Essential domains for ribonucleoprotein complex formation required for retrotransposition of telomere-specific non-long terminal repeat retrotransposon SART1

Novel function of SART1 in HNF4α transcriptional regulation contributes to its antiviral role during HBV infection

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Our understanding of the interactions between HBV and its host cells is still quite limited. Spliceosome associated factor 1 (SART1) has recently been found to restrict HCV. Thus, we aimed to dissect its role in HBV infection.

METHODS

SART1 was knocked down by RNA interference and over-expressed by lentiviral or adeno-associated virus (AAV) vectors in HBV-infected cell cultures and in vivo in HBV-infected mice. Luciferase reporter assays were used to determine viral or host factor promoter activities, and chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP) was used to investigate protein-DNA interactions.

RESULTS

In HBV-infected cell cultures, downregulation of SART1 did not affect covalently closed circular HBV DNA but resulted in markedly enhanced HBV RNA, antigen expression and progeny virus production. On the other hand, HBV transcription and replication were significantly inhibited by overexpression of SART1. Similar results were observed in AAV-HBV-infected mice persistently replicating HBV. Inhibition of Janus kinases had no effect on SART1-mediated inhibition of HBV replication. HBV promoter assays revealed that SART1 reduced HBV core promoter activity. By screening known HBV transcription factors, we found that SART1 specifically suppressed the expression of hepatocyte nuclear factor 4α (HNF4α). Luciferase reporter and ChIP assays demonstrated a direct downregulation of HNF4α expression by association of SART1 with the HNF4α proximal P1 promoter element.

CONCLUSIONS

We identify SART1 as a novel host factor suppressing HBV cccDNA transcription. Besides its effect on interferon-stimulated genes, SART1 exerts an anti-HBV activity by suppressing HNF4α expression, which is essential for transcription of HBV cccDNA.

LAY SUMMARY

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infects hepatocytes and persists in the form of covalently closed circular DNA (cccDNA), which remains a major obstacle to successful antiviral treatment. In this study, using various HBV models, we demonstrate that the protein SART1 restricts HBV cccDNA transcription by suppressing a key transcription factor, HNF4α.

Essential factors involved in the precise targeting and insertion of telomere-specific non-LTR retrotransposon, SART1Bm

Telomere length maintenance is essential for most eukaryotes to ensure genome stability and integrity. A non-long terminal repeat (LTR) retrotransposon, SART1Bm, targets telomeric repeats (TTAGG)n of the silkworm Bombyx mori and is presumably involved in telomere length maintenance. However, how many telomeric repeats are required for its retrotransposition and how reverse transcription is initiated at the target site are not well understood. Here, using an ex vivo and trans-in vivo recombinant baculovirus retrotransposition system, we demonstrated that SART1Bm requires at least three (TTAGG) telomeric repeats and a longer poly(A) tail for its accurate retrotransposition. We found that SART1Bm retrotransposed only in the third (TTAGG) tract of three repeats and that the A residue of the (TTAGG) unit was essential for its retrotransposition. Interestingly, SART1Bm also retrotransposed into telomeric repeats of other species, such as human (TTAGGG)n repeats, albeit with low retrotransposition efficiency. We further showed that the reverse transcription of SART1Bm occurred inaccurately at the internal site of the 3' untranslated region (UTR) when using a short poly(A) tail but at the accurate site when using a longer poly(A) tail. These findings promote our understanding of the general mechanisms of site-specific retrotransposition and aid the development of a site-specific gene knock-in tool.

Completion of LINE integration involves an open '4-way' branched DNA intermediate

Long Interspersed Elements (LINEs), also known as non-LTR retrotransposons, encode a multifunctional protein that reverse transcribes its mRNA into DNA at the site of insertion by target primed reverse transcription. The second half of the integration reaction remains very poorly understood. Second-strand DNA cleavage and second-strand DNA synthesis were investigated in vitro using purified components from a site-specific restriction-like endonuclease (RLE) bearing LINE. DNA structure was shown to be a critical component of second-strand DNA cleavage. A hitherto unknown and unexplored integration intermediate, an open ‘4-way’ DNA junction, was recognized by the element protein and cleaved in a Holliday junction resolvase-like reaction. Cleavage of the 4-way junction resulted in a natural primer-template pairing used for second-strand DNA synthesis. A new model for RLE LINE integration is presented.

Both the Exact Target Site Sequence and a Long Poly(A) Tail Are Required for Precise Insertion of the 18S Ribosomal DNA-Specific Non-Long Terminal Repeat Retrotransposon R7Ag

Ribosomal elements (R elements) are site-specific non-long terminal repeat (LTR) retrotransposons that target ribosomal DNA (rDNA). To elucidate how R elements specifically access their target sites, we isolated and characterized the 18S rDNA-specific R element R7Ag from Anopheles gambiae Using an in vivo and ex vivo recombinant baculovirus retrotransposition system, we found that the exact host 18S rDNA sequence at the target site is essential for the precise insertion of R7Ag. In addition, a long poly(A) tail is necessary for the accurate initiation of R7Ag reverse transcription, a novel mechanism found in non-LTR elements. We further compared the subcellular localizations of proteins in R7Ag as well as R1Bm, another R element that targets 28S rDNA. Although the open reading frame 1 proteins (ORF1ps) of both R7Ag and R1Bm localized predominantly in the cytoplasm, ORF2 proteins (ORF2ps) colocalized in the nucleus with the nucleolar marker fibrillarin. The ORF1ps and ORF2ps of both R elements colocalized largely in the nuclear periphery and to a lesser extent within the nucleus. These results suggest that R7Ag and R1Bm proteins may access nucleolar rDNA targets in an ORF2p-dependent manner.

Site-specific non-LTR retrotransposons

Although most of non-long terminal repeat (non-LTR) retrotransposons are incorporated in the host genome almost randomly, some non-LTR retrotransposons are incorporated into specific sequences within a target site. On the basis of structural and phylogenetic features, non-LTR retrotransposons are classified into two large groups, restriction enzyme-like endonuclease (RLE)-encoding elements and apurinic/apyrimidinic endonuclease (APE)-encoding elements. All clades of RLE-encoding non-LTR retrotransposons include site-specific elements. However, only two of more than 20 APE-encoding clades, Tx1 and R1, contain site-specific non-LTR elements. Site-specific non-LTR retrotransposons usually target within multi-copy RNA genes, such as rRNA gene (rDNA) clusters, or repetitive genomic sequences, such as telomeric repeats; this behavior may be a symbiotic strategy to reduce the damage to the host genome. Site- and sequence-specificity are variable even among closely related non-LTR elements and appeared to have changed during evolution. In the APE-encoding elements, the primary determinant of the sequence- specific integration is APE itself, which nicks one strand of the target DNA during the initiation of target primed reverse transcription (TPRT). However, other factors, such as interaction between mRNA and the target DNA, and access to the target region in the nuclei also affect the sequence-specificity. In contrast, in the RLE-encoding elements, DNA-binding motifs appear to affect their sequence-specificity, rather than the RLE domain itself. Highly specific integration properties of these site-specific non-LTR elements make them ideal alternative tools for sequence-specific gene delivery, particularly for therapeutic purposes in human diseases.

The spliceosome factor SART1 exerts its anti-HCV action through mRNA splicing

BACKGROUND &/AIMS

The broadly used antiviral cytokine interferon-α (IFNα)'s mechanisms of action against HCV infection are not well understood. We previously identified SART1, a host protein involved in RNA splicing and pre-mRNA processing, as a regulator of IFN's antiviral effects. We hypothesized that SART1 regulates antiviral IFN effector genes (IEGs) through mRNA processing and splicing.

METHODS

We performed siRNA knockdown in HuH7.5.1 cells and mRNA-sequencing with or without IFN treatment. Selected gene mRNA variants and their proteins, together with HCV replication, were monitored by qRT-PCR and Western blot in HCV OR6 replicon cells and the JFH1 HCV infectious model.

RESULTS

We identified 419 genes with a greater than 2-fold expression difference between Neg siRNA and SART1 siRNA treated cells in the presence or absence of IFN. Bioinformatic analysis identified at least 10 functional pathways. SART1 knockdown reduced classical IFN stimulating genes (ISG) mRNA transcription including MX1 and OAS3. However, SART1 did not affect JAK-STAT pathway gene mRNA expression and IFN stimulated response element (ISRE) signaling. We identified alternative mRNA splicing events for several genes, including EIF4G3, GORASP2, ZFAND6, and RAB6A that contribute to their antiviral effects. EIF4G3 and GORASP2 were also confirmed to have anti-HCV effect.

CONCLUSIONS

The spliceosome factor SART1 is not IFN-inducible but is an IEG. SART1 exerts its anti-HCV action through direct transcriptional regulation for some ISGs and alternative splicing for others, including EIF4G3, GORASP2. SART1 does not have an effect on IFN receptor or canonical signal transduction components. Thus, SART1 regulates ISGs using a novel, non-classical mechanism.

Integrated mechanism for the generation of the 5' junctions of LINE inserts

To elucidate the molecular mechanism of the integration of long interspersed elements (LINEs), we characterized the 5′ ends of more than 200 LINE de novo retrotransposition events into chicken DT40 or human HeLa cells. Human L1 inserts produced 15-bp target-site duplications (TSDs) and zebrafish ZfL2-1 inserts produced 5-bp TSDs in DT40 cells, suggesting that TSD length depends on the LINE species. Further analysis of 5′ junctions revealed that the 5′-end-joining pathways of LINEs can be divided into two fundamental types—annealing or direct. We also found that the generation of 5′ inversions depends on host and LINE species. These results led us to propose a new model for 5′-end joining, the type of which is determined by the extent of exposure of 3′ overhangs generated after the second-strand cleavage and by the involvement of host factors.

Mechanism by which a LINE protein recognizes its 3' tail RNA

LINEs mobilize their own copies via retrotransposition. LINEs can be divided into two types. One is a stringent type, which constitutes a majority of LINEs. The other is a relaxed type. To elucidate the molecular mechanism of retrotransposition, we used here two different zebrafish LINEs belonging to the stringent type. By using retrotransposition assays, we demonstrated that proteins (ORF2) encoded by an individual LINE recognize the cognate 3′ tail sequence of the LINE RNA strictly. By conducting in vitro binding assays with a variety of ORF2 proteins, we demonstrated that the region between the endonuclease and reverse transcriptase domains in ORF2 is the site at which the proteins bind the stem-loop structure of the 3′ tail RNA, showing that the strict recognition of the stem-loop structure by the cognate ORF2 protein is an important step in retrotransposition. This recognition can be bipartite, involving the general recognition of the stem by cTBR (conserved tail-binding region) of ORF2 and the specific recognition of the loop by vTBR (variable tail-binding region). This is the first report that clearly characterized the RNA-binding region in ORF2, providing the generality for the recognition mechanism of the RNA tail by the ORF2 protein encoded by LINEs.

Modular organization and reticulate evolution of the ORF1 of Jockey superfamily transposable elements

Background

Long interspersed nuclear elements (LINES) are the most common transposable element (TE) in almost all metazoan genomes examined. In most LINE superfamilies there are two open reading frames (ORFs), and both are required for transposition. The ORF2 is well characterized, while the structure and function of the ORF1 is less well understood. ORF1s have been classified into five types based on structural organization and the domains identified. Here we perform a large scale analysis of ORF1 domains of 448 elements from the Jockey superfamily using multiple alignments and Hidden Markov Model (HMM)-HMM comparisons.

Results

Three major lineages, Chicken repeat 1 (CR1), LINE2 (L2) and Jockey, were identified. All Jockey lineage elements have the same type of ORF1. In contrast, in the L2 and CR1 lineage elements, all five ORF1 types are found, with no one type of ORF1 predominating. A plant homeodomain (PHD) is much more prevalent than previously suspected. ORF1 type variations involving the PHD domain were found in many subgroups of the L2 and CR1 lineages. A Jockey lineage-like ORF1 with a PHD domain was found in both lineages. A phylogenetic analysis of this ORF1 suggests that it has been horizontally transferred. Likewise, an esterase containing ORF1 type was only found in two exclusively vertebrate L2 and CR1 groups, indicating that it may have been acquired in a vertebrate common ancestor and then transferred between the lineages.

Conclusions

The ORF1 of the CR1 and L2 lineages is very structurally diverse. The presence of a PHD domain in many ORF1s of the L2 and CR1 lineages is suggestive of domain shuffling. There is also evidence of possible horizontal transfer of entire ORF1s between lineages. In conclusion, while the structure of the ORF2 appears to be highly constrained and its evolution tree-like, the structure of the ORF1 within the CR1 and L2 lineages is much more variable and its evolution reticulate.

Lost in translation: The biogenesis of non-LTR retrotransposon proteins

“Young” APE-type non-LTR retrotransposons (non-LTRs) typically encode two open reading frames (ORFs 1 and 2). The shorter ORF1 translation product (ORF1p) comprises an RNA binding activity, thought to bind to non-LTR transcript RNA, protect against nuclease degradation and specify nuclear import of the ribonuclear protein complex (RNP). ORF2 encodes a multifunctional protein (ORF2p) comprising apurinic/apyrimidinic endonuclease (APE) and reverse-transcriptase (RT) activities, responsible for genome replication and re-integration into chromosomal DNA. However, some clades of APE-type non-LTRs only encode a single ORF—corresponding to the multifunctional ORF2p outlined above (and for simplicity referred-to as ORF2 below). The absence of an ORF1 correlates with the acquisition of a 2A oligopeptide translational recoding element (some 18–30 amino acids) into the N-terminal region of ORF2p. In the case of non-LTRs encoding two ORFs, the presence of ORF1 would necessarily downregulate the translation of ORF2. We argue that in the absence of an ORF1, 2A could provide the corresponding translational downregulation of ORF2. While multiple molecules of ORF1p are required to decorate the non-LTR transcript RNA in the cytoplasm, conceivably only a single molecule of ORF2p is required for target-primed reverse transcription/integration in the nucleus. Why would the translation of ORF2 need to be controlled by such mechanisms? An “excess” of ORF2p could result in disadvantageous levels of genome instability by, for example, enhancing short, interspersed, element (SINE) retrotransposition and the generation of processed pseudogenes. If so, the acquisition of mechanisms—such as 2A—to control ORF2p biogenesis would be advantageous.

Low dependency of retrotransposition on the ORF1 protein of the zebrafish LINE, ZfL2-1

The zebrafish long interspersed element (LINE), ZfL2-1, which belongs to the L2 clade, contains two open reading frames, ORF1 and ORF2. ORF1 encodes a protein containing a coiled-coil motif and an esterase domain, whereas ORF2 encodes a protein containing an endonuclease and a reverse transcriptase domain. To elucidate the functional significance of ORF1 in retrotransposition, we constructed many variants of ZfL2-1 and examined their retrotransposition ability. We concluded: 1) the ORF1 protein is not essential for ZfL2-1 retrotransposition in cultured cells; 2) the translation of ORF1 is required for the translation of ORF2; and 3) ORF2 translation probably occurs via suppression of the ORF1 stop codon, the efficiency of which is influenced by the context of the sequence juxtaposed to the 3' side of the stop codon. These results offer a new perspective on the evolution of the L2 clade LINEs.

A new mechanism to ensure integration during LINE retrotransposition: a suggestion from analyses of the 5' extra nucleotides

Long interspersed elements (LINEs) are transposable elements that exist in the chromosomal DNA of most eukaryotes; as such, they have a large impact on the genome evolution of their hosts. LINEs mobilize by a mechanism called retrotransposition in which the LINE RNA is reverse-transcribed into DNA and then integrated into the host chromosome. The integration of the 3' end of the LINE element simultaneously occurs with the initiation of reverse transcription; this process is called target-primed reverse transcription and is one of the important characteristics of LINEs. However, the molecular mechanism of the integration of the 5' end is not well understood. Here, we show that, in cultured cells, the integrants of the zebrafish ZfL2-2 LINE produce extra nucleotides at their 5' ends, and the extra nucleotides originate from their flanking sequences. We also found that, in cultured cells, some integrants of the human L1 LINE and, in their native hosts, some endogenous elements of two other LINEs also contain 5' extra nucleotides of similar origin, suggesting that the mechanism for generation of the 5' extra nucleotides is universal among various LINEs. From these data, we propose a general mechanism for 5' integration in LINE retrotransposition.

Self-interaction, nucleic acid binding, and nucleic acid chaperone activities are unexpectedly retained in the unique ORF1p of zebrafish LINE

Long interspersed elements (LINEs) are mobile elements that comprise a large proportion of many eukaryotic genomes. Although some LINE-encoded open reading frame 1 proteins (ORF1ps) were suggested to be required for LINE mobilization through binding to their RNA, their general role is not known. The ZfL2-1 ORF1p, which belongs to the esterase-type ORF1p, is especially interesting because it has no known RNA-binding domain. Here we demonstrate that ZfL2-1 ORF1p has all the canonical activities associated with known ORF1ps, including self-interaction, nucleic acid binding, and nucleic acid chaperone activities. In particular, we showed that its chaperone activity is reversible, suggesting that the chaperone activities of many other ORF1ps are also reversible. From this discovery, we propose that LINE ORF1ps play a general role in LINE integration by forming a complex with LINE RNA and rearranging its conformation.

Coevolution of telomeric repeats and telomeric repeat-specific non-LTR retrotransposons in insects

In the telomeres of the silkworm Bombyx mori, telomeric repeat-specific non-long terminal repeat (LTR) retrotransposon SARTBm1 is accumulated in the TTAGG telomeric repeats. Here, we identify novel telomeric repeat-specific non-LTR retrotransposons, SARTTc family, from the red flour beetle Tribolium castaneum in the unconventional TCAGG telomeric repeats. To compare the sequence specificity of SARTBm1 and SARTTc1, we developed a comparable ex vivo retrotransposition assay. Both SARTBm1 and SARTTc1 preferred the telomeric sequence of their hosts, suggesting that the target specificity of these retrotransposons coevolved with their host's telomeric repeats. Swapping experiment indicated that the endonuclease domain is involved in recognizing the target sequence. Moreover, SARTBm1 proteins could retrotranspose 3'untranslated region (UTR) sequence of SARTTc1 as well as their own 3'UTR, whereas SARTTc1 proteins could only retrotranspose their own 3'UTRs. These results provide insights to the mechanism and divergence of sequence specificity and 3'UTR recognition in non-LTR retrotransposons.

Unique functions of repetitive transcriptomes

Repetitive sequences occupy a huge fraction of essentially every eukaryotic genome. Repetitive sequences cover more than 50% of mammalian genomic DNAs, whereas gene exons and protein-coding sequences occupy only ~3% and 1%, respectively. Numerous genomic repeats include genes themselves. They generally encode "selfish" proteins necessary for the proliferation of transposable elements (TEs) in the host genome. The major part of evolutionary "older" TEs accumulated mutations over time and fails to encode functional proteins. However, repeats have important functions also on the RNA level. Repetitive transcripts may serve as multifunctional RNAs by participating in the antisense regulation of gene activity and by competing with the host-encoded transcripts for cellular factors. In addition, genomic repeats include regulatory sequences like promoters, enhancers, splice sites, polyadenylation signals, and insulators, which actively reshape cellular transcriptomes. TE expression is tightly controlled by the host cells, and some mechanisms of this regulation were recently decoded. Finally, capacity of TEs to proliferate in the host genome led to the development of multiple biotechnological applications.

Genetic evidence that the non-homologous end-joining repair pathway is involved in LINE retrotransposition

Long interspersed elements (LINEs) are transposable elements that proliferate within eukaryotic genomes, having a large impact on eukaryotic genome evolution. LINEs mobilize via a process called retrotransposition. Although the role of the LINE-encoded protein(s) in retrotransposition has been extensively investigated, the participation of host-encoded factors in retrotransposition remains unclear. To address this issue, we examined retrotransposition frequencies of two structurally different LINEs—zebrafish ZfL2-2 and human L1—in knockout chicken DT40 cell lines deficient in genes involved in the non-homologous end-joining (NHEJ) repair of DNA and in human HeLa cells treated with a drug that inhibits NHEJ. Deficiencies of NHEJ proteins decreased retrotransposition frequencies of both LINEs in these cells, suggesting that NHEJ is involved in LINE retrotransposition. More precise characterization of ZfL2-2 insertions in DT40 cells permitted us to consider the possibility of dual roles for NHEJ in LINE retrotransposition, namely to ensure efficient integration of LINEs and to restrict their full-length formation.

Long interspersed elements (LINEs) are transposable elements that mobilize and amplify their own copies within eukaryotic genomes. Although LINEs had been considered as “junk” DNA, recent studies have suggested that the LINE-induced alterations of host chromosomes are a major driving force for eukaryotic genome evolution. LINEs mobilize via a mechanism called retrotransposition, in which transcribed LINE RNA is reverse transcribed into DNA that is then integrated into the host chromosome. Although the role of LINE-encoded proteins in retrotransposition has been revealed, the participation of host-encoded proteins has not been well investigated. Here, using knockout chicken DT40 cell lines, we present genetic evidence that the host-encoded proteins involved in repair of DNA double-strand breaks participate in LINE retrotransposition. More precise characterization of LINE insertions in DT40 cells suggested dual roles for these host DNA repair proteins in LINE retrotransposition; one function is required for efficient integration of LINEs and the other restricts their full-length formation.

LINE-1 ORF1 protein enhances Alu SINE retrotransposition

Retroelements have contributed over one third of the human genome mass. The currently active LINE-1 (L1) codes for two proteins (ORF1p and ORF2p), both strictly required for retrotransposition. In contrast, the non-coding parasitic SINE (Alu) only appears to need the L1 ORF2p for its own amplification. This requirement was previously determined using a tissue culture assay system in human cells (HeLa). Because HeLa are likely to express functional L1 proteins, it is possible that low levels of endogenous ORF1p are necessary for the observed tagged Alu mobilization. By individually expressing ORF1 and ORF2 proteins from both human (L1RP and LRE3) and rodent (L1A102 and L1spa) L1 sources, we demonstrate that increasing amounts of ORF1 expressing vector enhances tagged Alu mobilization in HeLa cells. In addition, using chicken fibroblast cells as an alternate cell culture source, we confirmed that ORF1p is not strictly required for Alu mobilization in our assay. Supporting our observations in HeLa cells, we find that tagged Alu retrotransposition is improved by supplementation of ORF1p in the cultured chicken cells. We postulate that L1 ORF1p plays either a direct or indirect role in enhancing the interaction between the Alu RNA and the required factors needed for its retrotransposition.

Developmental and tissue-specific accumulation pattern for the Drosophila melanogaster TART ORF1 protein

The TART, HeT-A, and TAHRE families of Drosophila non-LTR retrotransposons specifically retrotranspose to telomeres to maintain telomeric DNA. Recent evidence indicates that an RNA interference mechanism is likely to regulate TART, HeT-A, and TAHRE retrotransposition, but the developmental and tissue-specific expression of telomeric retrotransposon proteins has not previously been investigated. We have generated antisera against TART ORF1 protein (ORF1p) and used these antisera to examine the pattern of TART ORF1p expression in Drosophila melanogaster. We detected TART ORF1p throughout most of development and observed particularly high levels of protein in late larval and pupal stages. In late-stage larvae, ORF1p accumulates in brain and imaginal discs tissues, rather than in terminally differentiated larval tissues. Accumulation of ORF1p in imaginal discs is intriguing, since TART antisense RNA has previously been detected in imaginal discs, and we discuss the implications of these findings for TART regulation.

Characterization of the sequence specificity of the R1Bm endonuclease domain by structural and biochemical studies

R1Bm is a long interspersed element (LINE) inserted into a specific sequence within 28S rDNA of the silkworm genome. Of two open reading frames (ORFs) of R1Bm, ORF2 encodes a reverse transcriptase (RT) and an endonuclease (EN) domain which digests specifically both top and bottom strand of the target sequence in 28S rDNA. To elucidate the sequence specificity of EN domain of R1Bm (R1Bm EN), we examined the cleavage tendency for the target sequences, and found that 5'-A(G/C)(A/T)!(A/G)T-3' is the consensus sequence (! = cleavage site). We also determined the crystal structure of R1Bm EN at 2.0 A resolution. Its structure was basically similar to AP endonuclease family, but had a special beta-hairpin at the edge of the DNA binding surface, which is a common feature among EN of LINEs. Point-mutations on the DNA binding surface of R1Bm EN significantly decreased the cleavage activities, but did not affect the sequence recognition in most residues. However, two mutants Y98A and N180A had altered cleavage patterns, suggesting an important role of these residues (Y98 and N180) for the sequence recognition of R1Bm EN. In addition, Y98A mutant showed another cleavage pattern, that implies de novo design of novel sequence-specific EN.

A novel target-specific gene delivery system combining baculovirus and sequence-specific long interspersed nuclear elements

Transposable elements are valuable for somatic and germ-line transformation. However, long interspersed nuclear elements (LINEs) have not been used because of poor information on the transposition mechanism. We have developed a novel gene delivery system combining baculovirus AcNPV and two silkworm LINEs, SART1 and R1, which integrate into specific sequences of telomeric repeats and 28S ribosomal DNA, respectively. When two LINEs containing the enhanced green fluorescent protein gene recombined into AcNPV were infected into fifth instar larvae of the silkworm, we observed target-specific retrotransposition of LINEs at 72h post-infection, using polymerase chain reaction amplification and sequencing. Telomere- and 28S rDNA-specific transposition occurred in all nine tissues tested, including the ovary and testis. This is the first demonstration of site-specific gene delivery in living larvae. Insertion efficiencies were dependent on the virus titer for injection and the host strains of Bombyx mori. Using this system, we successfully detected the intergeneration transmission of retrotransposed sequences. In addition, AcNPV-mediated SART1 also transposed into telomere of another lepidopteran, Orgyia recens, suggesting that this system is useful for a wide variety of AcNPV-infectious insects. Site-specific gene delivery by virus-mediated LINE will be a potential gene therapy tool to avoid harmful unexpected insertions.

A new system for analyzing LINE retrotransposition in the chicken DT40 cell line widely used for reverse genetics

Long interspersed elements (LINEs) are autonomous transposable elements that proliferate via retrotransposition, which involves reverse transcription of LINE RNAs. It is anticipated that LINE retrotransposition requires both LINE-encoded proteins and host-encoded proteins. However, identification of the host factors, their roles, and the steps at which they act on retrotransposition are poorly understood because of the lack of an appropriate genetic system to study LINE retrotransposition in a series of mutant hosts. To construct such a genetic system, we applied the retrotransposition-indicative cassette method to DT40 cells, a chicken cell line for which a variety of isogenic mutants have been established by gene targeting. Because DT40 cells are non-adherent, we utilized a selective soft agarose medium to allow the formation of colonies of cells that had undergone LINE retrotransposition. Colony formation was completely dependent on the activities of the LINE-encoded proteins and on the presence of the essential 3' region of the LINE RNA. Moreover, the selected colonies indeed carried retrotransposed LINE copies in their chromosomes, with integration features similar to those of genomic (native) LINE copies. This method thus allows the authentic selection of LINE-retrotransposed cells and the approximate recapitulation of retrotransposition events that occur in nature. Therefore, the DT40 cell system established here provides a powerful tool for the elucidation of LINE retrotransposition pathways, the host factors involved, and their roles.