A Genome-Wide Collection of Mos1 Transposon Insertion Mutants for the C. elegans Research Community

Vallin, Elodie; Gallagher, Joseph J.; Granger, Laure; Martin, Edwige; Belougne, Jérôme; Maurizio, Julien; Duverger, Yohann; Scaglione, Sarah; Borrel, Caroline; Cortier, Elisabeth; Abouzid, Karima; Carre-Pierrat, Maïté; Gieseler, Kathrin; Ségalat, Laurent; Kuwabara, Patricia E.; Ewbank, Jonathan J.

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0030482

Cited by 49 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A strain containing a genomic Mos1 -insertion near or in a target gene is identified. The NemaGENETAG Consortium created a collection of over 13,000 Mos1 -tagged alleles [102, 103]. The Mos1 -insertion strains are annotated on MosLocator (http://www.ciml.univmrs.fr/applications/MosLocator/) and Wormbase, and they are available to researchers through the Consortium (http://ums3421.univ-lyon1.fr).…”

Section: Gene-targeted Mutagenesismentioning

confidence: 99%

Forward and reverse mutagenesis in C. elegans

Kutscher

Shaham

2014

WormBook

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mutagenesis drives natural selection. In the lab, mutations allow gene function to be deciphered. C. elegans is highly amendable to functional genetics because of its short generation time, ease of use, and wealth of available gene-alteration techniques. Here we provide an overview of historical and contemporary methods for mutagenesis in C. elegans, and discuss principles and strategies for forward (genome-wide mutagenesis) and reverse (target-selected and gene-specific mutagenesis) genetic studies in this animal.

show abstract

Section: Gene-targeted Mutagenesismentioning

confidence: 99%

Forward and reverse mutagenesis in C. elegans

Kutscher

Shaham

2014

WormBook

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Instead, investigators have relied on random mutagenesis followed by molecular screening. For example, large transposon collections have been generated in Drosophila melanogaster, Arabidopsis thaliana, and Caenorhabditis elegans (Kuromori et al 2004;Bellen et al 2011;Vallin et al 2012). These impressive collections are still incomplete and involve the storage of large numbers of strains.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The million mutation project: A new approach to genetics in Caenorhabditis elegans

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We have created a library of 2007 mutagenized Caenorhabditis elegans strains, each sequenced to a target depth of 15-fold coverage, to provide the research community with mutant alleles for each of the worm's more than 20,000 genes. The library contains over 800,000 unique single nucleotide variants (SNVs) with an average of eight nonsynonymous changes per gene and more than 16,000 insertion/deletion (indel) and copy number changes, providing an unprecedented genetic resource for this multicellular organism. To supplement this collection, we also sequenced 40 wild isolates, identifying more than 630,000 unique SNVs and 220,000 indels. Comparison of the two sets demonstrates that the mutant collection has a much richer array of both nonsense and missense mutations than the wild isolate set. We also find a wide range of rDNA and telomere repeat copy number in both sets. Scanning the mutant collection for molecular phenotypes reveals a nonsense suppressor as well as strains with higher levels of indels that harbor mutations in DNA repair genes and strains with abundant males associated with him mutations. All the strains are available through the Caenorhabditis Genetics Center and all the sequence changes have been deposited in WormBase and are available through an interactive website.

show abstract

“…These techniques all rely on the induction of DNA double-strand breaks through reactivation of an inserted Mos1 transposon, followed by homologous recombination with an exogenously provided template. Although exceptionally useful, they require a Mos1 transposon insertion within or close to the genomic region to modify, a condition unmet for a significant portion of the coding genome (Vallin et al 2012).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%