A Method for Generating Transgenic Frog Embryos

  • Shoko Ishibashi
  • Kristen L. Kroll
  • Enrique Amaya
Part of the METHODS IN MOLECULAR BIOLOGY™ book series (MIMB, volume 461)

1. Introduction

1.1. Summary

The amphibian embryo has classically been one of the best systems for elucidating the molecular mechanisms of early development, in particular for studies of mesodermal and neural induction. Amphibian embryos develop externally and are large and robust. Therefore, tissues can be dissected, isolated, or transplanted with high precision and ease in these embryos. In addition, it is relatively easy to manipulate the expression of gene products by injecting in-vitro transcribed RNAs into developing embryos. However, since RNAs are translated soon after injection, this method has been used mainly for studying early stages of development. Manipulating genes specifically during later stages of development requires fine control over the time and place of expression, which can be achieved only through transgenic technology. In this chapter, we describe a very efficient method of transgenesis developed for Xenopus laevis and Xenopus tropicalis.

1.2. Background



Human Chorionic Gonadotropin Nuclear Transplantation Sperm Nucleus Xenopus Tropicalis Transgenic Embryo 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



We thank Jennifer Taylor and Roz Friday for comments on the manuscript. We also thank Odile Bronchain, who helped modify the protocol for Xenopus tropicalis. Enrique Amaya was a Welcome Trust senior research fellow. This work was funded by The Wellcome Trust.


  1. 1.
    Kroll KL, Amaya E (1996) Transgenic Xenopus embryos from sperm nuclear transplantations reveal FGF signaling requirements during gastrulation. Development 122:3173–3183.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Huang H, Marsh-Armstrong N, Brown DD (1999) Metamorphosis is inhibited in transgenic Xenopus laevis tadpoles that overexpress type III deiodinase. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 96:962–967.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Breckenridge RA, Mohun TJ, Amaya E (2001) A role for BMP signalling in heart looping morphogenesis in Xenopus. Dev Biol 232:191–203.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hartley KO, Hardcastle Z, Friday RV, Amaya E, Papalopulu N (2001) Transgenic Xenopus embryos reveal that anterior neural development requires continued suppression of BMP signaling after gastrulation. Dev Biol 238:168–184.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Schreiber AM, Das B, Huang H, Marsh-Armstrong N, Brown DD (2001) Diversedevelopmental programs of Xenopus laevis metamorphosis are inhibited by a dominant negative thyroid hormone receptor. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98:10739–10744.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hartle, KO, Nutt SL, Amaya E (2002) Targeted gene expression in transgenic Xenopus using the binary Gal4-UAS system. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99:1377–1382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Marsh-Armstrong N., Cai L, Brown DD (2004) Thyroid hormone controls the development of connections between the spinal cord and limbs during Xenopus laevis metamorphosis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 101:165–170.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Marsh-Armstrong N., Huang H, Berry DL, Brown DD (1999) Germ-line transmission of transgenes in Xenopus laevis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 96:14389–14393.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nutt SL, Bronchain OJ, Hartley KO, Amaya E (2001) Comparison of morpholino based translational inhibition during the development of Xenopus laevis and Xenopus tropicalis. Genesis 30:110–113.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Byrne JA, Simonsson S, Gurdon JB (2002) From intestine to muscle: nuclear reprogramming through defective cloned embryos. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99:6059–6063.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gargioli C, Slack JM (2004) Cell lineage tracing during Xenopus tail regeneration. Development 131:2669–2679.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kuroda H, Wessely O,. Robertis EM (2004) Neural induction in Xenopus: requirement for ectodermal and endomesodermal signals via chordin, noggin, beta-catenin, and cerberus. PLoS Biol 2:E92.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Offield MF, Hirsch N, Grainger RM (2000) The development of Xenopus tropicalis trans-genic lines and their use in studying lens developmental timing in living embryos.Development 127:1789–1797.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chalmers AD, Welchman D, Papalopulu N (2002) Intrinsic differences between the superficial and deep layers of the Xenopus ectoderm control primary neuronal differentiation. Dev Cell 2:171–182.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Geng X, Xiao L, Lin GF, Hu R, Wang JH, Rupp RA, Ding X (2003) Lef/Tcf- dependent Wnt/beta-catenin signaling during Xenopus axis specification. FEBS Lett 547:1–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Casey ES, Tada M, Fairclough L, Wylie CC, Heasman J, Smith JC (1999) Bix4 is activated directly by VegT and mediates endoderm formation in Xenopus development. Development 126:4193–4200.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mani SS, Besharse JC, Knox BE (1999) Immediate upstream sequence of arrestin directs rod-specific expression in Xenopus. J Biol Chem 274:15590–15597.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hyde CE, Old RW (2000) Regulation of the early expression of the Xenopus nodal-related 1 gene, Xnr1. Development 127:1221–1229.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lerchner W, Latinkic BV, Remacle JE, Huylebroeck D, Smith JC (2000) Region- specific activation of the Xenopus brachyury promoter involves active repression in ectoderm and endoderm: a study using transgenic frog embryos. Development 127:2729–2739.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ryffel GU, Lingott A (2000) Distinct promoter elements mediate endodermal and mesodermal expression of the HNF1alpha promoter in transgenic Xenopus. Mech Dev 90:65–75.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sparrow DB, Cai C, Kotecha S, Latinkic B, Cooper B, Towers N, Evans SM. Mohun TJ. (2000) Regulation of the tinman homologues in Xenopus embryos. Dev Biol 227:65–79.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Polli M, Amaya E (2002) A study of mesoderm patterning through the analysis of the regulation of Xmyf-5 expression. Development 129:2917–2927.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    23 Yang J, Mei W, Otto A, Xiao L, Tao Q, Geng X, Rupp RA, Ding X (2002) Repression through a distal TCF-3 binding site restricts Xenopus myf-5 expression in gastrula mesoderm. Mech Dev 115:79–89.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Small EM, Krieg PA (2003) Transgenic analysis of the atrialnatriuretic factor (ANF) promoter: Nkx2-5 and GATA-4 binding sites are required for atrial specific expression of ANF. Dev Biol 261:116–131.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Tanaka T, Kubota M, Shinohara K, Yasuda K, Kato JY (2003) In vivo analysis of the cyclin D1 promoter during early embryogenesis in Xenopus. Cell Struct Funct 28:165–177.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Karaulanov E, Knochel W, Niehrs C (2004) Transcriptional regulation of BMP4 synexpression in transgenic Xenopus. Embo J 23:844–856.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sipe CW, Gruber EJ, Saha MS (2004) Short upstream region drives dynamic expression of hypoxia-inducible factor 1alpha during Xenopus development. Dev Dyn:229–238.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Beck CW, Slack JM (1999) Gut specific expression using mammalian promoters in transgenic Xenopus laevis. Mech Dev 88:221–227.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Gottgens B, Barton LM, Gilbert JG, Bench AJ, Sanchez MJ, Bahn S, Mistry S, Grafham D, McMurray A, Vaudin M, Amaya E, Bentley DR, Green AR, Sinclair AM (2000) Analysis of vertebrate SCL loci identifies conserved enhancers. Nat Biotechnol 18:181–186.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Rodriguez TA, Casey ES, Harland RM, Smith JC, Beddington RS (2001) Distinct enhancer elements control Hex expression during gastrulation and early organo- genesis. Dev Biol 234:304–316.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Zhang, T, TanYH, Fu J, Lui D, Ning Y, Jirik FR, Brenner S, Venkatesh B (2003) The regulation of retina specific expression of rhodopsin gene in vertebrates. Gene 313:189–200.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Lim W, Neff ES, Furlow JD (2004) The mouse muscle creatine kinase promoter faithfully drives reporter gene expression in transgenic Xenopus laevis. Physiol Genomics 18:79–86.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Stapleton T, Luchman A, Johnston J, Browder L, Brenner S, Venkatesh B, Jirik FR (2004) Compact intergenic regions of the pufferfish genome facilitate isolation of gene promoters: characterization of Fugu 3 -phosphoadenosine 5 -phosphosulfate synthase 2 (fPapss2) gene promoter function in transgenic Xenopus. FEBS Lett 556:59–63.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Warkman AS, Atkinson BG (2004) Amphibian cardiac troponin I gene's organization, developmental expression, and regulatory properties are different from its mammalian homologue. Dev Dyn 229:275–288.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Brand AH, Perrimon N (1993) Targeted gene expression as a means of altering cell fates and generating dominant phenotypes. Development 118:401–415.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Chae J, Zimmerman LB, Grainger RM (2002) Inducible control of tissue- specific transgene expression in Xenopus tropicalis transgenic lines. Mech Dev 117:235–241.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Werdien D, Peiler G, Ryffel GU (2001) FLP and Cre recombinase function in Xenopus embryos. Nucleic Acids Res 29:e53–53.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Ryffel, GU, Werdien D, Turan G, Gerhards A, Goosses S, Senkel S (2003) Tagging muscle cell lineages in development and tail regeneration using Cre recombinase in transgenic Xenopus. Nucleic Acids Res 31:e44.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Murray AW (1991) Cell cycle extracts. Meth in Cell Biol 36:581–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Schiestl RH, Petes TD (1991) Integration of DNA fragments by illegitimate recombination in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 88: 7585–7589.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Kuspa A,. Loomis WF (1992) Tagging developmental genes in Dictyostelium by restriction enzyme-mediated integration of plasmid DNA. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 89:8803–8807.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Bronchain OJ, Hartley KO, Amaya E (1999) A gene trap approach in Xenopus. Curr Biol 9:1195–1198.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Amaya E, Offield MF, Grainger RM (1998) Frog genetics: Xenopus tropicalis jumps into the future. Trends Genet 14:253–255.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Hirsch N, Zimmerman LB, Grainger RM (2002) Xenopus, the next generation: X. tropicalis genetics and genomics. Dev Dyn 225:422–433.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Humana Press, a part of Springer Science + Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shoko Ishibashi
    • 1
  • Kristen L. Kroll
    • 2
  • Enrique Amaya
    • 1
  1. 1.The Healing Foundation Centre, Michael Smith Building, Faculty of Life SciencesUniversity of ManchesterManchesterUK
  2. 2.Department of Molecular Biology and PharmacologyWashington University School of MedicineSt. LouisUSA

Personalised recommendations