Housden Benjamin E, Muhar Matthias, Gemberling Matthew, Gersbach Charles A, Stainier Didier Y R, Seydoux Geraldine, Mohr Stephanie E, Zuber Johannes, Perrimon Norbert
Department of Genetics, Harvard Medical School, 77 Avenue Louis Pasteur, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, USA.
Research Institute of Molecular Pathology (IMP), Vienna Biocenter (VBC), Vienna 1030, Austria.
Nat Rev Genet. 2017 Jan;18(1):24-40. doi: 10.1038/nrg.2016.118. Epub 2016 Oct 31.
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.
我们对构成生物过程基础的遗传机制的理解在很大程度上依赖于功能丧失(LOF)分析。LOF方法作用于DNA、RNA或蛋白质,以减少或消除基因功能。通过分析这些干扰所导致的表型,可以阐明基因的野生型功能。尽管所有LOF方法都会降低基因活性,但方法的选择(例如诱变、基于CRISPR的基因编辑、RNA干扰、吗啉代或药理学抑制)可能对表型结果产生重大影响。对LOF表型的解释必须考虑每种方法所针对的生物过程。LOF方法的实用性和效率在不同模型系统之间也有很大差异。我们描述了选择方法和系统的最佳组合以及在每种方法的限制范围内解释表型的参数。