|
|
||||||||
1From the Telethon Institute of Genetics and Medicine, Naples, Italy; the 2Laboratory of Molecular Eye Development, Research Center for Environment and Health, Institute of Mammalian Genetics, Neuherberg, Germany; the 3Department of Pathophysiology of Vision and Neuro-Ophthalmology, University Eye Hospital, Tübingen, Germany; and the 4Department of Medical Genetics, Second University of Naples, Naples, Italy.
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
METHODS. A construct was prepared containing tTA1 under control of the murine rhodopsin regulatory region. This construct was used for the generation of transgenic mice. In situ hybridization was performed to study the distribution of the transactivator in the retina. The activity of the transactivator was analyzed by mating the lines with a luciferase reporter transgenic mouse. tTA1 activity and doxycyclines ability to block it were analyzed by luciferase assay. The effects of tTA1 on the retina were assessed by histology and electrophysiology.
RESULTS. Two transgenic lines were developed that specifically express tTA1 in photoreceptor cells. The time course of transgene expression replicated transcription of endogenous rhodopsin. tTA1 was not toxic to the retina. Transactivator activity was blocked readily by doxycycline.
CONCLUSIONS. An expression system for photoreceptor cells was generated to drive transcription in a cell-specific and time-controllable manner. This system is suitable for the study of factors involved in retinal biology and of mutant forms of genes involved in retinal diseases.
A cell-specific expression of tTA1 in rod photoreceptor cells can be obtained with the characterized rhodopsin promoter.9 We generated transgenic mice in which a transgene can be specifically expressed in rod photoreceptor cells and can be easily inactivated at a defined time. In this article we present the characterization of two different transgenic mouse lines that express tTA1 in the photoreceptor cell layer, with temporal and spatial profiles similar to those of the endogenous rhodopsin gene.9 We assessed the transactivators activity and the response to doxycycline by mating the two transgenic lines with reporter mice (L7) carrying the luciferase gene downstream to tetO.2 The results demonstrate that the two lines have different expression patterns of tTA1 in the photoreceptor layer. However, both lines responded quickly to doxycycline treatment. Therefore, our system can be used to express genes involved in retinal biology and pathology and is helpful in the study of pathogenetic events leading to retinal degeneration.
| Material and Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Constructs
The 314-bp fragment from the EcoRI site to the ATG of the murine rhodopsin gene9 was amplified from mouse genomic DNA using as primers oligo forward, 5'-GAGTTCAGGAGGAGACATTG-3', and oligo reverse, 5'-GCTCTAGACATGGCTGCGGCTCTCGAG-3'. The PCR product was cloned in the pUHD21-1 vector upstream to the tTA1 sequence, using the XbaI site.8 We then cloned, at the EcoRI site, the 4.0-kb fragment (from KnpI to EcoRI) of the rhodopsin promoter region (a kind gift from Muna Naash). This construct was named RhotTA1.
Production of the Transgenic Mice
Transgenic founder mice were generated by pronuclear injection, by standard techniques.10 The transgene was excised as a 5.6-kb ClaI fragment, purified from agarose gel with kit (QIAquick Gel Extraction; Basel, Switzerland) and microinjected into pronuclei of one-cell embryos from superovulating CD-1 mice (Charles River, Sulzfeld, Germany). Transgenic animals were identified by PCR and Southern blot analysis of genomic DNA prepared from tail samples.11 For PCR analysis tTA-specific primers were used: tTA forward (tTAf), 5'-ATGAGGTCGGAATCGAAGG-3'; and tTA reverse (tTAr), 5'-GGCATACTATCAGTAGTAGG-3'.
For Southern blot analysis, 12 µg genomic DNA was digested with the NsiI restriction enzyme, cutting once within the transgene; fractionated on 0.8% agarose gel; and transferred onto a nylon membrane (Hybond-N+; Amersham Pharmacia Biotech, Zurich, Switzerland). Blots were probed with the tTA PCR fragment labeled using a random prime labeling system (Rediprime II; Amersham Pharmacia Biotech).
Reverse TranscriptionPolymerase Chain Reaction
RT-PCR was performed as previously described.12 Total RNA was purified from retinas harvested from postnatal day (P)6, P7, P8, P9, and P13 and adult transgenic mice. tTAf and tTAr primers were used for PCR analysis.
Luciferase Assay
tTA1 transgenic mice (RhotTA1-L5 and RhotTA1-L32) were bred with luciferase reporter L7 mice.2 Animals carrying both the transactivator (tTA1) and reporter (L7) genes were killed at different ages after birth. Eyes were enucleated and homogenized in 300 µL of 1x passive lysis buffer (Promega, Mannheim, Germany). A portion (20 µL) of the homogenate was used to assay luciferase activity (Luciferase Reporter Assay System; Promega) in a luminometer (AutoLumat; EG&G Berthold, Natick, MA). Luciferase activity was normalized to protein concentration and expressed as relative light units per microgram of total protein (RLU/µg). Transgenic mice were killed for assay at the following time points: P8 (RhotTA1-L5, n = 6; RhotTA1-L32, n = 9), P13 (RhotTA1-L5, n = 6; RhotTA1-L32, n = 4), and P20 (RhotTA1-L5, n = 13; and RhotTA1-L32, n = 19). Four other groups of P15 animals were exposed for either 1 or 10 days to doxycycline (Sigma, Milan, Italy) dissolved in their drinking water (2 mg/mL) containing 5% sucrose.
In Situ Hybridization
Mice eyes were harvested at P13 and P20, fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde, and embedded in paraffin. Sections (7 µm) were dewaxed and treated with 0.2% HCl for 15 minutes. Samples were incubated for 15 minutes in 20 µg/mL proteinase K, then washed with 0.4% glycine in PBS and postfixed with 4% paraformaldehyde. Acetylation with 0.2 M triethanolamine-HCl (pH 8.0) containing 0.25% acetic anhydride was performed twice for 5 minutes at RT. Slides were extensively washed in water and air dried. Sections were hybridized overnight at 65°C with 1 µg/mL digoxigenin-labeled riboprobes in 50% formamide, 1x Denhardts solution, 3x SSC, 10% dextran sulfate, 500 µg/mL tRNA, and 500 µg/mL salmon sperm DNA.
The 450-bp tTA PCR fragment was used as a template for transcription, either with T3 RNA polymerase after linearization with XhoI (antisense probe) or with T7 RNA polymerase after digestion with XbaI (sense control probe). The luciferase antisense probe was obtained by digestion with PstI and transcription with T3 RNA polymerase (Roche Molecular Biochemicals, Mannheim, Germany), and the sense control probe was synthesized with T7 RNA polymerase (Roche) after digestion with XbaI.
After hybridization, slides were washed in 50% formamide and 2x SSC at 65°C and then equilibrated in NTE (0.5 M NaCl, 10 mM Tris-HCl [pH 8], and 5 mM EDTA), and treated with 20 µg/mL RNase A for 30 minutes at 37°C in NTE. After washing with 50% formamide, 1x SSC at 65°C and then with 2x SSC at RT, sections were blocked for 1 hour at RT with 1% blocking reagent (Roche) in MAB-T solution (100 mM maleic acid, 150 mM NaCl, 0.1% Tween-20 [pH 7.5]). Anti-digoxigenin-AP conjugate antibody (1:2000; Roche) in 1% blocking solution was incubated over night at 4°C. After extensive washes with TBS (100 mM Tris-HCl [pH 7.5], and 150 mM NaCl) and NTM (100 mM NaCl, 100 mM Tris-HCl [pH 9.5], and 50 mM MgCl2), sections were exposed to the nitroblue tetrazolium/5-bromo-4-chloro-3-indoyl phosphate (NBT-BCIP) substrate for alkaline phosphate (Sigma). Reaction was observed with a microscope and blocked with 4% paraformaldehyde for 20 minutes. Slides were coverslipped with 70% glycerol in PBS and photographed using a microscope with Nomarski optics (Axioplan; Carl Zeiss, Oberkochen, Germany).
Histologic Analysis
Eyes enucleated from adult transgenic mice were fixed overnight in Carnoys solution at 4°C, embedded using a kit (JB-4 Plus Embedding Kit; Polyscience, Inc., Eppelheim, Germany) and sectioned parallel to the sagittal plane. Sections (1 µm) were stained with 50% methylene blue and 50% azure II.
Electroretinograms
Animals were dark adapted for 12 hours and anesthetized with 100 mg/kg body weight ketamine and 5 mg xylazine. Pupils were dilated with 1 drop of a mixture of 1.7% tropicamide and 3.3% of phenylephrine. The ground electrode was a subcutaneous needle in the tail, the reference electrode was placed subcutaneously between the eyes, and the active electrodes were gold wires placed on the cornea below the pupil with a drop of methylhydroxypropyl cellulose (Methocel; Dow Chemical Co., Zürich, Switzerland). Measurements were performed on 6-month-old animals, with five mice in each group.
Recordings were made simultaneously in both eyes with a data acquisition system (Espion Console; Diagnosys LLC, Littleton, MA). The mouse was placed on a specially designed operating table that also contained the electrode mounts (High-Throughput Mouse-ERG; STZ for Biomedical Optics and Functiontesting, Tübingen, Germany) which could be introduced into a Ganzfeld LED stimulator (Espion ColorBurst; Diagnosys LLC). All electroretinographic (ERG) responses were obtained within 30 minutes after injection of anesthesia.13
Pulses of 10 ms were delivered at a frequency of 0.48 Hz. Results were obtained at 11 steps with illumination levels as indicated by the manufacturers setting at 0.5 x 10-3, 12.5 x 10-3, 25 x 10-3, 125 x 10-3, 500 x 10-3, 125, 5, 12.5, 50, 125, and 500 cd/sec per meter after 5 to 20 averaging.
A statistical analysis program (Matlab; the MathWorks, Natick, MA) was used to search for maxima and minima in predefined time windows to determine amplitudes, which were checked manually. Left and right eyes of all mice within one group were averaged for dark- and light-adapted ERGs separately. The Naka-Rushton fits for the amplitude of the b-wave14 15 16 17 were iteratively performed by computer (Delphi software; Borland Software Corp., Scotts Valley, CA) to determine the values of n and k for each mouse, until a least-square fit over all luminance-levels reached a minimum. Vmax is the maximum of the b-wave amplitude, k is the intensity at which the b-wave amplitude reaches half saturation, and n is a dimensionless constant related to the slope of the intensity-response function. The significance of differences between groups in all three parameters of Naka-Rushton fit and the a-wave amplitude were evaluated by Kruskal-Wallis followed by the Scheffes F post hoc test.
| Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
Specificity of tTA1 Expression in Transgenic Mice
We analyzed expression of tTA1 by in situ hybridization in sections from retinas harvested from the two transgenic mice. Expression of the transactivator was found only in the outer nuclear layer of the transgenic retinas (Figs. 2A 2E 2C 2G) . At 13 days after birth, tTA1 transcripts were detectable in both lines (Figs. 2A 2C) , and, at P20, expression was evident and well distributed in the photoreceptor cells (Figs. 2E 2G) . When we analyzed contiguous sections from the temporal to the nasal side of the eye, we did not notice differences in distribution of the transcripts.
|
|
|
|
|
Doxycyclines Effect on tTA1 Activity
The major advantage of the tTA1 system is that transcription can be blocked by the use of doxycycline. We therefore studied whether doxycycline treatment of RhotTA1/L7 mice blocks reporter gene expression. We added 2 mg/mL doxycycline in the drinking water of RhotTA1/L7 mice. We found that the response to the antibiotic was very rapid. In fact, 1 day of exposure to doxycycline was sufficient to block expression completely in RhotTA1-L5 mice (0.35 ± 0.07 RLU/µg; Fig. 4A ). Inactivation of tTA1 was maintained for a long time (10 days) by continued administration of the antibiotic (Fig. 4A) . Luciferase activity after doxycycline treatment was comparable to the activity from L7 single-transgenic mice (0.5 RLU/µg). In RhotTA1-L32 mice, suppression was not complete after 24 hours (Fig. 4B) . However, a longer exposure to doxycycline brought expression of luciferase to basal levels (0.66 ± 0.1 RLU/µg; Fig. 4B ).
We also analyzed the effect of doxycycline at the histologic level, by using in situ hybridization. One day after the addition of doxycycline to the drinking water, luciferase mRNA was not detectable, whereas, as expected, expression of tTA1 was not affected (Figs. 2I 2J 2K 2L 2M 2N 2O 2P) .
Finally, we studied whether we could induce tTA1 activity to resume. We withdrew the antibiotic from the drinking water after 3 days of treatment and tested luciferase activity at different time points. We found that, in 3-week-old mice, luciferase activity started to be detectable 4 days after we stopped the treatment (in RhotTA1-L5 mice it reached 51 ± 39 RLU/µg and in RhotTA1-L32 3628 ± 7730 RLU/µg). These data are in accordance with those of Robertson et al.20
| Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
In this report, we present data on two different transgenic lines expressing tTA1 in rod photoreceptors. To assess the system we used three techniques: histology, in situ hybridization, and enzymatic assay. Histology of the retina from transgenic mice showed that expression of tTA1 did not cause morphologic changes in the photoreceptor cells. Furthermore, no statistically significant difference was found between wild-type and transgenic mice in the dark-adapted or, in other words, rod-dominated ERG, as indicated by the parameters Vmax, k, and, n of the Naka-Rushton fits of the b-wave amplitudes. The a-wave analysis demonstrated that photoreceptor function was unaltered in the transgenic mice. A reduced Vmax, observed solely in the light-adapted or cone-dominated state in RhotTA1-L5 mice, without any impairment of sensitivity (as shown by the parameters n and k of the Naka-Rushton fits) and without any reduction in a-wave amplitude could point to a limited alteration of the inner retinal layer or the synaptic transmission from the cone system to it. Considering the fact that rhodopsin is only expressed in rod photoreceptor cells, the difference in Vmax can probably be attributed to the fact that CD1 mice are outbred or to the small sample size, which could not overcome interindividual variability. That the rod system of the transgenic mice was not altered in any of the electrophysiologically tested parameters is in good accordance with histologic findings.
The cell specificity of transcription of the transgene was analyzed by in situ hybridization. Both lines showed specific expression of tTA1 in the photoreceptor nuclear layer. However, transcript distribution in the retina did not show a homogeneous pattern, and we detected photoreceptors highly expressing tTA1 among cells with lower level of expression. Heterogeneous expression of transgenes is a common phenomenon in mice and has been reported in many transgenic lines.20 21 22 This effect was more evident in one of the two lines (RhotTA1-L32), whereas expression was more homogeneous in RhotTA1-L5. However, when we analyzed the distribution of expression in the entire retina we found that tTA1 activated transcription in the entire adult organ and transcription of tTA1 started at the same time as that of endogenous rhodopsin.18
Finally, tTA1 transcriptional activity was studied by breeding the transgenic lines with the L7 reporter line. We analyzed the ability of tTA1 to activate transcription in vivo in the retina by measuring the amount of luciferase activity. Based on an enzymatic luciferase assay, we defined good transactivation activity in both lines, demonstrating that the system works well in the retina. Then, by feeding the mice with doxycycline, we showed that a 1-day treatment is effective in completely inactivating the transgene in RhotTA1-L5. RhotTA1-L32 needs a longer exposure to the antibiotic to block the activity of tTA1. These data demonstrate that RhotTA1 transgenic mice are a versatile system to control expression in the photoreceptor cells. The rapid response to low doses of antibiotic makes these mice an effective tool for functional studies in retinal biology. Furthermore, this animal model represents an important component in the development of therapies that may be applied to human diseases in the future.
| Acknowledgements |
|---|
| Footnotes |
|---|
Submitted for publication April 5, 2002; revised June 13 and August 20, 2002; accepted September 5, 2002.
Commercial relationships policy: N.
The publication costs of this article were defrayed in part by page charge payment. This article must therefore be marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C.
1734 solely to indicate this fact.
Corresponding author: Valeria Marigo, Telethon Institute of Genetics and Medicine, via P. Castellino, 111 Naples, Italy; marigo{at}tigem.it.
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
Y.-Z. Le, W. Zheng, P.-C. Rao, L. Zheng, R. E. Anderson, N. Esumi, D. J. Zack, and M. Zhu Inducible Expression of Cre Recombinase in the Retinal Pigmented Epithelium Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., March 1, 2008; 49(3): 1248 - 1253. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. Dalke, J. Loster, H. Fuchs, V. Gailus-Durner, D. Soewarto, J. Favor, A. Neuhauser-Klaus, W. Pretsch, F. Gekeler, K. Shinoda, et al. Electroretinography as a Screening Method for Mutations Causing Retinal Dysfunction in Mice Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., February 1, 2004; 45(2): 601 - 609. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |