgi B, Voight BF, Bucan M. From mouse to human: evolutionary genomics analysis of human orthologs of essential genes. PLoS Genet. 2013;9:e1003484. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1003484. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 77.Liao BY, Zhang J. Null mutations in human and mouse orthologs frequently result in different phenotypes. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 2008;105:6987–6992. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0800387105. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 78.Liao BY, Zhang J. Mouse duplicate genes are as essential as singletons. Trends Genet. 2007;23:378–381. doi: 10.1016/j.tig.2007.05.006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 79.Smith V, Botstein D, Brown PO. Genetic footprinting: a genomic strategy for determining a gene's function given its sequence. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 1995;92:6479–6483. doi: 10.1073/pnas.92.14.6479. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Nucleic Acids Research are provided here courtesy of Oxford University Press

RESOURCES