4.5 Article

Marker-free genome editing in the edible mushroom, Pleurotus ostreatus, using transient expression of genes required for CRISPR/Cas9 and for selection

期刊

JOURNAL OF WOOD SCIENCE
卷 68, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

SPRINGER JAPAN KK
DOI: 10.1186/s10086-022-02033-6

关键词

Transient transformation; Genome editing; Agaricomycete; Mushroom; Wood-rot fungi; Pleurotus ostreatus; CRISPR/Cas9

资金

  1. KAKENHI [18H02254, 18KK0178, 19K22332, 21K18224]
  2. JSPS Bilateral Program [JPJSBP 120208402, 120209920]
  3. Kyoto University Foundation
  4. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [21K18224, 19K22332, 18H02254, 18KK0178] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, marker-free genome editing was achieved in Pleurotus ostreatus by combining CRISPR/Cas9 with a transient transformation system. This opens up possibilities for repeated genome editing in these fungi.
In a previous study, we reported a transient transformation system using repeated screening for hygromycin B (Hyg) resistance in the basidiomycete Ceriporiopsis subvermispora. In the present study, by combining this technique with CRISPR/Cas9, we demonstrated successful marker-free genome editing in Pleurotus ostreatus, which is one of the most economically important cultivated mushrooms as well as a model white-rot fungus. At first, transformant selection mediated by the transient expression of marker genes was demonstrated using a plasmid harboring the Hyg resistance gene (hph) in P. ostreatus. Then, genome editing of fcy1, which confers 5-fluorocytosine (5-FC) resistance to the host cell, was performed by the transient expression of Cas9, gRNA, and hph and strains with 5-FC resistance and Hyg sensitivity were isolated. Additionally, genome editing of fcy1 in these strains was confirmed by Sanger sequencing. To our knowledge, this is the first report of marker-free genome editing through the transient expression of Cas9, gRNA, and hph in agaricomycetes, which opens the door for repeated genome editing in these fungi.

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

4.5
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