RNAi rescue

Yanhui Hu, Aram Comjean, Charles Roesel, Arunachalam Vinayagam, Ian Flockhart, Jonathan Zirin, Lizabeth Perkins, Norbert Perrimon, and Stephanie E Mohr. 10/11/2016. “FlyRNAi.org—the database of the Drosophila RNAi screening center and transgenic RNAi project: 2017 update.” Nucleic Acids Research. Publisher's VersionAbstract

The FlyRNAi database of the Drosophila RNAi Screening Center (DRSC) and Transgenic RNAi Project (TRiP) at Harvard Medical School and associated DRSC/TRiP Functional Genomics Resources website (http://fgr.hms.harvard.edu) serve as a reagent production tracking system, screen data repository, and portal to the community. Through this portal, we make available protocols, online tools, and other resources useful to researchers at all stages of high-throughput functional genomics screening, from assay design and reagent identification to data analysis and interpretation. In this update, we describe recent changes and additions to our website, database and suite of online tools. Recent changes reflect a shift in our focus from a single technology (RNAi) and model species (Drosophila) to the application of additional technologies (e.g. CRISPR) and support of integrated, cross-species approaches to uncovering gene function using functional genomics and other approaches.

Benjamin E Housden, Matthias Muhar, Matthew Gemberling, Charles A Gersbach, Didier YR Stainier, Geraldine Seydoux, Stephanie E Mohr, Johannes Zuber, and Norbert Perrimon. 10/31/2016. “Loss-of-function genetic tools for animal models: cross-species and cross-platform differences.” Nat Rev Genet. Publisher's VersionAbstract

Our understanding of the genetic mechanisms that underlie biological processes has relied extensively on loss-of-function (LOF) analyses. LOF methods target DNA, RNA or protein to reduce or to ablate gene function. By analysing the phenotypes that are caused by these perturbations the wild-type function of genes can be elucidated. Although all LOF methods reduce gene activity, the choice of approach (for example, mutagenesis, CRISPR-based gene editing, RNA interference, morpholinos or pharmacological inhibition) can have a major effect on phenotypic outcomes. Interpretation of the LOF phenotype must take into account the biological process that is targeted by each method. The practicality and efficiency of LOF methods also vary considerably between model systems. We describe parameters for choosing the optimal combination of method and system, and for interpreting phenotypes within the constraints of each method.

Publication describes TRiP resources

Publication describes TRiP resources

July 8, 2016

Liz Perkins and colleagues have published a paper describing the Drosophila Transgenic RNAi Project (TRiP) at Harvard Medical School. The article, published in the November 1, 2015 issue of Geneticsdetails the TRiP production pipeline, reagents generated, state of the collection, and validation efforts.

This is a great introduction to the many in vivo RNAi resources the DRSC/TRiP-FGR provides to the scientific community.

Click...

Read more about Publication describes TRiP resources
Ian T Flockhart, Matthew Booker, Yanhui Hu, Benjamin McElvany, Quentin Gilly, Bernard Mathey-Prevot, Norbert Perrimon, and Stephanie E Mohr. 2012. “FlyRNAi.org--the database of the Drosophila RNAi screening center: 2012 update.” Nucleic Acids Res, 40, Database issue, Pp. D715-9.Abstract

FlyRNAi (http://www.flyrnai.org), the database and website of the Drosophila RNAi Screening Center (DRSC) at Harvard Medical School, serves a dual role, tracking both production of reagents for RNA interference (RNAi) screening in Drosophila cells and RNAi screen results. The database and website is used as a platform for community availability of protocols, tools, and other resources useful to researchers planning, conducting, analyzing or interpreting the results of Drosophila RNAi screens. Based on our own experience and user feedback, we have made several changes. Specifically, we have restructured the database to accommodate new types of reagents; added information about new RNAi libraries and other reagents; updated the user interface and website; and added new tools of use to the Drosophila community and others. Overall, the result is a more useful, flexible and comprehensive website and database.

Ian Flockhart, Matthew Booker, Amy Kiger, Michael Boutros, Susan Armknecht, Nadire Ramadan, Kris Richardson, Andrew Xu, Norbert Perrimon, and Bernard Mathey-Prevot. 2006. “FlyRNAi: the Drosophila RNAi screening center database.” Nucleic Acids Res, 34, Database issue, Pp. D489-94.Abstract

RNA interference (RNAi) has become a powerful tool for genetic screening in Drosophila. At the Drosophila RNAi Screening Center (DRSC), we are using a library of over 21,000 double-stranded RNAs targeting known and predicted genes in Drosophila. This library is available for the use of visiting scientists wishing to perform full-genome RNAi screens. The data generated from these screens are collected in the DRSC database (http://flyRNAi.org/cgi-bin/RNAi_screens.pl) in a flexible format for the convenience of the scientist and for archiving data. The long-term goal of this database is to provide annotations for as many of the uncharacterized genes in Drosophila as possible. Data from published screens are available to the public through a highly configurable interface that allows detailed examination of the data and provides access to a number of other databases and bioinformatics tools.

Norbert Perrimon, Jian-Quan Ni, and Lizabeth Perkins. 2010. “In vivo RNAi: today and tomorrow.” Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol, 2, 8, Pp. a003640.Abstract

RNA interference (RNAi) provides a powerful reverse genetics approach to analyze gene functions both in tissue culture and in vivo. Because of its widespread applicability and effectiveness it has become an essential part of the tool box kits of model organisms such as Caenorhabditis elegans, Drosophila, and the mouse. In addition, the use of RNAi in animals in which genetic tools are either poorly developed or nonexistent enables a myriad of fundamental questions to be asked. Here, we review the methods and applications of in vivo RNAi to characterize gene functions in model organisms and discuss their impact to the study of developmental as well as evolutionary questions. Further, we discuss the applications of RNAi technologies to crop improvement, pest control and RNAi therapeutics, thus providing an appreciation of the potential for phenomenal applications of RNAi to agriculture and medicine.

Matthew Booker, Anastasia A Samsonova, Young Kwon, Ian Flockhart, Stephanie E Mohr, and Norbert Perrimon. 2011. “False negative rates in Drosophila cell-based RNAi screens: a case study.” BMC Genomics, 12, Pp. 50.Abstract

BACKGROUND: High-throughput screening using RNAi is a powerful gene discovery method but is often complicated by false positive and false negative results. Whereas false positive results associated with RNAi reagents has been a matter of extensive study, the issue of false negatives has received less attention. RESULTS: We performed a meta-analysis of several genome-wide, cell-based Drosophila RNAi screens, together with a more focused RNAi screen, and conclude that the rate of false negative results is at least 8%. Further, we demonstrate how knowledge of the cell transcriptome can be used to resolve ambiguous results and how the number of false negative results can be reduced by using multiple, independently-tested RNAi reagents per gene. CONCLUSIONS: RNAi reagents that target the same gene do not always yield consistent results due to false positives and weak or ineffective reagents. False positive results can be partially minimized by filtering with transcriptome data. RNAi libraries with multiple reagents per gene also reduce false positive and false negative outcomes when inconsistent results are disambiguated carefully.

Stephanie Mohr, Chris Bakal, and Norbert Perrimon. 2010. “Genomic screening with RNAi: results and challenges.” Annu Rev Biochem, 79, Pp. 37-64.Abstract

RNA interference (RNAi) is an effective tool for genome-scale, high-throughput analysis of gene function. In the past five years, a number of genome-scale RNAi high-throughput screens (HTSs) have been done in both Drosophila and mammalian cultured cells to study diverse biological processes, including signal transduction, cancer biology, and host cell responses to infection. Results from these screens have led to the identification of new components of these processes and, importantly, have also provided insights into the complexity of biological systems, forcing new and innovative approaches to understanding functional networks in cells. Here, we review the main findings that have emerged from RNAi HTS and discuss technical issues that remain to be improved, in particular the verification of RNAi results and validation of their biological relevance. Furthermore, we discuss the importance of multiplexed and integrated experimental data analysis pipelines to RNAi HTS.

Shu Kondo and Norbert Perrimon. 2011. “A genome-wide RNAi screen identifies core components of the G₂-M DNA damage checkpoint.” Sci Signal, 4, 154, Pp. rs1.Abstract

The DNA damage checkpoint, the first pathway known to be activated in response to DNA damage, is a mechanism by which the cell cycle is temporarily arrested to allow DNA repair. The checkpoint pathway transmits signals from the sites of DNA damage to the cell cycle machinery through the evolutionarily conserved ATM (ataxia telangiectasia mutated) and ATR (ATM- and Rad3-related) kinase cascades. We conducted a genome-wide RNAi (RNA interference) screen in Drosophila cells to identify previously unknown genes and pathways required for the G₂-M checkpoint induced by DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs). Our large-scale analysis provided a systems-level view of the G₂-M checkpoint and revealed the coordinated actions of particular classes of proteins, which include those involved in DNA repair, DNA replication, cell cycle control, chromatin regulation, and RNA processing. Further, from the screen and in vivo analysis, we identified previously unrecognized roles of two DNA damage response genes, mus101 and mus312. Our results suggest that the DNA replication preinitiation complex, which includes MUS101, and the MUS312-containing nuclease complexes, which are important for DSB repair, also function in the G₂-M checkpoint. Our results provide insight into the diverse mechanisms that link DNA damage and the checkpoint signaling pathway.

Stephanie E Mohr and Norbert Perrimon. 2012. “RNAi screening: new approaches, understandings, and organisms.” Wiley Interdiscip Rev RNA, 3, 2, Pp. 145-58.Abstract

RNA interference (RNAi) leads to sequence-specific knockdown of gene function. The approach can be used in large-scale screens to interrogate function in various model organisms and an increasing number of other species. Genome-scale RNAi screens are routinely performed in cultured or primary cells or in vivo in organisms such as C. elegans. High-throughput RNAi screening is benefitting from the development of sophisticated new instrumentation and software tools for collecting and analyzing data, including high-content image data. The results of large-scale RNAi screens have already proved useful, leading to new understandings of gene function relevant to topics such as infection, cancer, obesity, and aging. Nevertheless, important caveats apply and should be taken into consideration when developing or interpreting RNAi screens. Some level of false discovery is inherent to high-throughput approaches and specific to RNAi screens, false discovery due to off-target effects (OTEs) of RNAi reagents remains a problem. The need to improve our ability to use RNAi to elucidate gene function at large scale and in additional systems continues to be addressed through improved RNAi library design, development of innovative computational and analysis tools and other approaches.