Comparison of genome engineering using the CRISPR-Cas9 system in C. glabrata wild-type and lig4 strains

Abstract

Candida glabrata is reported as the second most prevalent human opportunistic fungal pathogen in North America and is threatening patients all over the world. Its incidence is rising, while it has developed resistance to the most widely used antifungal drugs, necessitating new approaches based on better insight into the biology of the organism. Despite its close phylogenetic relationship with Saccharomyces cerevisiae, generating precise genomic alterations in this species is problematic. Previously we have shown that deletion of LIG4, which encodes an enzyme involved in Non-Homologous End Joining (NHEJ), strongly enhances the probability of obtaining correctly modified transformants. In this work we used the Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats (CRISPR) and CRISPR associated protein 9 (Cas9) system to genetically engineer the C. glabrata genome, targeting the genes ADE2, MET15 and SOK2, located on different chromosomes. We used the CRISPR-Cas9 technology to replace the open reading frame (ORF) by the SAT1 selective marker or introduced a premature stop codon in ADE2 and MET15, as they are easily scored by their adenine or methionine auxotrophy, respectively. The SOK2 gene was modified by insertion of a triple HA-tag sequence and the transformants were verified in a western blot. The CRISPR-Cas9 mediated targeting efficiency varies depending on the gene targeted and the genetic modification performed. We show that CRISPR-Cas9 mediated genome editing is more efficient than the conventional method in the wild-type strain, moreover it has the big advantage being marker-free. In previous work, we showed that the targeting efficiency is highly increased in the lig4Δ strain using the conventional way to delete genes in C. glabrata. Using the CRISPR-Cas9 system in this strain, the percentage of correct transformants is consistently higher compared to the wild-type strain. This indicates that using the lig4 mutant as such is already a strong improvement, while the CRISPR-Cas9 gives the additional advantage of not leaving a scar or marker and that it therefore can be used to generate multiple modifications.