Applying thiouracil tagging to mouse transcriptome analysis

Nature Protocols

Volumn 9, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 410-420

  Gay, Leslie ^a   Karfilis, Kate V ^a   Miller, Michael R ^a,b   Doe, Chris Q ^a   Stankunas, Kryn ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OREGON   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANIMALS; COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY; GENE EXPRESSION PROFILING; MICE; MICE, TRANSGENIC; RNA; THIOURACIL;

EID: 84893213699     PISSN: 17542189     EISSN: 17502799     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/nprot.2014.023     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Gay, L. et al. Mouse TU tagging: a chemical/genetic intersectional method for purifying cell type-specifc nascent RNA. Genes Dev. 27, 98-115 (2013).
2. Miller, M., Robinson, K., Cleary, M. & Doe, C. TU-tagging: cell type-specifc RNA isolation from intact complex tissues. Nat. Methods 6, 439-441 (2009).
3. Cleary, M.D., Meiering, C.D., Jan, E., Guymon, R. & Boothroyd, J.C. Biosynthetic labeling of RNA with uracil phosphoribosyltransferase allows cell-specifc microarray analysis of mRNA synthesis and decay. Nat. Biotechnol. 23, 232-237 (2005).
4. Friedel, C.C. & Dölken, L. Metabolic tagging and purifcation of nascent RNA: implications for transcriptomics. Mol. Biosystems 5, 1271-1278 (2009).
5. Lai, S.L., Miller, M.R., Robinson, K.J. & Doe, C.Q. The Snail family member Worniu is continuously required in neuroblasts to prevent Elav-induced premature differentiation. Dev Cell 23, 849-857 (2012).
6. Hafner, M. et al. Transcriptome-wide identifcation of RNA-binding protein and microRNA target sites by PAR-CLIP. Cell 141, 129-141 (2010).
7. Doyle, J.P. et al. Application of a translational profling approach for the comparative analysis of CNS cell types. Cell 135, 749-762 (2008).
8. Heiman, M. et al. A translational profling approach for the molecular characterization of CNS cell types. Cell 135, 738-748 (2008).
9. Deal, R.B. & Henikoff, S. The INTACT method for cell type-specifc gene expression and chromatin profling in Arabidopsis thaliana. Nat. Protoc. 6, 56-68 (2011).
10. Sanz, E. et al. Cell-type-specifc isolation of ribosome-associated mRNA from complex tissues. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 106, 13939-13944 (2009).
11. Kenzelmann, M. et al. Microarray analysis of newly synthesized RNA in cells and animals. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 104, 6164-6169 (2007).
12. Feil, R. et al. Ligand-activated site-specifc recombination in mice. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 93, 10887-10890 (1996).
13. Diez-Roux, G. et al. A high-resolution anatomical atlas of the transcriptome in the mouse embryo. PLoS Biol. 9, e1000582 (2011).
14. Adiconis, X. et al. Comparative analysis of RNA sequencing methods for degraded or low-input samples. Nat. Methods 10, 623-629 (2013).
15. Kim, D. et al. TopHat2: accurate alignment of transcriptomes in the presence of insertions, deletions and gene fusions. Genome Biol. 14, R36 (2013).
16. Li, H. et al. The Sequence Alignment/Map format and SAMtools. Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) 25, 2078-2079 (2009).
17. Anders, S. HTSeq: Analyzing high-throughput sequencing data with Python http://www-huber.embl.de/users/anders/HTSeq/doc/overview.html (2011).
18. Anders, S. & Huber, W. Differential expression analysis for sequence count data. Genome Biol. 11, R106 (2010).