4.7 Article

Generation of a Tn5 transposon library in Haemophilus parasuis and analysis by transposon-directed insertion-site sequencing (TraDIS)

期刊

VETERINARY MICROBIOLOGY
卷 166, 期 3-4, 页码 558-566

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.vetmic.2013.07.008

关键词

Haemophilus parasuis; Tn5 mutagenesis; TraDIS

资金

  1. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council [BB/G020744/1, BB/G019177/1, BB/G019274/1, BB/G003203/1]
  2. UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
  3. Zoetis
  4. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council [BB/G019177/1, BB/G020744/1, BB/G018553/1, BB/G019274/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  5. BBSRC [BB/G018553/1, BB/G019274/1, BB/G020744/1, BB/G019177/1] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Haemophilus parasuis is an important respiratory tract pathogen of swine and the etiological agent of Glasser's disease. The molecular pathogenesis of H. parasuis is not well studied, mainly due to the lack of efficient tools for genetic manipulation of this bacterium. In this study we describe a Tn5-based random mutagenesis method for use in H. parasuis. A novel chloramphenicol-resistant Tn5 transposome was electroporated into the virulent H. parasuis serovar 5 strain 29755. High transposition efficiency of Tn5, up to 10(4) transformants/mu g of transposon DNA, was obtained by modification of the Tn5 DNA in the H. parasuis strain HS071 and establishment of optimal electrotransformation conditions, and a library of approximately 10,500 mutants was constructed. Analysis of the library using transposon-directed insertion-site sequencing (TraDIS) revealed that the insertion of Tn5 was evenly distributed throughout the genome. 10,001 individual mutants were identified, with 1561 genes being disrupted (69.4% of the genome). This newly-developed, efficient mutagenesis approach will be a powerful tool for genetic manipulation of H. parasuis in order to study its physiology and pathogenesis. (C) 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据