Cited by 592Fungal and yeast genetics researchAntifungal resistance and susceptibilityFungal Infections and Studies

Strains and Strategies for Large-Scale Gene Deletion Studies of the Diploid Human Fungal Pathogen Candida albicans

Open access
Noble, Suzanne M., Johnson, Alexander D.·2005·Eukaryotic Cell

Abstract

Candida albicans is the most common human fungal pathogen and causes significant morbidity and mortality worldwide. Nevertheless, the basic principles of C. albicans pathogenesis remain poorly understood. Of central importance to the study of this organism is the ability to generate homozygous knockout mutants and to analyze them in a mammalian model of pathogenesis. C. albicans is diploid, and current strategies for gene deletion typically involve repeated use of the URA3 selectable marker. These procedures are often time-consuming and inefficient. Moreover, URA3 expression levels—which are susceptible to chromosome position effects—can themselves affect virulence, thereby complicating analysis of strains constructed with URA3 as a selectable marker. Here, we describe a set of newly developed reference strains ( leu2Δ/leu2Δ , his1Δ/his1Δ ; arg4Δ/arg4Δ , his1Δ/his1Δ ; and arg4Δ/arg4Δ , leu2Δ/leu2Δ , his1Δ/his1Δ ) that exhibit wild-type or nearly wild-type virulence in a mouse model. We also describe new disruption marker cassettes and a fusion PCR protocol that permit rapid and highly efficient generation of homozygous knockout mutations in the new C. albicans strains. We demonstrate these procedures for two well-studied genes, TUP1 and EFG1 , as well as a novel gene, RBD1 . These tools should permit large-scale genetic analysis of this important human pathogen.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1128/ec.4.2.298-309.2005

Cites

57 of 57 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Noble, S. M., & Johnson, A. D.
Affiliations
University of California, San Francisco (US)
Venue
Eukaryotic Cell
Published
2005-02
Volume
4
Issue
2
Pages
298-309
ISSN
  • 1535-9778 (ISSN-L)
  • 1535-9786
OpenAlex
W2128207311
Cited by
592
References
57
Citations by year
2026: 22 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 39 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 35 · 2021: 27 · 2020: 28 · 2019: 35 · 2018: 33 · 2017: 36 · 2016: 35 · 2015: 46 · 2014: 36 · 2013: 32 · 2012: 23
FWCI
6.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Eukaryotic Cell (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (R01AI049187, R01 AI 49187)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Fungal and yeast genetics research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Antifungal resistance and susceptibility
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Fungal Infections and Studies
Keywords
Candida albicans, gene deletion, fusion PCR, reference strains, virulence, Tup1, EFG1
MeSH terms
Animals, Candida albicans, Fungal Proteins, Genes, Fungal, Genetic Complementation Test, Genetic Markers, Humans, Gene Expression Regulation, Fungal, Survival Rate, Polymerase Chain Reaction, Gene Deletion, Mice

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review