4.5 Article

An Improved Single-Step Cloning Strategy Simplifies the Agrobacterium tumefaciens-Mediated Transformation (ATMT)-Based Gene-Disruption Method for Verticillium dahliae

期刊

PHYTOPATHOLOGY
卷 106, 期 6, 页码 645-652

出版社

AMER PHYTOPATHOLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1094/PHYTO-10-15-0280-R

关键词

HSVtk

资金

  1. Chinese Academy of Sciences [XDB11020600]
  2. China Transgenic Research and Commercialization Key Special Project [2014ZX00800908B]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The soilborne fungal pathogen Verticillium dahliae infects a broad range of plant species to cause severe diseases. The availability of Verticillium genome sequences has provided opportunities for largescale investigations of individual gene function in Verticillium strains using Agrobacterium tumefaciens-mediated transformation (ATMT)-based gene-disruption strategies. Traditional ATMT vectors require multiple cloning steps and elaborate characterization procedures to achieve successful gene replacement; thus, these vectors are not suitable for high-throughput ATMT-based gene deletion. Several advancements have been made that either involve simplification of the steps required for gene-deletion vector construction or increase the efficiency of the technique for rapid recombinant characterization. However, an ATMT binary vector that is both simple and efficient is still lacking. Here, we generated a USER-ATMT dual-selection (DS) binary vector, which combines both the advantages of the USER single-step cloning technique and the efficiency of the herpes simplex virus thymidine kinase negative selection marker. Highly efficient deletion of three different genes in V dahliae using the USER-ATMT-DS vector enabled verification that this newly-generated vector not only facilitates the cloning process but also simplifies the subsequent identification of fungal homologous recombinants. The results suggest that the USER-ATMT-DS vector is applicable for efficient gene deletion and suitable for large-scale gene deletion in V dahliae.

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