CRISPR-based synthetic gene drives have the potential to deliver a more effective and humane method of invasive vertebrate pest control than current strategies. Relatively efficient CRISPR gene drive systems have been developed in insects and yeast but not in mammals. Here, we investigated the efficiency of CRISPR-Cas9-based gene drives in Mus musculus by constructing “split drive” systems where gRNA expression occurs on a separate chromosome to Cas9, which is under the control of either a zygotic (CAG) or germline (Vasa) promoter. While both systems generated double-strand breaks at their intended target site in vivo, no homology-directed repair between chromosomes (“homing”) was detectable. Our data indicate that robust and specific Cas9 expression during meiosis is a critical requirement for the generation of efficient CRISPR-based synthetic gene drives in rodents.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BlackburnTM, CasseyP, DuncanRP, et al.Avian extinction and mammalian introductions on oceanic islands. Science, 2004; 305:1955–1958. DOI: 10.1126/science.1101617.
2.
HarrisDB. Review of negative effects of introduced rodents on small mammals on islands. Biol Invasions, 2008; 11:1611–1630. DOI: 10.1007/s10530-008-9393-0.
3.
DohertyTS, GlenAS, NimmoDG, et al.Invasive predators and global biodiversity loss. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2016; 113:11261–11265. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1602480113.
4.
StensethNC, LeirsH, SkonhoftA, et al.Mice, rats, and people: the bio-economics of agricultural rodent pests. Front Ecol Environ, 2003; 1:367–375. DOI: 10.2307/3868189.
5.
GregoryS, HendersonW, SmeeE, et al.Eradications of Vertebrate Pests in Australia: A Review and Guidelines for Future Best Practice. Canberra, Australia: Invasive Animals Cooperative Research Centre, 2014, 1–90.
6.
SinkinsSP, GouldF. Gene drive systems for insect disease vectors. Nat Rev Genet, 2006; 7:427–435. DOI: 10.1038/nrg1870.
7.
BurtA, KoufopanouV. Homing endonuclease genes: the rise and fall and rise again of a selfish element. Curr Opin Genet Dev, 2004; 14:609–615. DOI: 10.1016/j.gde.2004.09.010.
8.
LyttleTW. Segregation distorters. Annu Rev Genet, 1991; 1991:511–577. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.ge.25.120191.002455.
9.
ChanYS, TakeuchiR, JarjourJ, et al.The design and in vivo evaluation of engineered I-OnuI-based enzymes for HEG gene drive. PLoS One, 2013; 8:e74254. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0074254.
10.
KelemenRK, VicosoB. Complex history and differentiation patterns of the t-haplotype, a mouse meiotic driver. Genetics, 2018; 208:365–375. DOI: 10.1534/genetics.117.300513.
11.
CharronY, WillertJ, LipkowitzB, et al.Two isoforms of the RAC-specific guanine nucleotide exchange factor TIAM2 act oppositely on transmission ratio distortion by the mouse t-haplotype. PLoS Genet, 2019; 15:e1007964. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1007964.
12.
EsveltKM, SmidlerAL, CatterucciaF, et al.Concerning RNA-guided gene drives for the alteration of wild populations. Elife, 2014; 3:e03401. DOI: 10.7554/eLife.03401.
13.
GantzVM, BierE. The dawn of active genetics. Bioessays, 2016; 38:50–63. DOI: 10.1002/bies.201500102.
14.
ProwseTAA, CasseyP, RossJV, et al.Dodging silver bullets: good CRISPR gene-drive design is critical for eradicating exotic vertebrates. Proc Biol Sci, 2017; 284:20170799. DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2017.0799.
15.
GantzVM, BierE. The mutagenic chain reaction: a method for converting heterozygous to homozygous mutations. Science, 2015; 348:442–444. DOI: 10.1126/science.aaa5945.
16.
ChamperJ, ReevesR, OhSY, et al.Novel CRISPR/Cas9 gene drive constructs reveal insights into mechanisms of resistance allele formation and drive efficiency in genetically diverse populations. PLoS Genet, 2017; 13:e1006796. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1006796.
17.
ChamperJ, LiuJ, OhSY, et al.Reducing resistance allele formation in CRISPR gene drive. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2018; 115:5522–5527. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1720354115.
18.
GantzVM, JasinskieneN, TatarenkovaO, et al.Highly efficient Cas9-mediated gene drive for population modification of the malaria vector mosquito Anopheles stephensi. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2015; 112:E6736–6743. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1521077112.
19.
DiCarloJE, ChavezA, DietzSL, et al.Safeguarding CRISPR-Cas9 gene drives in yeast. Nat Biotechnol, 2015; 33:1250–1255. DOI: 10.1038/nbt.3412.
20.
HammondA, GaliziR, KyrouK, et al.A CRISPR-Cas9 gene drive system targeting female reproduction in the malaria mosquito vector Anopheles gambiae. Nat Biotechnol, 2016; 34:78–83. DOI: 10.1038/nbt.3439.
21.
GrunwaldHA, GantzVM, PoplawskiG, et al.Super-Mendelian inheritance mediated by CRISPR-Cas9 in the female mouse germline. Nature, 2019; 566:105–109. DOI: 10.1038/s41586-019-0875-2.
22.
AkbariOS, BellenHJ, BierE, et al.Safeguarding gene drive experiments in the laboratory. Science, 2015; 349:927–929. DOI: 10.1126/science.aac7932.
23.
RanFA, HsuPD, WrightJ, et al.Genome engineering using the CRISPR-Cas9 system. Nat Protoc, 2013; 8:2281–2308. DOI: 10.1038/nprot.2013.143.
24.
GallardoT, ShirleyL, JohnGB, et al.Generation of a germ cell-specific mouse transgenic Cre line, Vasa-Cre. Genesis, 2007; 45:413–417. DOI: 10.1002/dvg.20310.
25.
WuS, YingG, WuQ, et al.A protocol for constructing gene targeting vectors: generating knockout mice for the cadherin family and beyond. Nat Protoc, 2008; 3:1056–1076. DOI: 10.1038/nprot.2008.70.
26.
HsuPD, ScottDA, WeinsteinJA, et al.DNA targeting specificity of RNA-guided Cas9 nucleases. Nat Biotechnol, 2013; 31:827–832. DOI: 10.1038/nbt.2647.
27.
PlattRJ, ChenS, ZhouY, et al.CRISPR-Cas9 knockin mice for genome editing and cancer modeling. Cell, 2014; 159:440–455. DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2014.09.014.
28.
CongL, RanFA, CoxD, et al.Multiplex genome engineering using CRISPR/Cas systems. Science, 2013; 339:819–823. DOI: 10.1126/science.1231143.
29.
ShanerNC, CampbellRE, SteinbachPA, et al.Improved monomeric red, orange and yellow fluorescent proteins derived from Discosoma sp. red fluorescent protein. Nat Biotechnol, 2004; 22:1567–1572. DOI: 10.1038/nbt1037.
30.
AdikusumaF, PiltzS, CorbettMA, et al.Large deletions induced by Cas9 cleavage. Nature, 2018; 560:E8–E9. DOI: 10.1038/nature23305.
31.
YangH, WangH, ShivalilaCS, et al.One-step generation of mice carrying reporter and conditional alleles by CRISPR/Cas-mediated genome engineering. Cell, 2013; 154:1370–1379. DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2013.08.022.
32.
MaH, Marti-GutierrezN, ParkSW, et al.Correction of a pathogenic gene mutation in human embryos. Nature, 2017; 548:413–419. DOI: 10.1038/nature23305.
33.
EgliD, ZuccaroMV, KosickiM, et al.Inter-homologue repair in fertilized human eggs?. Nature, 2018; 560:E5–E7. DOI: 10.1038/s41586-018-0379-5.
JukamD, ShariatiSAM, SkotheimJM. Zygotic genome activation in vertebrates. Dev Cell, 2017; 42:316–332. DOI: 10.1016/j.devcel.2017.07.026.
36.
LiM, YangT, KandulNP, et al.Development of a confinable gene drive system in the human disease vector Aedes aegypti. Elife, 2020; 9:e51701. DOI: 10.7554/eLife.51701.
37.
Lopez Del AmoV, BishopAL, SanchezCH, et al.A transcomplementing gene drive provides a flexible platform for laboratory investigation and potential field deployment. Nat Commun, 2020; 11:352. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-019-13977-7.
38.
HilzS, ModzelewskiAJ, CohenPE, et al.The roles of microRNAs and siRNAs in mammalian spermatogenesis. Development, 2016; 143:3061–3073. DOI: 10.1242/dev.136721.
39.
TanakaSS, ToyookaY, AkasuR, et al.The mouse homolog of Drosophila Vasa is required for the development of male germ cells. Genes Dev, 2000; 14:841–853. DOI: 10.1101/gad.14.7.841.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
