Published: Vol 9, Iss 23, Dec 5, 2019 DOI: 10.21769/BioProtoc.3443 Views: 3918
Reviewed by: Longping Victor TseDr. Kalpa MehtaAnonymous reviewer(s)
Protocol Collections
Comprehensive collections of detailed, peer-reviewed protocols focusing on specific topics
Related protocols
Workflow for a Functional Assay of Candidate Effectors From Phytopathogens Using a TMV-GFP-based System
Peng Cao [...] Yuyan An
Apr 20, 2025 819 Views
Flow Cytometric Quantification of HIV-1-Infected Cells Expressing Either Abortive or Elongated HIV-1 Transcripts Using Flow-FISH
Shirley Man [...] Neeltje A. Kootstra
Jul 20, 2025 1083 Views
Abstract
A founding paradigm in virology is that the spatial unit of the viral replication cycle is an individual cell. This concept applied to multipartite viruses–which have a genome composed of two or more nucleic acid segments, each individually encapsulated–implies that all segments constituting a viral genome need to coinfect the same host cell for replication to occur. Would this requirement be verified, it would constitute a major cost for extreme cases of multipartition such as the Faba bean necrotic stunt virus (FBNSV, nanovirus) whose genome is composed of eight complementary segments, each encoding a single gene (Grigoras et al., 2009). To address this question, we followed the distribution of the FBNSV genome segments by fluorescence in situ hybridization combined to immunolocalization of the replication-controlling viral protein within the cells of the host plant: Vicia Faba.
A rapid and efficient protocol to localize viral transcripts in plant and insect hosts has been developed earlier (Ghanim et al., 2009). We here improve this method by using random-primed labeled probes and apply it to the detection and quantification of the individual segments composing the FBNSV genome. Moreover, we combine this technique with immunolocalization so that both viral segments and proteins can be visualized within the same samples.
Background
Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and immunolocalization are essential techniques to localize specific nucleic acids and proteins respectively. These techniques have been successfully used either separately or in combination in a number of studies. Generally, in situ hybridization protocols include numerous steps, resulting in a cumbersome and time-consuming technique. The protocol developed by Ghanim et al. has considerably simplified this technique (Ghanim et al., 2009). When applied to our pathosystem (FBNSV, Vicia Faba), however, this protocol yielded poor and/or non-specific signals. Although FBNSV is a circular single-stranded DNA phytovirus like the Tomato yellow leaf curl virus (TYLCV) on which Ghanim and coauthors tested their protocol, the FBNSV genome is composed of eight molecules of around 1 kb each, sharing common regions which sometimes correspond to the almost quasi-totality of their non-coding regions (Grigoras et al., 2010). We thus sought to improve this protocol for the detection of individual FBNSV genomic segments by using, instead of fluorescent oligonucleotides, random primed probes generally used for in situ localization experiments on chromosomes. We were able to couple it with immunolocalization for visualization of nucleic acid and proteins i.e., covisualization of genetic information and translation products within the same cells.
By combining these two methods, we showed (i) that the FBNSV genomic segments do not colocalize in individual host cells, and (ii) that the viral protein involved in the replication of all segments is often found within cells lacking the segment encoding it; suggesting that viral expression products are able to move away from the cells where they are produced. We believe that our methodology could easily be adapted to locate and quantify (single-stranded) nucleic acids in different tissues with great specificity. For instance, this protocol has also been successfully used to locate the FBNSV segments within gut cells of its aphid vector and TYLCV genome within host plants.
Materials and Reagents
Note: Some of the reagents and materials described below are optional depending on the targeted sequence and tissue (see Procedure below for further details).
Equipment
Software
Procedure
Name | Primer sequence | Size | Segment |
NV C-297 F | ATGGGTCTGAAATATTTCTC | 510nt | C |
NV C-806 R | TTAATTAATTACAATCTCC | ||
M ORF For2 | GCTGCGTATCAAGACGAC | 268nt | M |
M ORF Rev2 | TTCTAGCATCCCAATTCC | ||
N ORF For | TGGCAGATTGGTTTTCTAGT | 450nt | N |
N ORF Rev | TTCTGAGTGAATGTACAATAAACATTT | ||
R ORF For | ACATTAAATAATCCTCTCTCTCCTA | 810nt | R |
R ORF Rev | CCTATCATCACTAAACATGCC | ||
S ORF For | AAATGGTGAGCAATTGGAA | 350nt | S |
S ORF Rev | GCCTATGATAGTAATCATATCTTGACA | ||
U1 ORF For | TTGGTCGATTATTTGTTGGTT | 455nt | U1 |
U1 ORF Rev | AATATCTCATTAGCATTAATTACATTTGAA | ||
U2 ORF For | TTATGGATGCCGGCTTT | 361nt | U2 |
U2 ORF Rev | CATGAAGTATTAGAATAACGAACTTGA | ||
U4 ORF For | AGCAGGTTATGGAATGTAGG | 313nt | U4 |
U4 ORF Rev | ATAGATTCCCACAATCGCT | ||
R1 For | ACATTAAATAATCCTCTCTCTCCTA | 282nt | R |
R1 Rev | CTCTAAGCGTACTTGCAG | ||
R2 For | GAAGAAAGCTATTGCTACTTGG | 406nt | |
R2 Rev | CCTATCATCACTAAACATGCC | ||
Nmys2-Red | TTACATCATAAGTGCTGTAAGTATAATAAGGCACAACTAA | 40 nt | N |
Nmys7-Green | TTACATCATATTATACCAACTGTTGCTATCCCACAACTAA | 40 nt | N |
Smys1-Red | GTTTTTCATTAACTTCTCACTATAATAACTGCCCACAGTG | 40 nt | S |
Smys8-Green | GTTTTTCATTAATATAAGTCATAATTCCTGCTCCACAGTG | 40 nt | S |
Reagents | Procedure | |||
Components | Final concentrations | Step | Temperature | Time |
GoTaq reaction buffer | 1x | Initial Denaturation | 95 °C | 2 min |
GoTaq DNA polymerase | 0.5 unit | 40 Cycles | 95 °C | 45 s |
dNTP 0.2 mM each | 0.2 mM each | 59 °C | 45 s | |
Primers Forward + Reverse | 0.5 μM | 72 °C | 45 s | |
Template DNA | 72 °C | 5 min | ||
Nuclease-free water | Hold | 4-10 °C |
Figure 5. Microscopy slide ready to be observed and mounted as described in the note below. A Vaseline chamber was made prior to adding the mounting medium and the cross section to avoid movement of the preparation during long image captures.
Note: For microscopy slides, depending on the thickness of your samples, you can use Vaseline to make a kind of “incubation chamber” on the slide before adding the mounting media and the coverslip.
Fluorescence emission was collected on the photomultiplicator 1 and the variable secondary dichroic beam splitter was set so as to recover fluorescence up to:
Data analysis
Analyses were run using maximum intensity projections so that all the fluorescence emitted in the whole nuclei was accounted for. These microscopic images were analyzed using Image J software.
Notes
Recipes
Acknowledgments
We are thankful to the PHIV platform (CIRAD, Montpellier, France) for sharing their immunolocalization protocol.
Competing interests
No competing interests to declare.
References
Article Information
Copyright
Vernerey et al. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0).
How to cite
Readers should cite both the Bio-protocol article and the original research article where this protocol was used:
Category
Plant Science > Plant immunity > Host-microbe interactions
Microbiology > Pathogen detection > FISH
Molecular Biology > DNA > DNA labeling
Do you have any questions about this protocol?
Post your question to gather feedback from the community. We will also invite the authors of this article to respond.
Tips for asking effective questions
+ Description
Write a detailed description. Include all information that will help others answer your question including experimental processes, conditions, and relevant images.
Share
Bluesky
X
Copy link