Combined DNA-RNA FISH can be technically challenging, as conditions suitable for DNA FISH can be too harsh for less stable RNA molecules. Several approaches have been applied to study both DNA and RNA in the same cell, circumventing the need for simultaneous incubation with probes detecting both the DNA and RNA. For example, in a superimposition approach, first RNA FISH is performed, and cells are imaged, and coordinates are taken. Subsequently, the same slides are used for DNA FISH, during which the signal of RNA FISH is lost. After DNA FISH, the cells are again imaged, and the pictures obtained from both the RNA and DNA FISH are superimposed. Although this approach will work in almost all cases, as the DNA of fixed cells is stable, and is not affected by the treatment needed for initial RNA FISH, this is a very laborious approach which will cost at least four days. In another approach, first the RNA FISH is performed, the RNA FISH signal is fixed by addition of fixatives, after which DNA FISH is applied. Although also this approach can work, some of the fluorescent signal derived from the RNA FISH can be lost upon fixation. This might especially hinder the detection of transcripts which are only expressed at a low level. The herein presented approach is optimized for the simultaneous detection of both one RNA target and one DNA target in a single FISH experiment, and has the advantage that both results can be obtained in a single experiment within two days, with reliable results.
Several steps in the FISH protocol are crucial to obtain optimal results. First, whenever dealing with RNA molecules, one should be careful not to introduce RNAse in any buffer or solution used. Hence, a clean working environment should be established, and filter tips should be used when pipetting reagents being used for FISH. Care should be taken to use RNAse free compounds (for example RNAse free water, cell culture grade PBS, absolutely pure ethanol etc.). When these simple rules are followed, it is generally not necessary to use additional RNAse inhibitors supplemented to the reagents used. Second, the permeabilization procedure using pepsin is a gentle equilibrium between too little, or too much permeabilization. Depending on the particular cell type used, it might be required to optimize the time allowed for permeabilization, or the pepsin concentrations. The latter also depends on your particular batch of pepsin, as the activity might vary. As an alternative, permeabilization using 0.1% Triton-X100/PBS for 5 min results in good results under certain conditions, and has the advantage that FISH using this method of permeabilization can be combined with immunostaining to detect nuclear or cytoplasmic proteins. As a third important aspect of FISH, the aging, denaturation, hybridization and washing temperatures should be kept constant. Even small deviations from the target temperature can result in less efficient denaturation, hybridization, or less stringent washes, which will result in more background staining. As an alternative to the 1 hr aging step at 65 °C followed by denaturation at 65 °C for 2 min, also an initial denaturation at 80 °C for 5 min, without aging, can give good results. We prefer the aging procedure, as in general this procedure gives more reliable DNA FISH signals. Lastly, certain DNA probes will be so specific, that they will not require three layers of antibodies for sufficient detection. This should be empirically tested for every newly generated probe.
Although the current protocol works robustly in the study of X chromosome inactivation and detection of Xist, combined detection of RNA and DNA might be more complicated in other settings. This might especially be the case when the RNA species which is aimed to be detected is only expressed at very low levels, is full of repeat sequences or is a relatively short transcript. In these situations, it might be rather difficult to design an optimal probe, which will allow the efficient hybridization to a limited, not optimal available amount of target. In such situations, it might be worth optimizing first conditions for RNA FISH. Several alternative probes could be tried, and the duration of probe labeling by Nick-translation could be titrated, to optimize the amount of incorporated haptens. Importantly, it should be verified that the aimed RNA is expressed in the cells to be investigated, by for example verifying expression by RT-PCR. Also when analyzing a different type of cells, it is essential to include cells in which expression has previously been detected as positive controls, as this might allow the distinction between a technical, FISH related problem, or the simple absence of expression in the new type of cells analyzed. When, despite verified expression, the use of various probes and optimization of labeling conditions, RNA FISH does not result in a clear signal, it might be worth changing the hybridization conditions, by varying the amount of formamide used, or the duration and temperature of probe hybridization. Alternatively, directly labeled oligonucleotide probes might be used9-10. The same optimization steps can subsequently be applied to improve DNA FISH, and the simultaneous detection of DNA and RNA.
Using the combined DNA-RNA FISH protocol, we have been able to study X chromosome inactivation in differentiating female ES cells. Similar results have been obtained in our studies using different cell types and embryos, and we are currently further optimizing conditions to apply combined DNA-RNA FISH on tissue sections. As the important role of non-coding RNAs in many biological processes becomes more and more appreciated, we foresee that the same protocol can likely be used to study other non-coding RNAs in the context of their specific chromatin.