The genotyping technique described here, which couples fluorescent polymerase chain reaction (PCR) to capillary gel electrophoresis, allows for high-throughput genotyping of nuclease-mediated knockout clones. It circumvents limitations faced by other genotyping techniques and is more cost effective than sequencing methods.
The development of programmable genome-editing tools has facilitated the use of reverse genetics to understand the roles specific genomic sequences play in the functioning of cells and whole organisms. This cause has been tremendously aided by the recent introduction of the CRISPR/Cas9 system-a versatile tool that allows researchers to manipulate the genome and transcriptome in order to, among other things, knock out, knock down, or knock in genes in a targeted manner. For the purpose of knocking out a gene, CRISPR/Cas9-mediated double-strand breaks recruit the non-homologous end-joining DNA repair pathway to introduce the frameshift-causing insertion or deletion of nucleotides at the break site. However, an individual guide RNA may cause undesirable off-target effects, and to rule these out, the use of multiple guide RNAs is necessary. This multiplicity of targets also means that a high-volume screening of clones is required, which in turn begs the use of an efficient high-throughput technique to genotype the knockout clones. Current genotyping techniques either suffer from inherent limitations or incur high cost, hence rendering them unsuitable for high-throughput purposes. Here, we detail the protocol for using fluorescent PCR, which uses genomic DNA from crude cell lysate as a template, and then resolving the PCR fragments via capillary gel electrophoresis. This technique is accurate enough to differentiate one base-pair difference between fragments and hence is adequate in indicating the presence or absence of a frameshift in the coding sequence of the targeted gene. This precise knowledge effectively precludes the need for a confirmatory sequencing step and allows users to save time and cost in the process. Moreover, this technique has proven to be versatile in genotyping various mammalian cells of various tissue origins targeted by guide RNAs against numerous genes, as shown here and elsewhere.
Reverse genetic approaches have allowed scientists to elucidate the effects of specific alterations in the genome on the cell or whole organism. For example, the expression of a particular gene can be attenuated by gene knockdown1,2 (partial reduction) or gene knockout3,4 (complete ablation) in order to determine the effect that this has on the function of the cell or on the development of the organism.
Gene knockout experiments have become easier since the introduction of sequence-specific programmable nucleases, such as zinc-finger nucleases (ZFNs) and transcription activator-like effector nucleases (TALENs). However, the relatively recent characterization of the clustered regularly interspersed short palindromic repeat (CRISPR)/Cas9 system has made it extremely easy for any laboratory around the world to perform gene knockout experiments. In essence, the CRISPR/Cas9 system consists of two essential components-a single guide RNA (sgRNA), which recognizes and binds via base complementarity to a specific sequence in the genome, and an endonuclease called Cas9. The aftermath of the specific binding and action of the sgRNA-Cas9 complex on genomic DNA is the double-strand cleavage of DNA. This, in turn, triggers the DNA damage response mechanism in the cell, which is subsequently repaired via the non-homologous end-joining (NHEJ) or homologous recombination (HR) pathways. Since the NHEJ repair mechanism (but not the HR mechanism) often results in the random insertion or deletion of nucleotides at the site of repair, resulting in insertion/deletion (indel) mutations, it may cause the reading frame of an exon to shift. This may then result in the knockout of the gene due to premature termination of translation and nonsense-mediated decay5,6,7.
Despite the convenience afforded by the introduction of the CRISPR/Cas9 system in knocking out a gene, the genotyping of clones of targeted cells remains a bottleneck, especially in a high-throughput setting8,9. Existing techniques either suffer major inherent limitations or are financially costly. For example, the SURVEYOR or T7E1 assay, which is an enzymatic assay that detects mismatches in DNA duplexes10, is not able to distinguish between wildtype clones and homozygous mutants (clones whose alleles are mutated identically), since these clones have identical alleles and thus do not present mismatches in their DNA sequence11. In addition, the use of Sanger sequencing, which is considered the gold standard in genotyping mutant clones, in a high-throughput setup is undesirable due to its high cost. Here, we present a detailed protocol of the fluorescent PCR-capillary gel electrophoresis technique, which can circumvent the limitations of the other existing genotyping techniques and is particularly useful in performing a high-throughput screen of nuclease-mediated knockout clones. This method is technically simple to perform and saves time and cost.
1. Obtaining CRISPR/Cas9-targeted Single-cell Clones
2. Extracting Crude Genomic DNA Using a Direct Lysis Method
3. Performing Fluorescent PCR to Amplify CRISPR/Cas9 Target Regions
4. Preparing Samples for Capillary Gel Electrophoresis
5. Performing Capillary Gel Electrophoresis on a Genetic Analyzer
6. Analysis of the Electropherogram to Determine Base-pair Differences
7. Verification of the Knockout Status of Clones
The fluorescent PCR-capillary gel electrophoresis technique described here is anticipated to be applicable to any targetable region in the genome in virtually any cell line that is amenable to foreign DNA delivery. We have previously demonstrated its application by targeting three genes in a colorectal cancer cell line12. Here, we show its efficacy in genotyping a hepatocellular carcinoma cell line, HEPG2, targeted with a CRISPR/Cas9 construct against the Nucleosome Assembly Protein 1 Like 1 (NAP1L1) gene. In fact, we have successfully utilized the fluorescent PCR-capillary gel electrophoresis technique to genotype various other cells, including non-human mammalian cell lines, targeted at numerous other genes12,13.
Experiment-wise, the fluorescent PCR-capillary gel electrophoresis technique is easy and fast to perform. After the introduction of Cas9 and sgRNA expression constructs into the cells and the selection of positive clones, the individual clones are lysed directly from the 96-well culture plate using our homemade lysis buffer, Direct-Lyse Buffer12. In our experience, the resulting lysates can be stored at -20 °C or lower for several months without significant loss of genomic DNA quality. The lysis step is followed by the PCR amplification step, which involves the production of fluorophore-tagged amplicons that span the CRISPR target region. The fluorescent PCR protocol provided has been optimized for this purpose and has consistently produced ample PCR products, regardless of the region being amplified. Figure 1 shows a representative result of the resolution of the amplicons derived from the fluorescent PCR step, with each lane corresponding to an individual CRISPR/Cas9-targeted clone and the various bands corresponding to the amplified regions of individual alleles in the clones. In our experience, the use of other polymerases and their concomitant protocols resulted in a lower amplicon yield. Although this can be easily rectified by adjusting the dilution factor during sample preparation for capillary gel electrophoresis, the background or noise level may consequently be higher when amplicons of lower yield are used. After the PCR step, the amplicons are diluted, and those of the wildtype sample and the targeted clones are mixed in equal ratio before they are added to deionized formamide buffer and a size standard, denatured, and resolved on a capillary gel.
After the completion of the capillary gel electrophoresis, the genotyping results are ready to be analyzed. Two important sets of results are required from the electrophoresis run: the electropherograms containing the peaks corresponding to individual fluorescence signals and the result table containing all the necessary values required for calculation. Figure 2 shows the results for the genotyping of two clones targeted by sgRNA against the NAP1L1 gene in HEPG2 cells. The green peaks correspond to the amplicons of the untargeted wildtype allele in the parental HEPG2 cells, whereas the blue peaks correspond to amplicons of the indel mutation-containing alleles of the CRISPR/Cas9-targeted clones. As clearly shown, the two clones are homozygous mutants (mutants with identically mutated alleles), with the deletion of one and ten nucleotides on both alleles. It is important to note that the electropherograms are used for visualization purposes only, whereas the peak values are important in determining the number of base pair differences between the amplicon of the targeted clones and that of the wildtype cells.
To validate the authenticity of the knockout status, we recommend performing Sanger sequencing and Western blot analysis to confirm the abolition of gene expression in the cells. The two clones identified above gave Sanger sequencing results consistent with the fluorescent PCR-capillary gel electrophoresis results (Figure 3A). They also displayed complete ablation of NAP1L1 protein expression (Figure 3B), as expected of knockout clones.
Figure 1: PCR Amplicons of HEPG2 Clones Targeted by CRISPR/Cas9 Against the NAP1L1 Gene. Amplicons of the fluorescent PCR step were resolved on two separate agarose gels (top and bottom), and each lane corresponds to an individual targeted clone. L: DNA ladder (the sizes of individual bands are given next to the diagram). Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 2: Plots of Fluorescence Signals from Two Samples Resolved via Capillary Gel Electrophoresis. The horizontal axis represents the fragment size and the vertical axis represents the fluorescence signal intensity. The blue peaks correspond to fragments derived from CRISPR/Cas9-mediated targeted clones, while the green peaks correspond to fragments derived from wildtype cells. Magenta lines correspond to automatic peak-calling positions determined by the analysis software, which marks positions that consistently show peaks across samples. The values provided next to individual peaks correspond to the sizes of the fragments (in bp) and are obtained from the analysis software. The values in parentheses depict the calculated difference in size between individual fragments from a targeted clone and the wildtype fragment. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 3: The Results of Assays to Confirm the Knockout of the targeted gene in two clones. (A) Sanger sequencing results and (B) Western blot analysis using antibodies against the indicated protein. Nucleotides in blue represent the sgRNA target sequence, the ones in red represent the protospacer adjacent motif (PAM), the ones in brown represent base-substituted nucleotides, and the dashes represent the positions where the nucleotide are deleted in the allele. The values in parentheses next to the individual clone names represent the genotype of the alleles of the clone; "-1" and "-10" means that the alleles contain a deletion of one and ten nucleotides, respectively. Approximate size of proteins detected in the Western blot analyses: ~ 54 kDa for NAP1L1 and ~ 84 kDa for p84 (loading control). Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Reagent | Volume for one reaction (μl) |
Kit specific solution | 4 |
10x PCR Buffer | 2 |
10 μM forward primer (labeled) | 1 |
10 μM reverse primer (unlabeled) | 1 |
25 mM dNTP mix | 0.4 |
Taq DNA Polymerase | 0.2 |
Water | 8.4 |
Diluted lysate | 3 |
Total | 20 |
Table 1: Reagents for the Fluorescent PCR Reaction.
The knocking out of a specific gene in a model cell line of choice has become routine for elucidating the role that the gene plays in that particular cellular context. In fact, several genome-wide screens are currently available that use the CRISPR/Cas9 system to target virtually all known human genes in the genome14,15,16. With these large-scale screens (or even small-scale targeting of individual genes of interest), it is important to design and utilize sgRNAs targeting different loci of the same gene. Consistent results across the different sgRNAs used would unambiguously capitulate the true effect of the depletion of the gene. As such, the targeting of one single gene would require a high-volume genotyping step to accurately genotype a multitude of clones from each of the individual sgRNA used. The fluorescent PCR-capillary gel electrophoresis technique described here can precisely perform this task.
Whilst most of the existing genotyping methods are amenable to high-throughput purposes, each of them suffers from certain inherent limitations that render them less than ideal. The SURVEYOR, or T7E1, assay, which detects mismatches in DNA duplexes10, is not able to differentiate between wildtype cells and homozygous mutants (clones with two identically mutated alleles) due to the fact that both these clones yield duplexes devoid of mismatches11. The restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) assay, which reports the disappearance of restriction sites due to indel mutations in the CRISPR target region17, is limited by the availability of suitable restriction sites at the target region18. The DNA melting analysis technique, which discerns the different genotypes based on their melting curves19,20, suffers from a lack of consistency. In addition, all three of these methods are not particularly informative in that they do not report the occurrence of a frameshift in the genetic sequence. In contrast, Sanger sequencing – which is presently the most popular genotyping technique – is extremely informative, since it provides the exact sequence of the genomic region being targeted. However, this technique is costly, especially in large-scale experiments. Thus, the characterization of the fluorescent PCR-capillary gel electrophoresis technique described here is vital because it can circumvent all the limitations faced by the other techniques described above.
The fluorescent PCR-capillary gel electrophoresis technique enables users to distinguish between all possible genotypes a clone may exist in-wildtype, heterozygous mutant (characterized by a wildtype allele and a mutant allele), homozygous mutant (characterized by two identical mutant alleles), and compound heterozygous mutant (characterized by two non-identical mutant alleles). These genotypes are easily differentiable by the peak patterns in the electropherogram. Furthermore, this genotyping technique reports the difference between the fragment size of the wildtype amplicon and that of the targeted clones and is accurate to a single base pair. This effectively reports the presence or absence of a frameshift in the genetic sequence, allowing the users to reduce their validation to only a handful of clones, saving them time and cost. On top of that, this technique also allows for the multiplexing of gene targeting (i.e., it can concurrently genotype more than one target), and it enables the detection of a heterogeneous cell population from the presence of aberrant peak patterns (e.g., the presence of three or more peaks in the electropherogram of diploid cells). In addition to the cell lines used here and previously12,13, we have also successfully genotyped various other human and non-human cell lines, including stem cells and neuronal cells (unpublished data), using the fluorescent PCR-capillary gel electrophoresis technique, and we anticipate that this technique is applicable to any cells that are amenable to CRISPR/Cas9 targeting. Moreover, since this technique reports the genotype of individual alleles in the cell, it is extremely useful in genotyping multi-allelic cells, such as cancer cells that have aneuploidy or genetic amplifications.
The protocol described here (including all the material used) has been optimized for the versatile and reproducible genotyping of CRISPR/Cas9-targeted clones. Nevertheless, there are some parts that warrant modification. They include, but are not limited to: 1) the use of a different sgRNA expression vector (or cloning strategy), which may necessitate the use of a different selection strategy (e.g., the antibiotic selection of clones instead of FACS); 2) the use of a different polymerase for the fluorescent PCR step; and 3) the use of different fluorescent labels. Moreover, it is worth noting that a couple of essential steps in the protocol may prove problematic. For one, the fluorescent PCR amplicons may yield unspecific bands in the agarose gel electropherogram, or the peak pattern in the capillary gel electropherogram may be "noisy." This is likely due to the sub-optimal quality of the PCR primers and therefore can be rectified by re-designing these primers. We recommend testing the quality of the primers using unlabeled oligonucleotides prior to procuring the fluorophore-labeled ones to ensure the consistency, reproducibility, and specificity of the amplification step. The other important factor to note is the efficiency of the CRISPR guide RNA, which may determine the rate of obtaining true positive knockout clones. Since none of the sgRNA search programs that are currently available are foolproof, the efficacy of each individual sgRNA can only be determined empirically. Thus, it is important to design and utilize more than one sgRNA (preferably three or more) for each targeted gene to reduce the chance of not obtaining a successful knockout clone.
Whilst the fluorescent PCR-capillary gel electrophoresis technique is informative, sensitive, and easy to use, it comes with some caveats. First, this technique requires the use of a genetic analyzer, which may not be readily available. However, since the genetic analyzer used for this purpose is the same one used for Sanger sequencing experiments, the capillary gel electrophoresis protocol may be outsourced to existing Sanger sequencing service providers. In fact, we have previously arranged with our sequencing service provider to perform the capillary gel electrophoresis protocol at a cost comparable to when done in-house. Second, the accuracy of the technique may suffer when indel mutations longer than 30 bp are involved. In our experience, the fluorescent PCR-capillary gel electrophoresis technique tends to underestimate the size of the indels when large indels (>30 bp) are observed. However, in our experience, a vast majority of mutants displayed very short indel mutation lengths (most are less than 5 bp). Nonetheless, this is highly dependent on the CRISPR target site and cell line used. Third, the fluorescent PCR-capillary gel electrophoresis technique is not able to detect base substitutions upon NHEJ repair at the CRISPR/Cas9 cut site. Nevertheless, it has been reported that base substitution as a result of the NHEJ repair of double-stranded breaks is a rare event21, and they do not deleteriously alter the reading frame of the gene. Fourth, this technique only detects changes in the target region amplified in the fluorescent PCR step and thus does not report any off-target aberrations (genetic changes outside the amplified region). If such a comprehensive survey of the off-target effects of individual CRISPR sgRNA is required, we recommend whole genome sequencing to accurately detect any changes in the genome of the targeted clones. However, this rather costly experiment is not necessary if more than one sgRNA is used per targeted gene, as discussed above. Last, the fluorescent PCR-capillary gel electrophoresis technique described here has a fragment size limit of 600 bp. This may pose a problem if the target region consists of repeated sequences or has exceptionally high guanine-cytosine (GC) content, which may affect PCR amplification efficiency and specificity. This easily preventable problem stresses the importance of careful sgRNA target design, which must include proper consideration for the appropriate amplification of the targeted region. Thus, considering the strengths and caveats of the fluorescent PCR-capillary gel electrophoresis technique, this facile method of genotyping may ease the burden of high-volume genotyping of knockout clones, which remains a bottleneck to this day.
The authors have nothing to disclose.
The authors would like to thank Ms. Tan Shi Min, Ms. Helen Ong, and Dr. Zhao Yi for helping with the capillary gel electrophoresis experiments. This work was supported by NMRC/IRG grant NMRC/1314/2011 and MOE AcRF Tier 2 Fund grant MOE2011-T2-1-051.
HEPG2 cells | ATCC | HB-8065 | |
HyClone Dulbecco's Modified Eagles Medium (DMEM) | Thermo Fisher Scientific | SH30022.01 | |
HyClone Fetal Bovine Serum | Thermo Fisher Scientific | SV30160.03 | |
pSpCas9(BB)-2A-GFP plasmid | Addgene | PX458 | |
Lipofectamine 2000 | Thermo Fisher Scientific | 11668027 | |
Trypsin-EDTA (0.25%), phenol red | Thermo Fisher Scientific | 25200056 | |
Trypsin-EDTA (0.5%), no phenol red | Thermo Fisher Scientific | 15400054 | |
Penicillin-Streptomycin (10,000 U/mL) | Thermo Fisher Scientific | 15140122 | |
HyClone Water, Molecular Biology Grade | GE Healthcare | SH30538.02 | |
CRISPR sgRNA insert oligonucleotide (sense) | AITbiotech | None | Sequence: 5'-CACCGCTAACCTTTCAGCCTGCCTA-3' |
CRISPR sgRNA insert oligonucleotide (anti-sense) | AITbiotech | None | Sequence: 5'-AAACTAGGCAGGCTGAAAGGTTAGC-3' |
Unlabeled PCR amplification forward primer | AITbiotech | None | Sequence: 5'-CACTAACTCCAATGCTTCAGTTTC-3'; this primer is also used to sequence PCR amplified alleles |
6-FAM-labeled fluorescent PCR forward primer | AITbiotech | None | Sequence: 5'-6-FAM-CACTAACTCCAATGCTTCAGTTTC-3' |
HEX-labeled fluorescent PCR forward primer | AITbiotech | None | Sequence: 5'-HEX-CACTAACTCCAATGCTTCAGTTTC-3' |
Unlabeled PCR reverse primer | AITbiotech | None | Sequence: 5'-CCTCTTCCAAGTCTGCTTATGT-3' |
Taq PCR Core Kit | QIAGEN | 201223 | |
Hi-Di Formamide | Thermo Fisher Scientific | 4311320 | |
GeneScan 500 LIZ Dye Size Standard | Thermo Fisher Scientific | 4322682 | |
MicroAmp Optical 96-Well Reaction Plate | Thermo Fisher Scientific | 4306737 | |
3500xL Genetic Analyzer | Thermo Fisher Scientific | 4405633 | |
3500 Series 2 program | Thermo Fisher Scientific | 4476988 | |
Gene Mapper 5 program | Thermo Fisher Scientific | 4475073 | |
Gentra Puregene Cell Kit | QIAGEN | 1045696 | |
Wizard SV Gel and PCR Clean-Up System | Promega | A9282 | |
NAP1L1 Antibody (N-term) | Abgent | AP1920b | |
Nuclear Matrix Protein p84 antibody [5E10] | GeneTex | GTX70220 | |
Peroxidase AffiniPure Goat Anti-Rabbit IgG | Jackson ImmunoResearch | 111-035-144 | |
Peroxidase AffiniPure Sheep Anti-Mouse IgG | Jackson ImmunoResearch | 515-035-003 |