Genome biology · 2018 · 96 citations · 41 references
Life SciencesGeneticsMolecular BiologyDna RepairGenetic EngineeringGenome EditingCrispr-based EngineeringCrispr-cas SystemsDna Double-strand Break RepairHomologous RecombinationHomology-directed RepairNon-homologous End JoiningClustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats (Crispr)-based MutagenesisCrispr-based Genome EngineeringCrispr-cas Genome EditingCrispr-cas9 Genome EditingCrispr-cas9-mediated RepairGenome Editing By Homology-directed RepairHomologyHomology-directed Repair Pathway
BACKGROUND: While CRISPR-Cas systems hold tremendous potential for engineering the human genome, it is unclear how well each system performs against one another in both non-homologous end joining (NHEJ)-mediated and homology-directed repair (HDR)-mediated genome editing. RESULTS: We systematically compare five different CRISPR-Cas systems in human cells by targeting 90 sites in genes with varying expression levels. For a fair comparison, we select sites that are either perfectly matched or have overlapping seed regions for Cas9 and Cpf1. Besides observing a trade-off between cleavage efficiency and target specificity for these natural endonucleases, we find that the editing activities of the smaller Cas9 enzymes from Staphylococcus aureus (SaCas9) and Neisseria meningitidis (NmCas9) are less affected by gene expression than the other larger Cas proteins. Notably, the Cpf1 nucleases from Acidaminococcus sp. BV3L6 and Lachnospiraceae bacterium ND2006 (AsCpf1 and LbCpf1, respectively) are able to perform precise gene targeting efficiently across multiple genomic loci using single-stranded oligodeoxynucleotide (ssODN) donor templates with homology arms as short as 17 nucleotides. Strikingly, the two Cpf1 nucleases exhibit a preference for ssODNs of the non-target strand sequence, while the popular Cas9 enzyme from Streptococcus pyogenes (SpCas9) exhibits a preference for ssODNs of the target strand sequence instead. Additionally, we find that the HDR efficiencies of Cpf1 and SpCas9 can be further improved by using asymmetric donors with longer arms 5' of the desired DNA changes. CONCLUSIONS: Our work delineates design parameters for each CRISPR-Cas system and will serve as a useful reference for future genome engineering studies.
41
Multiplex Genome Engineering Using CRISPR/Cas Systems
Le Cong, F. Ann Ran, David Cox et al. · Science · 2013 · 15.7K citations
RNA-Guided Human Genome Engineering via Cas9
Prashant Mali, Luhan Yang, Kevin M. Esvelt et al. · Science · 2013 · 9.4K citations · Full text
Cpf1 Is a Single RNA-Guided Endonuclease of a Class 2 CRISPR-Cas System
Bernd Zetsche, Jonathan S. Gootenberg, Omar O. Abudayyeh et al. · Cell · 2015 · 4.9K citations · Full text
Efficient genome editing in zebrafish using a CRISPR-Cas system
Woong Y. Hwang, Yanfang Fu, Deepak Reyon et al. · Nature Biotechnology · 2013 · 3K citations · Full text
In vivo genome editing using Staphylococcus aureus Cas9
F. Ann Ran, Le Cong, Winston X. Yan et al. · Nature · 2015 · 2.7K citations · Full text