$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$
$$\longleftharp{xx}$$,
$$\longrightharp{xx}$$,
The protocol described here allows for the construction of a dense insertion library. This method allows for the creation of a transposon library with over 2 x 105 unique transposon mutants using under 5 mL of culture volume6. It is relatively easy to perform, uses reagents available in most basic microbiology labs, is scalable, and requires little in the way of expensive equipment or consumables such as electroporation cuvettes.
A significant benefit of this method is that, in theory, the user has wide latitude in the choice of enterobacterial recipient strains. This paper, as well as others11, use E. coli as a recipient strain, however the pJA1 plasmid has been used successfully with other enterobacterial recipient species such as Shigella flexneri6 and Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium strain SL134410. Theoretically, the γ origin of replication (oriR6Kγ) in pJA1 allows this plasmid to be maintained in a broad host range19, allowing that the recipient strain is pir+. Recently, new methods have been described that allow for construction of the pir+ in a range of enterobacterial strains20, giving additional flexibility. Additionally, the300 base pair mob region from the RP4 plasmid in pJA1 allows conjugative transfer of this plasmid to a wide range of gram negative bacterial strains19. Simply put, this method could theoretically be used with a variety of recipient strains, as long as several conditions are met: the strain is pir+, and is marked with an antibiotic resistance other than kanamycin and other than the donor strain.
A critical step in the protocol lies in estimating the proper number of cells to plate out in step 4.1. If colonies are spaced too closely, they compete for nutrients on the plate and less fit mutants are outcompeted. This may lead to a reduction in the total number of mutants. Alternatively, if colonies are spaced too far apart, there will be too few colonies on the plate, and the total number of agar plates needed to achieve a large library becomes burdensome. Therefore, achieving the right balance in terms of colony numbers per plate is important.
It is important to perform the controls listed in the protocol to ensure the steps are working as described. Notably, when using nalidixic acid as a counter-selection against the donor strain, it is important to ensure the negative donor control plates are free of colonies. This is because there may be a low rate (approximately 1 x 10-10)21 of spontaneous resistance to nalidixic acid, yielding false positives. Typically, the rate of conjugation and transposition is approximately 2 x 10-4 19. Therefore, the rate of conjugation and transposition is several orders of magnitude greater than the rate of spontaneous resistance to nalidixic acid. Therefore, the rate of false positives compared to true transposition events is very low and deemed negligible when the protocol is working. However, if rates of conjugation or transposition are significantly reduced, (from low mating efficiency and/or lack of induction of the transposase gene with IPTG) and the protocol is scaled up to compensate for this, then the number of false positives (clones that do not have the transposon inserted) may also increase.
Some modifications can be made to incubation times in Steps 3.2 and 3.10. Step 3.2 states that conjugation should occur for 6 h, but in our experience, this time step can be varied (i.e., 4-7 h) without changing the results significantly. Additionally, in step 3.10, the length of time the colonies are incubated on the agar plates can also be adjusted. This can be varied depending on the average doubling time or growth rate of the recipient strain. Additionally, in our experience, 18 h yielded a variety of colony sizes, indicating a library of diverse fitness. However, colonies with greatly reduced fitness may take longer to grow and thus may not be visible after 18 h. If this method is being used to find clones of extremely reduced fitness, longer incubation times and fewer colonies on the plate to reduce crowding (i.e., 48 h, 50-300 colonies) may be used.
Additional pitfalls of this method include that it is not possible to use a recipient strain that is already kanamycin resistant. It may be possible to swap out the kanamycin resistance marker in the pJA1 plasmid for an alternative selectable marker, such as chloramphenicol resistance to overcome this hurdle. It may also be worth noting that, in theory, it is possible to use a recipient strain that is ampicillin resistant, as the pJA1 plasmid containing the ampicillin resistance marker is lost shortly after transposition.
The creation of a dense transposon library in the genetic background of choice is potentially advantageous for many downstream applications. For example, a dense transposon library could be used to identify auxotrophic mutants using replica plating22 or to identify mutants that are defective in establishing an infection1,2. More recently, as DNA sequencing costs have dropped and new technologies such as next generation sequencing have become commonplace, transposon libraries have been used with deep DNA sequencing to gain insight into gene essentiality, gene function, and genetic interactions. Some of these methods are reviewed in 23 and include methods such as transposon-directed insertion site sequencing (TraDIS), transposon sequencing (Tn-seq), high-throughput insertion tracking by deep sequencing (HITS), and insertion sequencing (INSeq). All these downstream methods rely on the construction of dense transposon insertion libraries. While other vectors may need to be used for particular downstream methods, the protocol described here gives an overview of the salient procedural points to follow.