4.7 Article

Functional Dissection of pri-miR-290∼295 in Dgcr8 Knockout Mouse Embryonic Stem Cells

期刊

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijms20184345

关键词

DiGeorge syndrome critical region gene 8; primary microRNA; miR-290 similar to 295 cluster; embryonic stem cells; cell cycle; pluripotency; self-renewal; differentiation; Nlrp12

资金

  1. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2016YFA0100701, 2018YFA0107601]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [91640116, 31821091, 81830072, 31622033]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The DiGeorge syndrome critical region gene 8 (Dgcr8) knockout strategy has been widely used to study the function of canonical microRNAs (miRNAs) in vitro and in vivo. However, primary miRNA (pri-miRNA) transcripts are accumulated in Dgcr8 knockout cells due to interrupted processing. Whether abnormally accumulated pri-miRNAs have any function is unknown. Here, using clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats system/CRISPR-associated protein 9 (CRISPR/Cas9), we successfully knocked out the primary microRNA-290 similar to 295 (pri-miR-290 similar to 295) cluster, the most highly expressed miRNA cluster in mouse embryonic stem cells (ESCs), in Dgcr8 knockout background. We found that the major defects associated with Dgcr8 knockout in mouse ESCs, including higher expression of epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT) markers, slower proliferation, G1 accumulation, and defects in silencing self-renewal, were not affected by the deletion of pri-miR-290 similar to 290 cluster. Interestingly, the transcription of neighboring gene nucleotide-binding oligomerization domain, leucine rich repeat and pyrin domain containing 12(Nlrp12) was upregulated upon the deletion of the pri-miR-290 similar to 295 cluster. Together, our results suggested that the major defects in Dgcr8 knockout ESCs were not due to the accumulation of pri-miR-290 similar to 295, and the deletion of miRNA genes could affect the transcription of neighboring DNA elements.

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