SpyCas9a

Cas ID

RESOURCES

  • Species Streptococcus pyogenes M1 GAS strain SF370link
  • Genome Assembly NC_002737.2link
  • Gene ID 901176link
  • Protein ID WP_010922251.1link
  • UniProtKB Q99ZW2link
  • CDD COG3513link
  • Nucleotide Sequence FASTA 2
  • Amino Acid Sequence FASTA 1
  • crRNA (Ex) FASTA 3
  • sgRNA Sequence (Ex) FASTA 4
  • tracrRNA Sequence (Ex) FASTA 3
  • Direct Repeat (Native) FASTA 3

CLASSIFICATION

  • Cas ID 1.1.1
  • Nuclease Activity Target dsDNA + no trans-activity. Blunt cut.
  • Targeting Requirement 3' PAM
  • gRNA and Multiplexability crRNA + tracr + endogenous
  • Class 2 subtype II-A
  • PAM or PFS NGG

PROPERTIES

  • Protospacer Length 20 1
  • PAM NGG 1
  • Protein Weight (KDa) 158
  • RNP Weight (KDa) 190
  • CDS Length (nt) 4107 2
  • Number Amino Acids 1368 1
  • tracrRNA Length (nt) 75 3
  • crRNA_Length (nt) 56 3
  • sgRNA Length (nt) 96 4



DESCRIPTION

Summary

The first demonstration of RNA-guided DNA targeting by Cas9 from Streptococcus pyogenes (SpyCas9) 1 , and consequent demonstration of its ability to edit mammalian genomes 4 , initiated a revolution in fundamental biology and therapeutic development.

In its native context, SpyCas9 complexes with a CRISPR RNA (crRNA) and a trans-activating CRISPR RNA (tracrRNA) to form the active ribonucleoprotein (RNP) 3 . The SpyCas9 RNP then searches for a PAM sequence 5’-NGG-3’ situated directly downstream of the target sequence in the DNA, forms an R-loop complex where one of the DNA strands is base-paired to the complementary spacer of crRNA, and uses two catalytic domains (RuvC and HNH) to cleave both DNA strands 1 . The ease of reprogramming SpyCas9 RNPs to target various DNA sequences (when a PAM is present nearby) makes this enzyme highly attractive for genome-engineering applications. In most applications, an engineered single guide RNA (sgRNA) is used instead of the natural dual tracrRNA:crRNA guide 1 4 . Double-stranded breaks (DSBs) generated by SpyCas9 RNPs are usually repaired via non-homologous end-joining; however, the ultimate outcome depends on which DNA repair pathway is predominant 5 , which is impacted by absence/presence of a DNA template for homology directed repair (HDR), cell type, chromatin structure, cell cycle, and many other cellular factors.

Applications

SpyCas9 is the most broadly utilized and validated CRISPR editor and has been shown to be highly adept at modifying the genome of many organisms, ranging from phage to humans. Additionally, by leveraging CRISPR-Cas9’s ability to introduce targeted genetic disruptions, scientists have built successful platforms for the rapid creation of knockout animal models, genetic screening6 7 , and diagnostic testing 8 9 .

There are many ongoing CRISPR-Cas clinical trials that utilize SpyCas9. These treatments include many ex vivo cell therapies 10 and emerging systemic in vivo editing in patients 11 . A comprehensive listing of these trials is outside of CasPEDIA's scope but can be found in other resources link link. A more detailed general overview of CRISPR clinical trials: link.

CRISPR-Cas9 has also been extensively harnessed for agricultural purposes, improving plant immunity and nutritional content for staple crops like wheat and rice. A more comprehensive listing of all agricultural CRISPR-Cas9 based engineering can be found in other resources 12 13 14 15 , but several examples may be found in the experimental section of CasPEDIA. A more detailed general overview of CRISPR agricultural engineering: link.

Experimental Considerations

When working with SpyCas9, there are several important experimental considerations to take into account.

Multiple software tools exist for SpyCas9 guide design 16 , to identify suitable high-activity target sites and minimize potential off-target events.

The size of the SpyCas9 coding sequence (CDS) poses a limitation for packaging into adeno-associated virus (AAV), as it approaches the maximum limit of approximately 4.7kb. This accounts for the inclusion of a promoter, termination signal, and sgRNA expression cassette. To accommodate the size constraint, splitting the SpyCas9 CDS into multiple AAV vectors may be necessary especially if using SpyCas9 fusion proteins 17 18 . Other Cas9 orthologs, including SauCas9 19 , Nme2Cas9 20 and SluCas9 21 , are more compact and therefore package more effectively into AAV. In certain cases, it can be advantageous to alter the delivery method of SpyCas9, making the size of its CDS less of a concern. For instance, one option is to deliver SpyCas9 (and its derivatives) as mRNA and sgRNA using lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) 22 , or as preassembled RNPs using virus-like particles (VLPs) 23 24 25 .

Engineered versions of SpyCas9 exist that broaden its PAM targeting 26 27 or improve its specificity 28 29 30 31 . These variants expand the targeting scope of SpyCas9 and may be better suited for certain genome-editing goals.

To minimize non-specific genome editing, commonly referred to as off-target sites, efforts have been undertaken to develop high-specificity variants of SpyCas9, either with rational design 28 29 based on structures 32 33 , or with directed evolution 30 . These specially engineered variants preserve SpyCas9's on-target activity at a comparable level while significantly reducing the occurrence of off-target editing events. It was shown that the alteration of SpyCas9's DNA-cutting kinetics has a major effect on target specificity 34 . A comprehensive evaluation of several high-fidelity variants was made in this study 35 .

A number of fusion proteins have also been generated with SpyCas9, including DNA base editors 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 and prime editors 43 44 45 , which are capable of generating site-specific precise modifications such as single-base substitutions or small deletions and insertions without the need for double-stranded breaks (DSBs) and homology directed repair (HDR).

In addition to directly modifying genomic DNA, SpyCas9 (usually inactive, dCas9) fusion proteins can be harnessed for transcriptional activation 46 or repression 47 , targeted manipulation of epigenetic marks 48 49 , imaging of genomic loci in cells 50 .

It is worth noting that SpyCas9 has tight binding to the targeted DNA and slow dissociation rate following cleavage in vitro. These characteristics make SpyCas9 behave as a single-turnover enzyme 1 51 52 ; however, some orthologs may demonstrate a multi-turnover nature 53 . While stable product binding may be an important consideration for the design of experiments in vitro, studies report that in vivo SpyCas9 is dislodged from the cleaved site by histone chaperone FACT. This process effectively transforms SpyCas9 into a multiple-turnover enzyme within the cellular nucleus 54 . Furthermore, even though the DNA cut produced by SpyCas9 is commonly referred to as blunt-ended double-strand break, in vitro experiments indicate that, following blunt cleavage, nucleotides are then trimmed from at least one of the newly cleaved DNA ends, though this trimming activity occurs on a timescale much slower than that of the initial cut 1 55 56 . In vivo cleavage products with 1–3 nt 5’ overhangs have also been reported based on DNA repair outcomes of Cas9 editing 56 57 56 .

Search Constructs on Addgeneaddgene_link

Tool_Type Tool Is_Tool_Applicable Notes Citation
Delivery and Expression RNP Yes Deliverable as an RNP via electroporation 58 Delivery with cell-penetrating peptides (in cis and in trans) 59 NaN
Delivery and Expression Lenti Yes Primarily used for screening 6 NaN
Delivery and Expression AAV No Exceeds packaging limits as a single construct, but effectively engineered into a split intein system for dual construct delivery 18 NaN
Delivery and Expression LNP Yes LNP has been shown effective for intravenous tissue-selective delivery to liver, spleen, lungs, and kidney 60 . The first systemic CRISPR gene therapy, VERVE-101, was done with liver selective LNP delivery and SpyCas9. link
Delivery and Expression EDV Yes EDVs typically package Cas9 RNP as a fusion to a retroviral polypeptide, delivered as free RNP after cleavage by a co-packaged viral protease. 23 Pseudotyping the EDV with different fusogens can provide target cell specificity. 24 NaN
Delivery and Expression Other_Delivery Nanoclews; CRISPR-Gold; Photorhabdus virulence cassette Nanoclews are DNA-based "ball of yarn"-like nanoparticles generated using rolling circle amplification.61 Gold nanoparticles can deliver RNP and HDR template DNA (if desired).62 NanoMEDIC utilizes small molecule-inducible protein dimerization to recruit Cas9 as cargo into extracellular vesicles.63 Photorhabdus virulence cassettes (PVCs) are extracellular contractile injection systems derived from bacteria engineered to have programmable payloads and tissue specificity 64 NaN
Guide Design Guide_Design_Algorithm CRISPOR;CHOPCHOPv3 NaN 65 66

Application_Type Description Pharmaceutical_or_Product_Name NCT Responsible_Party Delivery_Mechanism In_Vivo_or_Ex_Vivo_Editing Citation_or_Publications
Human_Clinical_Trial Phase 1 treatment of hereditary Transthyretin Amyloidosis (ATTR) with lipid nanoparticle (LNP) formulation. NTLA-2001 NCT04601051 Intellia Therapeutics LNP In vivo NaN
Human_Clinical_Trial Phase 1b treatment of Heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia with LNP base editor formulation. VERVE-101 NCT05398029 Verve Therapeutics, Inc. LNP In vivo NaN
Human_Clinical_Trial Phase 1/2 treatment of hereditary angioedema with lipid nanoparticle formulation. NTLA-2002 NCT05120830 Intellia Therapeutics LNP In vivo NaN
Human_Clinical_Trial Phase 3 treatment of Beta-Thalassemic and related hemoglobinopathies by modifying hemopoietic stem cells at BCL11a enhancer. CTX001 NCT05356195 Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated NaN Ex vivo NaN
Human_Clinical_Trial Phase 1/2 treatment of Beta-Thalassemic and related hemoglobinopathies by modifying hemopoietic stem cells. EDIT-301 NCT05444894 Editas Medicine, Inc. NaN Ex vivo NaN
Human_Clinical_Trial Phase 1 treatment of type I diabetes VCTX210 NCT05210530 CRISPR Therapeutics NaN Ex vivo NaN
Human_Clinical_Trial Beam Therapeutics Inc., Phase 1/2 treatment of severe Sickle Cell Disease. BEAM-101 NCT05456880 Beam Therapeutics Inc. NaN Ex vivo NaN
Prokaryotes CRISPR interference in Escherichia coli NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
Prokaryotes Gene editing in Streptococcus pneumoniae and Escherichia coli NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
Plant_Agriculture Staple crops: Wheat 67 , Maize 68 , Sorghum 69 , Rice, Soybean, Potato NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
Plant_Agriculture Fruits and Vegetables: Tomato 70 , Cucumber, Grapefruit, Oranges, Grapes 71 , Apples 71 , Cavendish Banana 72 NaN NaN NaN NaN In Vivo NaN
Mouse Brain editing by local injection of cell penetrant SpyCas9 59 , In Vivo Base Editing in Mouse Brain liver Heart 18 NaN NaN NaN NaN In Vivo NaN
Other_Model_System Primary Human Lymphocytes 73 NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN

Tool_Type Tool_Name Description Citation
Tool Perturb-seq CRISPR perturb-seq is a high-throughput functional genomics approach that combines CRISPR-Cas9 gene perturbation with single-cell RNA sequencing to study gene function on a large scale at single-cell resolution. 7 NaN
Tool CRISPR KO CRISPR-KO with comprehensive single guide RNAs (sgRNAs) libraries enables efficient genome-wide knockout to disrupt specific genes and interrogate complex gene networks. GeCKO 6 and Brunello 74 libraries. NaN
Tool Spatiotemporal Editing Control Spatiotemporal engineering control refers to limiting the editing window to a specific genetic, chemical or physical context, allowing for synchronized activiation of editing, or mitigation of undesirable consequences resulting from extended expression such as off-target modifications. Several examples of spatiotemporal editing control are listed below, but for a comphrehensive overview please refer to these reviews: General review 75 , in plants 76 NaN
NaN NaN Light (activation): Far-red inducible split SpyCas9 77 , photocleavable gRNA 78 NaN
NaN NaN Small molecule (activation): 4-hydroxytamoxifen (4-HT) 79 80 NaN
NaN NaN Small molecule (inhibition): Trimethoprim 81 NaN
NaN NaN Heat (activation): heat inducible promoter 82 NaN
Diagnostic CRISPR/Cas9-based Lateral Flow and Fluorescence Diagnostics CRISPR/Cas9-based lateral flow and fluorescence diagnostics use nucleic acid probes labeled with reporter molecules, such as fluorescent dyes or enzymes. These probes specifically bind to the target nucleic acids, enabling the visualization of the diagnostic result through fluorescence or colorimetric signals. 8 NaN
Diagnostic ctPCR: CRISPR-typing PCR for DNA detection CRISPR-typing PCR utilizes Cas nucleases to specifically cleave target DNA sequences, followed by PCR amplification to detect and quantify the presence of the target DNA with high sensitivity and accuracy. 9 NaN

Variant_Name Mutations Description
eSpyCas9 1.1 K848A/K1003A/R1060A Engineered for improved specificity 28
SpyCas9-HF1 N497A/R661A/Q695A/Q926A Engineered for improved specificity 29
EvoCas9 M495V, Y515N, K526E, R661Q Engineered for improved specificity 30
Sniper-Cas9 F539S/M763I/K890N Engineered for improved specificity 83
HypaCas9 N692A/M694A/Q695A/H698A R1335V/L1111R/D1135V/G1218R/E1219F/A1322R/T1337R
xCas9 A262T/R324L/S409I/E480K/E543D/M694I/E1219V Engineered for improved specificity 31
SuperFi-Cas9 Y1010D/Y1013D/Y1016D/V1018D/R1019D/K1031D/Q1027D Engineered for improved specificifty 84
HiFi SpyCas9 R691A Engineered for improved specificity85
HeFSpyCas9 N497A/R661A/Q695A/K848A/Q926A/K1003A/R1060A Engineered for improved specificity 86
SpyCas9-HF1 N467A/R661A/Q695A/Q926A Engineered for improved specificity 29
rCas9HF K526D Engineered for improved specificity 87
SpGCas9 D1135L/S1136W/G1218K/E1219Q/R1335Q/T1337R Engineered for novel PAMs. SpGCas9: NGN 26
SpRYCas9 D1135L/S1136W/G1218K/E1219Q/R1335Q/T1337R/L1111R/A1322R/A61R, N1317R/R1333P Engineered for novel PAMs. SpRYCas9: NRN 26
SpyCas9-VQR D1135V/R1335Q/T1337R Engineered for novel PAMs. Spy VQR:NGAN 88
SpyCas9-EQR D1135E/R1335Q/T1337R Engineered for novel PAMs., EQR:NGNG 88
SpyCas9-VRER D1135V/G1218R/R1335E/T1337R Engineered for novel PAMs. VRER:NGCG 88
SpyCas9-NG R1335V/L1111R/D1135V/G1218R/E1219F/A1322R/T1337R Engineered for novel PAM: NG 27
SpyCas9-QQR1 G1218R/N1286Q/I1331F/D1332K/R1333Q/R1335Q/T1337R Engineered for novel PAM: NAAG 89
SpyCas9-NRRH D10T/I322V/S409I/E427G/R654L/R753G/R1114G/D1135N/V1139A/D1180G/E1219V/Q1221H/A1320V/R1333K Engineered for novel PAM: NRRH 90
SpyCas9-NRTH D10T/I322V/S409I/E427G/R654L/R753G/R1114G/D1135N/D1180G/G1218S/E1219V/Q1221H/P1249S/E1253K/P1321S/D1332G/R1335L Engineered for novel PAM: NRTH 90
SpyCas9-NRCH D10T/I322V/S409I/E427G/R654L/R753G/R1114G/D1135N/D1332N/R1335Q/T1337N/S1338T/H1349R Engineered for novel PAM: NRCH 90
Sniper2L Sniper mutations (F539S/M763I/K890N)83 w/ E1007L Derived from Sniper-Cas9 to further improve specificity and improve activity91
iSpyMac Combination of SpyCas9 with Streptococcus macacae Cas9 (SmacCas9) Combination of SpyCas9 with Streptococcus macacae Cas9 (SmacCas9) to create a variant with 5′\n-NAAN-3′ PAM preference92

NUCLEOTIDE SEQUENCE


PROTEIN STRUCTURE

PFAM ID Description
PF16593 Cas9-BH
PF16595 Cas9_PI
PF16592 Cas9_REC
PF13395 HNH_4

Feature Type Start End Ligand Description Citations
Chain 1 1368 CRISPR-associated endonuclease Cas9/Csn1
Domain 770 921 HNH Cas9-type
Region 1 62 RuvC-I PubMed_ID:24505130
Region 56 718 Recognition lobe PubMed_ID:24505130
Region 56 73 ARM PubMed_ID:24505130
Region 718 765 RuvC-II PubMed_ID:24505130
Region 925 1102 RuvC-III PubMed_ID:24505130
Region 1099 1368 PAM-interacting domain (PI) PubMed_ID:24529477
Motif 1333 1335 PAM substrate-binding PubMed_ID:25079318
Active site 10 10 For RuvC-like nuclease domain PubMed_ID:24529477
Active site 840 840 Proton acceptor for HNH nuclease domain PubMed_ID:24529477
Binding site 10 10 Mn(2+) (ChEBI:CHEBI:29035) PubMed_ID:24505130
Binding site 10 10 Mn(2+) (ChEBI:CHEBI:29035) PubMed_ID:24505130
Binding site 762 762 Mn(2+) (ChEBI:CHEBI:29035) PubMed_ID:24505130
Binding site 766 766 Mn(2+) (ChEBI:CHEBI:29035) PubMed_ID:24505130
Binding site 766 766 Mn(2+) (ChEBI:CHEBI:29035) PubMed_ID:24505130
Binding site 983 983 Mn(2+) (ChEBI:CHEBI:29035) PubMed_ID:24505130
Binding site 1297 1297 Mn(2+) (ChEBI:CHEBI:29035) PubMed_ID:24505130
Binding site 1328 1328 Mn(2+) (ChEBI:CHEBI:29035) PubMed_ID:24505130
Mutagenesis 10 10 Target DNA noncomplementary to the crRNA is not cleaved; nickase activity. Processes guide RNAs. In vivo, loss of Cas9-mediated CRISPR interference in plasmid transformation. Able to bind guide RNAs and target DNA but not cleave DNA; when associated with A-840. PubMed_ID:22745249;PubMed_ID:24270795;PubMed_ID:24529477
Mutagenesis 15 15 Decreased DNA cleavage. PubMed_ID:24529477
Mutagenesis 66 66 Significantly decreased DNA cleavage. PubMed_ID:24529477
Mutagenesis 70 70 No DNA cleavage. PubMed_ID:24529477
Mutagenesis 74 74 Significantly decreased DNA cleavage. PubMed_ID:24529477
Mutagenesis 78 78 Moderately decreased DNA cleavage. PubMed_ID:24529477
Mutagenesis 97 150 No nuclease activity. PubMed_ID:24529477
Mutagenesis 165 165 Moderately decreased DNA cleavage. PubMed_ID:24529477
Mutagenesis 175 307 About 50% nuclease activity. PubMed_ID:24529477
Mutagenesis 312 409 No nuclease activity. PubMed_ID:24529477
Mutagenesis 475 477 Slight decrease in target DNA cleavage and DNA-binding. Almost complete loss of DNA cleavage and binding; when associated with 1125-A--A-1127. PubMed_ID:24505130
Mutagenesis 762 762 Only cleaves 1 DNA strand, probably the noncomplementary strand. Processes guide RNAs correctly. In vivo, loss of Cas9-mediated CRISPR interference in plasmid transformation. PubMed_ID:24270795;PubMed_ID:24529477
Mutagenesis 840 840 Target DNA complementary to the crRNA is not cleaved; nickase activity. In vivo, loss of Cas9-mediated CRISPR interference in plasmid transformation. Able to process and bind guide RNAs and target DNA but not cleave DNA; when associated with A-10. PubMed_ID:22745249;PubMed_ID:24270795;PubMed_ID:24529477;PubMed_ID:25079318
Mutagenesis 854 854 Decreased DNA cleavage. Processes guide RNAs correctly. In vivo, retains Cas9-mediated CRISPR interference in plasmid transformation. PubMed_ID:24270795;PubMed_ID:24529477
Mutagenesis 863 863 Only cleaves 1 DNA strand, probably the complementary strand. Processes guide RNAs correctly. In vivo, loss of Cas9-mediated CRISPR interference in plasmid transformation. PubMed_ID:24270795;PubMed_ID:24529477
Mutagenesis 982 983 Processes guide RNAs correctly. PubMed_ID:24270795
Mutagenesis 982 982 Decreased DNA cleavage. In vivo, loss of Cas9-mediated CRISPR interference in plasmid transformation. PubMed_ID:24529477
Mutagenesis 983 983 Only cleaves 1 DNA strand, probably the noncomplementary strand. PubMed_ID:24529477
Mutagenesis 986 986 Only cleaves 1 DNA strand, probably the noncomplementary strand. Processes guide RNAs correctly. In vivo, loss of Cas9-mediated CRISPR interference in plasmid transformation. PubMed_ID:24270795;PubMed_ID:24529477
Mutagenesis 1099 1368 No nuclease activity. PubMed_ID:24529477
Mutagenesis 1125 1127 No change in target DNA cleavage, slight decrease in DNA-binding. Almost complete loss of DNA cleavage and binding; when associated with 475-A--A-477. PubMed_ID:24505130
Mutagenesis 1132 1132 Probably inactivates protein. PubMed_ID:23360965
Mutagenesis 1333 1335 Nearly complete loss of target DNA cleavage. PubMed_ID:25079318
Mutagenesis 1333 1333 Dramatically reduced target DNA binding, slightly decreased target cleavage. PubMed_ID:25079318
Mutagenesis 1335 1335 Dramatically reduced target DNA binding, slightly decreased target cleavage. PubMed_ID:25079318
Beta strand 6 11 PDB_ID:5B2R
Beta strand 13 21 PDB_ID:5B2R
Helix 23 25 PDB_ID:7VK9
Beta strand 29 39 PDB_ID:5B2R
Beta strand 42 52 PDB_ID:5B2R
Beta strand 56 58 PDB_ID:7VK9
Helix 60 93 PDB_ID:5B2R
Helix 97 102 PDB_ID:5B2R
Turn 103 105 PDB_ID:5B2R
Helix 108 110 PDB_ID:5B2R
Turn 117 119 PDB_ID:5B2R
Helix 122 131 PDB_ID:5B2R
Helix 135 144 PDB_ID:5B2R
Helix 151 163 PDB_ID:5B2R
Helix 177 179 PDB_ID:7QQV
Helix 182 184 PDB_ID:7S4X
Helix 185 195 PDB_ID:5B2R
Turn 196 198 PDB_ID:5B2R
Beta strand 205 207 PDB_ID:6K4S
Helix 208 212 PDB_ID:5B2R
Beta strand 214 216 PDB_ID:5B2R
Helix 218 227 PDB_ID:5B2R
Beta strand 229 231 PDB_ID:7OX9
Beta strand 234 236 PDB_ID:6K57
Helix 237 246 PDB_ID:5B2R
Turn 253 257 PDB_ID:5B2R
Beta strand 258 261 PDB_ID:7S4V
Beta strand 266 268 PDB_ID:5FQ5
Helix 271 282 PDB_ID:5B2R
Helix 284 286 PDB_ID:5B2R
Helix 287 299 PDB_ID:5B2R
Turn 300 305 PDB_ID:5B2R
Turn 310 312 PDB_ID:7OXA
Helix 316 342 PDB_ID:5B2R
Helix 345 351 PDB_ID:5B2R
Beta strand 356 358 PDB_ID:5B2R
Helix 359 363 PDB_ID:5B2R
Helix 369 382 PDB_ID:5B2R
Beta strand 383 385 PDB_ID:5B2R
Helix 387 394 PDB_ID:5B2R
Beta strand 402 404 PDB_ID:5VW1
Helix 405 409 PDB_ID:5B2R
Helix 412 426 PDB_ID:5B2R
Turn 427 429 PDB_ID:5B2R
Helix 431 435 PDB_ID:5B2R
Helix 437 445 PDB_ID:5B2R
Turn 450 452 PDB_ID:5B2R
Helix 453 455 PDB_ID:7VK9
Beta strand 467 471 PDB_ID:5B2R
Turn 475 477 PDB_ID:5B2R
Helix 478 481 PDB_ID:5B2R
Helix 484 493 PDB_ID:5B2R
Beta strand 500 502 PDB_ID:5B2R
Beta strand 505 509 PDB_ID:7QQZ
Helix 513 524 PDB_ID:5B2R
Beta strand 528 530 PDB_ID:5B2R
Turn 532 534 PDB_ID:4ZT0
Helix 542 551 PDB_ID:5B2R
Turn 552 555 PDB_ID:5B2R
Beta strand 556 558 PDB_ID:5FW1
Helix 561 567 PDB_ID:5B2R
Turn 568 573 PDB_ID:5B2R
Helix 574 576 PDB_ID:7S4V
Beta strand 579 582 PDB_ID:5B2R
Beta strand 584 586 PDB_ID:5FQ5
Helix 592 601 PDB_ID:5B2R
Helix 604 608 PDB_ID:5B2R
Helix 610 612 PDB_ID:5B2R
Helix 613 625 PDB_ID:5B2R
Helix 629 636 PDB_ID:5B2R
Helix 637 642 PDB_ID:5B2R
Helix 645 652 PDB_ID:5B2R
Beta strand 659 663 PDB_ID:7QQZ
Helix 664 668 PDB_ID:5B2R
Turn 673 675 PDB_ID:5B2R
Helix 679 684 PDB_ID:5B2R
Turn 687 689 PDB_ID:5B2R
Helix 693 698 PDB_ID:5B2R
Beta strand 700 703 PDB_ID:5FW1
Helix 704 711 PDB_ID:5B2R
Turn 714 716 PDB_ID:7Z4L
Helix 720 725 PDB_ID:5B2R
Beta strand 727 729 PDB_ID:5B2R
Helix 731 750 PDB_ID:5B2R
Turn 751 753 PDB_ID:5B2R
Beta strand 757 763 PDB_ID:5B2R
Beta strand 770 772 PDB_ID:7S3H
Helix 777 791 PDB_ID:6O56
Helix 795 798 PDB_ID:6O56
Helix 803 807 PDB_ID:6O56
Helix 809 816 PDB_ID:6O56
Turn 817 819 PDB_ID:6O56
Beta strand 822 827 PDB_ID:6O56
Helix 830 835 PDB_ID:6O56
Beta strand 836 842 PDB_ID:6O56
Turn 844 846 PDB_ID:6O56
Helix 852 854 PDB_ID:6O56
Beta strand 855 859 PDB_ID:6O56
Helix 861 864 PDB_ID:6O56
Beta strand 867 871 PDB_ID:6O56
Helix 873 888 PDB_ID:6O56
Helix 894 900 PDB_ID:6O56
Helix 902 905 PDB_ID:6O56
Helix 910 921 PDB_ID:5B2R
Helix 926 939 PDB_ID:5B2R
Beta strand 945 947 PDB_ID:7S3H
Beta strand 953 957 PDB_ID:5B2R
Helix 960 969 PDB_ID:5B2R
Helix 976 978 PDB_ID:5FQ5
Helix 981 1000 PDB_ID:5B2R
Helix 1002 1004 PDB_ID:5B2R
Helix 1005 1008 PDB_ID:5B2R
Beta strand 1009 1011 PDB_ID:7Z4L
Helix 1018 1021 PDB_ID:5VW1
Beta strand 1024 1029 PDB_ID:7S3H
Helix 1032 1040 PDB_ID:5B2R
Helix 1042 1046 PDB_ID:5B2R
Beta strand 1048 1051 PDB_ID:5B2R
Beta strand 1053 1055 PDB_ID:7S3H
Beta strand 1057 1059 PDB_ID:5B2R
Beta strand 1062 1065 PDB_ID:5B2R
Turn 1067 1069 PDB_ID:5B2R
Beta strand 1072 1075 PDB_ID:5B2R
Turn 1076 1078 PDB_ID:5B2R
Helix 1079 1087 PDB_ID:5B2R
Beta strand 1093 1096 PDB_ID:5B2R
Beta strand 1105 1111 PDB_ID:6AEG
Beta strand 1115 1117 PDB_ID:4OO8
Beta strand 1120 1123 PDB_ID:4UN4
Helix 1128 1131 PDB_ID:5B2R
Beta strand 1133 1137 PDB_ID:6AEG
Beta strand 1139 1151 PDB_ID:5B2R
Turn 1152 1155 PDB_ID:5B2R
Beta strand 1156 1167 PDB_ID:5B2R
Turn 1168 1170 PDB_ID:5B2R
Helix 1171 1176 PDB_ID:5B2R
Helix 1178 1185 PDB_ID:5B2R
Beta strand 1187 1189 PDB_ID:5FQ5
Helix 1192 1194 PDB_ID:5B2R
Beta strand 1196 1198 PDB_ID:5B2R
Beta strand 1203 1205 PDB_ID:5B2R
Helix 1207 1209 PDB_ID:5B2R
Beta strand 1211 1218 PDB_ID:5B2R
Beta strand 1220 1222 PDB_ID:5B2R
Helix 1230 1240 PDB_ID:5B2R
Beta strand 1242 1244 PDB_ID:5VW1
Helix 1251 1261 PDB_ID:5B2R
Turn 1262 1264 PDB_ID:5B2R
Helix 1265 1280 PDB_ID:5B2R
Helix 1284 1296 PDB_ID:5B2R
Turn 1297 1299 PDB_ID:5B2R
Helix 1302 1316 PDB_ID:5B2R
Beta strand 1317 1320 PDB_ID:5B2R
Beta strand 1324 1326 PDB_ID:5B2R
Beta strand 1329 1331 PDB_ID:5B2R
Beta strand 1334 1336 PDB_ID:6IFO
Helix 1340 1344 PDB_ID:5B2R
Beta strand 1345 1350 PDB_ID:5B2R
Beta strand 1352 1354 PDB_ID:4UN4
Beta strand 1356 1361 PDB_ID:5B2R
Helix 1362 1364 PDB_ID:5B2R

PDB_IDs Domains Active_Sites
5F9R RuvC D10;E769;D986;
5F9R HNH D839;H840;N863;

PDB ID: 5F9R


  • 1. Jinek, M., Chylinski, K., Fonfara, I., Hauer, M., Doudna, J. A., & Charpentier, E. (2012). A Programmable Dual-RNA–Guided DNA Endonuclease in Adaptive Bacterial Immunity. Science, 337(6096), 816–821. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1225829 addgene_link
  • 2. Haft, D. H., Selengut, J., Mongodin, E. F., & Nelson, K. E. (2005). A Guild of 45 CRISPR-Associated (Cas) Protein Families and Multiple CRISPR/Cas Subtypes Exist in Prokaryotic Genomes. PLoS Computational Biology, 1(6), e60. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.0010060
  • 3. Deltcheva, E., Chylinski, K., Sharma, C. M., Gonzales, K., Chao, Y., Pirzada, Z. A., Eckert, M. R., Vogel, J., & Charpentier, E. (2011). CRISPR RNA maturation by trans-encoded small RNA and host factor RNase III. Nature, 471(7340), 602–607. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature09886
  • 4. Mali, P., Yang, L., Esvelt, K. M., Aach, J., Guell, M., DiCarlo, J. E., Norville, J. E., & Church, G. M. (2013). RNA-Guided Human Genome Engineering via Cas9. Science, 339(6121), 823–826. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1232033 addgene_link
  • 5. Xue, C., & Greene, E. C. (2021). DNA Repair Pathway Choices in CRISPR-Cas9-Mediated Genome Editing. Trends in Genetics, 37(7), 639–656. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tig.2021.02.008
  • 6. Shalem, O., Sanjana, N. E., Hartenian, E., Shi, X., Scott, D. A., Mikkelsen, T. S., Heckl, D., Ebert, B. L., Root, D. E., Doench, J. G., & Zhang, F. (2014). Genome-Scale CRISPR-Cas9 Knockout Screening in Human Cells. Science, 343(6166), 84–87. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1247005 addgene_link
  • 7. Dixit, A., Parnas, O., Li, B., Chen, J., Fulco, C. P., Jerby-Arnon, L., Marjanovic, N. D., Dionne, D., Burks, T., Raychowdhury, R., Adamson, B., Norman, T. M., Lander, E. S., Weissman, J. S., Friedman, N., & Regev, A. (2016). Perturb-Seq: Dissecting Molecular Circuits with Scalable Single-Cell RNA Profiling of Pooled Genetic Screens. Cell, 167(7), 1853-1866.e17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2016.11.038 addgene_link
  • 8. Osborn, M. J., Bhardwaj, A., Bingea, S. P., Knipping, F., Feser, C. J., Lees, C. J., Collins, D. P., Steer, C. J., Blazar, B. R., & Tolar, J. (2021). CRISPR/Cas9-Based Lateral Flow and Fluorescence Diagnostics. Bioengineering, 8(2), 23. https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering8020023
  • 9. Liu, H., Chang, S., Chen, S., Du, Y., Wang, H., Wang, C., Xiang, Y., Wang, Q., Li, Z., Wang, S., Qiu, S., & Song, H. (2022). Highly sensitive and rapid detection of SARS‐CoV‐2 via a portable CRISPR‐Cas13a‐based lateral flow assay. Journal of Medical Virology, 94(12), 5858–5866. Portico. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmv.28096
  • 10. Ottaviano, G., Georgiadis, C., Gkazi, S. A., Syed, F., Zhan, H., Etuk, A., Preece, R., Chu, J., Kubat, A., Adams, S., Veys, P., Vora, A., Rao, K., Qasim, W., James, J., Gilmour, K., Inglott, S., Thomas, R., … Mhaldien, L. (2022). Phase 1 clinical trial of CRISPR-engineered CAR19 universal T cells for treatment of children with refractory B cell leukemia. Science Translational Medicine, 14(668). https://doi.org/10.1126/scitranslmed.abq3010
  • 11. Gillmore, J. D., Gane, E., Taubel, J., Kao, J., Fontana, M., Maitland, M. L., Seitzer, J., O’Connell, D., Walsh, K. R., Wood, K., Phillips, J., Xu, Y., Amaral, A., Boyd, A. P., Cehelsky, J. E., McKee, M. D., Schiermeier, A., Harari, O., Murphy, A., … Lebwohl, D. (2021). CRISPR-Cas9 In Vivo Gene Editing for Transthyretin Amyloidosis. New England Journal of Medicine, 385(6), 493–502. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa2107454
  • 12. Chen, K., Wang, Y., Zhang, R., Zhang, H., & Gao, C. (2019). CRISPR/Cas Genome Editing and Precision Plant Breeding in Agriculture. Annual Review of Plant Biology, 70(1), 667–697. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-arplant-050718-100049
  • 13. Zaidi, S. S.-A., Mahas, A., Vanderschuren, H., & Mahfouz, M. M. (2020). Engineering crops of the future: CRISPR approaches to develop climate-resilient and disease-resistant plants. Genome Biology, 21(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13059-020-02204-y
  • 14. Liu, Q., Yang, F., Zhang, J., Liu, H., Rahman, S., Islam, S., Ma, W., & She, M. (2021). Application of CRISPR/Cas9 in Crop Quality Improvement. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 22(8), 4206. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms22084206
  • 15. Zhu, H., Li, C., & Gao, C. (2020). Applications of CRISPR–Cas in agriculture and plant biotechnology. Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology, 21(11), 661–677. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41580-020-00288-9
  • 16. Hanna, R. E., & Doench, J. G. (2020). Design and analysis of CRISPR–Cas experiments. Nature Biotechnology, 38(7), 813–823. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41587-020-0490-7
  • 17. Chew, W. L., Tabebordbar, M., Cheng, J. K. W., Mali, P., Wu, E. Y., Ng, A. H. M., Zhu, K., Wagers, A. J., & Church, G. M. (2016). A multifunctional AAV–CRISPR–Cas9 and its host response. Nature Methods, 13(10), 868–874. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.3993 addgene_link
  • 18. Davis, J. R., Banskota, S., Levy, J. M., Newby, G. A., Wang, X., Anzalone, A. V., Nelson, A. T., Chen, P. J., Hennes, A. D., An, M., Roh, H., Randolph, P. B., Musunuru, K., & Liu, D. R. (2023). Efficient prime editing in mouse brain, liver and heart with dual AAVs. Nature Biotechnology. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41587-023-01758-z addgene_link
  • 19. Ran, F. A., Cong, L., Yan, W. X., Scott, D. A., Gootenberg, J. S., Kriz, A. J., Zetsche, B., Shalem, O., Wu, X., Makarova, K. S., Koonin, E. V., Sharp, P. A., & Zhang, F. (2015). In vivo genome editing using Staphylococcus aureus Cas9. Nature, 520(7546), 186–191. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature14299 addgene_link
  • 20. Edraki, A., Mir, A., Ibraheim, R., Gainetdinov, I., Yoon, Y., Song, C.-Q., Cao, Y., Gallant, J., Xue, W., Rivera-Pérez, J. A., & Sontheimer, E. J. (2019). A Compact, High-Accuracy Cas9 with a Dinucleotide PAM for In Vivo Genome Editing. Molecular Cell, 73(4), 714-726.e4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2018.12.003 addgene_link
  • 21. Schmidt, M. J., Gupta, A., Bednarski, C., Gehrig-Giannini, S., Richter, F., Pitzler, C., Gamalinda, M., Galonska, C., Takeuchi, R., Wang, K., Reiss, C., Dehne, K., Lukason, M. J., Noma, A., Park-Windhol, C., Allocca, M., Kantardzhieva, A., Sane, S., Kosakowska, K., … Coco, W. M. (2021). Improved CRISPR genome editing using small highly active and specific engineered RNA-guided nucleases. Nature Communications, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-24454-5
  • 22. Breda, L., Papp, T. E., Triebwasser, M. P., Yadegari, A., Fedorky, M. T., Tanaka, N., Abdulmalik, O., Pavani, G., Wang, Y., Grupp, S. A., Chou, S. T., Ni, H., Mui, B. L., Tam, Y. K., Weissman, D., Rivella, S., & Parhiz, H. (2023). In vivo hematopoietic stem cell modification by mRNA delivery. Science, 381(6656), 436–443. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.ade6967
  • 23. Mangeot, P. E., Risson, V., Fusil, F., Marnef, A., Laurent, E., Blin, J., Mournetas, V., Massouridès, E., Sohier, T. J. M., Corbin, A., Aubé, F., Teixeira, M., Pinset, C., Schaeffer, L., Legube, G., Cosset, F.-L., Verhoeyen, E., Ohlmann, T., & Ricci, E. P. (2019). Genome editing in primary cells and in vivo using viral-derived Nanoblades loaded with Cas9-sgRNA ribonucleoproteins. Nature Communications, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-07845-z addgene_link
  • 24. Hamilton, J. R., Tsuchida, C. A., Nguyen, D. N., Shy, B. R., McGarrigle, E. R., Sandoval Espinoza, C. R., Carr, D., Blaeschke, F., Marson, A., & Doudna, J. A. (2021). Targeted delivery of CRISPR-Cas9 and transgenes enables complex immune cell engineering. Cell Reports, 35(9), 109207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2021.109207 addgene_link
  • 25. Banskota, S., Raguram, A., Suh, S., Du, S. W., Davis, J. R., Choi, E. H., Wang, X., Nielsen, S. C., Newby, G. A., Randolph, P. B., Osborn, M. J., Musunuru, K., Palczewski, K., & Liu, D. R. (2022). Engineered virus-like particles for efficient in vivo delivery of therapeutic proteins. Cell, 185(2), 250-265.e16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2021.12.021 addgene_link
  • 26. Walton, R. T., Christie, K. A., Whittaker, M. N., & Kleinstiver, B. P. (2020). Unconstrained genome targeting with near-PAMless engineered CRISPR-Cas9 variants. Science, 368(6488), 290–296. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aba8853 addgene_link
  • 27. Nishimasu, H., Shi, X., Ishiguro, S., Gao, L., Hirano, S., Okazaki, S., Noda, T., Abudayyeh, O. O., Gootenberg, J. S., Mori, H., Oura, S., Holmes, B., Tanaka, M., Seki, M., Hirano, H., Aburatani, H., Ishitani, R., Ikawa, M., Yachie, N., … Nureki, O. (2018). Engineered CRISPR-Cas9 nuclease with expanded targeting space. Science, 361(6408), 1259–1262. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aas9129 addgene_link
  • 28. Slaymaker, I. M., Gao, L., Zetsche, B., Scott, D. A., Yan, W. X., & Zhang, F. (2016). Rationally engineered Cas9 nucleases with improved specificity. Science, 351(6268), 84–88. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aad5227 addgene_link
  • 29. Kleinstiver, B. P., Pattanayak, V., Prew, M. S., Tsai, S. Q., Nguyen, N. T., Zheng, Z., & Joung, J. K. (2016). High-fidelity CRISPR–Cas9 nucleases with no detectable genome-wide off-target effects. Nature, 529(7587), 490–495. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature16526 addgene_link
  • 30. Casini, A., Olivieri, M., Petris, G., Montagna, C., Reginato, G., Maule, G., Lorenzin, F., Prandi, D., Romanel, A., Demichelis, F., Inga, A., & Cereseto, A. (2018). A highly specific SpCas9 variant is identified by in vivo screening in yeast. Nature Biotechnology, 36(3), 265–271. https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.4066 addgene_link
  • 31. Hu, J. H., Miller, S. M., Geurts, M. H., Tang, W., Chen, L., Sun, N., Zeina, C. M., Gao, X., Rees, H. A., Lin, Z., & Liu, D. R. (2018). Evolved Cas9 variants with broad PAM compatibility and high DNA specificity. Nature, 556(7699), 57–63. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature26155 addgene_link
  • 32. Nishimasu, H., Ran, F. A., Hsu, P. D., Konermann, S., Shehata, S. I., Dohmae, N., Ishitani, R., Zhang, F., & Nureki, O. (2014). Crystal Structure of Cas9 in Complex with Guide RNA and Target DNA. Cell, 156(5), 935–949. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2014.02.001 addgene_link
  • 33. Anders, C., Niewoehner, O., Duerst, A., & Jinek, M. (2014). Structural basis of PAM-dependent target DNA recognition by the Cas9 endonuclease. Nature, 513(7519), 569–573. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13579
  • 34. Liu, M.-S., Gong, S., Yu, H.-H., Jung, K., Johnson, K. A., & Taylor, D. W. (2020). Engineered CRISPR/Cas9 enzymes improve discrimination by slowing DNA cleavage to allow release of off-target DNA. Nature Communications, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-17411-1
  • 35. Kim, N., Kim, H. K., Lee, S., Seo, J. H., Choi, J. W., Park, J., Min, S., Yoon, S., Cho, S.-R., & Kim, H. H. (2020). Prediction of the sequence-specific cleavage activity of Cas9 variants. Nature Biotechnology, 38(11), 1328–1336. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41587-020-0537-9 addgene_link
  • 36. Komor, A. C., Kim, Y. B., Packer, M. S., Zuris, J. A., & Liu, D. R. (2016). Programmable editing of a target base in genomic DNA without double-stranded DNA cleavage. Nature, 533(7603), 420–424. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature17946 addgene_link
  • 37. Gaudelli, N. M., Komor, A. C., Rees, H. A., Packer, M. S., Badran, A. H., Bryson, D. I., & Liu, D. R. (2017). Programmable base editing of A•T to G•C in genomic DNA without DNA cleavage. Nature, 551(7681), 464–471. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature24644 addgene_link
  • 38. Nishida, K., Arazoe, T., Yachie, N., Banno, S., Kakimoto, M., Tabata, M., Mochizuki, M., Miyabe, A., Araki, M., Hara, K. Y., Shimatani, Z., & Kondo, A. (2016). Targeted nucleotide editing using hybrid prokaryotic and vertebrate adaptive immune systems. Science, 353(6305). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaf8729 addgene_link
  • 39. Chen, L., Hong, M., Luan, C., Gao, H., Ru, G., Guo, X., Zhang, D., Zhang, S., Li, C., Wu, J., Randolph, P. B., Sousa, A. A., Qu, C., Zhu, Y., Guan, Y., Wang, L., Liu, M., Feng, B., Song, G., … Li, D. (2023). Adenine transversion editors enable precise, efficient A•T-to-C•G base editing in mammalian cells and embryos. Nature Biotechnology. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41587-023-01821-9 addgene_link
  • 40. Komor, A. C., Zhao, K. T., Packer, M. S., Gaudelli, N. M., Waterbury, A. L., Koblan, L. W., Kim, Y. B., Badran, A. H., & Liu, D. R. (2017). Improved base excision repair inhibition and bacteriophage Mu Gam protein yields C:G-to-T:A base editors with higher efficiency and product purity. Science Advances, 3(8). https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aao4774 addgene_link
  • 41. Kurt, I. C., Zhou, R., Iyer, S., Garcia, S. P., Miller, B. R., Langner, L. M., Grünewald, J., & Joung, J. K. (2020). CRISPR C-to-G base editors for inducing targeted DNA transversions in human cells. Nature Biotechnology, 39(1), 41–46. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41587-020-0609-x addgene_link
  • 42. Levy, J. M., Yeh, W.-H., Pendse, N., Davis, J. R., Hennessey, E., Butcher, R., Koblan, L. W., Comander, J., Liu, Q., & Liu, D. R. (2020). Cytosine and adenine base editing of the brain, liver, retina, heart and skeletal muscle of mice via adeno-associated viruses. Nature Biomedical Engineering, 4(1), 97–110. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41551-019-0501-5 addgene_link
  • 43. Anzalone, A. V., Randolph, P. B., Davis, J. R., Sousa, A. A., Koblan, L. W., Levy, J. M., Chen, P. J., Wilson, C., Newby, G. A., Raguram, A., & Liu, D. R. (2019). Search-and-replace genome editing without double-strand breaks or donor DNA. Nature, 576(7785), 149–157. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1711-4 addgene_link
  • 44. Grünewald, J., Miller, B. R., Szalay, R. N., Cabeceiras, P. K., Woodilla, C. J., Holtz, E. J. B., Petri, K., & Joung, J. K. (2022). Engineered CRISPR prime editors with compact, untethered reverse transcriptases. Nature Biotechnology, 41(3), 337–343. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41587-022-01473-1 addgene_link
  • 45. Zhao, Z., Shang, P., Mohanraju, P., & Geijsen, N. (2023). Prime editing: advances and therapeutic applications. Trends in Biotechnology, 41(8), 1000–1012. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tibtech.2023.03.004
  • 46. Maeder, M. L., Linder, S. J., Cascio, V. M., Fu, Y., Ho, Q. H., & Joung, J. K. (2013). CRISPR RNA–guided activation of endogenous human genes. Nature Methods, 10(10), 977–979. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.2598 addgene_link
  • 47. Gilbert, L. A., Larson, M. H., Morsut, L., Liu, Z., Brar, G. A., Torres, S. E., Stern-Ginossar, N., Brandman, O., Whitehead, E. H., Doudna, J. A., Lim, W. A., Weissman, J. S., & Qi, L. S. (2013). CRISPR-Mediated Modular RNA-Guided Regulation of Transcription in Eukaryotes. Cell, 154(2), 442–451. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2013.06.044 addgene_link
  • 48. Hilton, I. B., D’Ippolito, A. M., Vockley, C. M., Thakore, P. I., Crawford, G. E., Reddy, T. E., & Gersbach, C. A. (2015). Epigenome editing by a CRISPR-Cas9-based acetyltransferase activates genes from promoters and enhancers. Nature Biotechnology, 33(5), 510–517. https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.3199 addgene_link
  • 49. Nuñez, J. K., Chen, J., Pommier, G. C., Cogan, J. Z., Replogle, J. M., Adriaens, C., Ramadoss, G. N., Shi, Q., Hung, K. L., Samelson, A. J., Pogson, A. N., Kim, J. Y. S., Chung, A., Leonetti, M. D., Chang, H. Y., Kampmann, M., Bernstein, B. E., Hovestadt, V., Gilbert, L. A., & Weissman, J. S. (2021). Genome-wide programmable transcriptional memory by CRISPR-based epigenome editing. Cell, 184(9), 2503-2519.e17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2021.03.025 addgene_link
  • 50. Chen, B., Gilbert, L. A., Cimini, B. A., Schnitzbauer, J., Zhang, W., Li, G.-W., Park, J., Blackburn, E. H., Weissman, J. S., Qi, L. S., & Huang, B. (2013). Dynamic Imaging of Genomic Loci in Living Human Cells by an Optimized CRISPR/Cas System. Cell, 155(7), 1479–1491. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2013.12.001 addgene_link
  • 51. Sternberg, S. H., Redding, S., Jinek, M., Greene, E. C., & Doudna, J. A. (2014). DNA interrogation by the CRISPR RNA-guided endonuclease Cas9. Nature, 507(7490), 62–67. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13011
  • 52. Richardson, C. D., Ray, G. J., DeWitt, M. A., Curie, G. L., & Corn, J. E. (2016). Enhancing homology-directed genome editing by catalytically active and inactive CRISPR-Cas9 using asymmetric donor DNA. Nature Biotechnology, 34(3), 339–344. https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.3481 addgene_link
  • 53. Yourik, P., Fuchs, R. T., Mabuchi, M., Curcuru, J. L., & Robb, G. B. (2018). Staphylococcus aureus Cas9 is a multiple-turnover enzyme. RNA, 25(1), 35–44. https://doi.org/10.1261/rna.067355.118
  • 54. Wang, A. S., Chen, L. C., Wu, R. A., Hao, Y., McSwiggen, D. T., Heckert, A. B., Richardson, C. D., Gowen, B. G., Kazane, K. R., Vu, J. T., Wyman, S. K., Shin, J. J., Darzacq, X., Walter, J. C., & Corn, J. E. (2020). The Histone Chaperone FACT Induces Cas9 Multi-turnover Behavior and Modifies Genome Manipulation in Human Cells. Molecular Cell, 79(2), 221-233.e5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2020.06.014 addgene_link
  • 55. Stephenson, A. A., Raper, A. T., & Suo, Z. (2018). Bidirectional Degradation of DNA Cleavage Products Catalyzed by CRISPR/Cas9. Journal of the American Chemical Society, 140(10), 3743–3750. https://doi.org/10.1021/jacs.7b13050
  • 56. Shou, J., Li, J., Liu, Y., & Wu, Q. (2018). Precise and Predictable CRISPR Chromosomal Rearrangements Reveal Principles of Cas9-Mediated Nucleotide Insertion. Molecular Cell, 71(4), 498-509.e4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2018.06.021
  • 57. Renouf, B., Piganeau, M., Ghezraoui, H., Jasin, M., & Brunet, E. (2014). Creating Cancer Translocations in Human Cells Using Cas9 DSBs and nCas9 Paired Nicks. The Use of CRISPR/Cas9, ZFNs, and TALENs in Generating Site-Specific Genome Alterations, 251–271. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-801185-0.00012-x
  • 58. Kim, S., Kim, D., Cho, S. W., Kim, J., & Kim, J.-S. (2014). Highly efficient RNA-guided genome editing in human cells via delivery of purified Cas9 ribonucleoproteins. Genome Research, 24(6), 1012–1019. https://doi.org/10.1101/gr.171322.113 addgene_link
  • 59. Staahl, B. T., Benekareddy, M., Coulon-Bainier, C., Banfal, A. A., Floor, S. N., Sabo, J. K., Urnes, C., Munares, G. A., Ghosh, A., & Doudna, J. A. (2017). Efficient genome editing in the mouse brain by local delivery of engineered Cas9 ribonucleoprotein complexes. Nature Biotechnology, 35(5), 431–434. https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.3806 addgene_link
  • 60. Cheng, Q., Wei, T., Farbiak, L., Johnson, L. T., Dilliard, S. A., & Siegwart, D. J. (2020). Selective organ targeting (SORT) nanoparticles for tissue-specific mRNA delivery and CRISPR–Cas gene editing. Nature Nanotechnology, 15(4), 313–320. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41565-020-0669-6
  • 61. Sun, W., Ji, W., Hall, J. M., Hu, Q., Wang, C., Beisel, C. L., & Gu, Z. (2015). Self-Assembled DNA Nanoclews for the Efficient Delivery of CRISPR-Cas9 for Genome Editing. Angewandte Chemie International Edition, 54(41), 12029–12033. Portico. https://doi.org/10.1002/anie.201506030
  • 62. Lee, B., Lee, K., Panda, S., Gonzales-Rojas, R., Chong, A., Bugay, V., Park, H. M., Brenner, R., Murthy, N., & Lee, H. Y. (2018). Nanoparticle delivery of CRISPR into the brain rescues a mouse model of fragile X syndrome from exaggerated repetitive behaviours. Nature Biomedical Engineering, 2(7), 497–507. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41551-018-0252-8
  • 63. Gee, P., Lung, M. S. Y., Okuzaki, Y., Sasakawa, N., Iguchi, T., Makita, Y., Hozumi, H., Miura, Y., Yang, L. F., Iwasaki, M., Wang, X. H., Waller, M. A., Shirai, N., Abe, Y. O., Fujita, Y., Watanabe, K., Kagita, A., Iwabuchi, K. A., Yasuda, M., … Hotta, A. (2020). Extracellular nanovesicles for packaging of CRISPR-Cas9 protein and sgRNA to induce therapeutic exon skipping. Nature Communications, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-14957-y addgene_link
  • 64. Kreitz, J., Friedrich, M. J., Guru, A., Lash, B., Saito, M., Macrae, R. K., & Zhang, F. (2023). Programmable protein delivery with a bacterial contractile injection system. Nature, 616(7956), 357–364. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-023-05870-7 addgene_link
  • 65. Concordet, J.-P., & Haeussler, M. (2018). CRISPOR: intuitive guide selection for CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing experiments and screens. Nucleic Acids Research, 46(W1), W242–W245. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gky354
  • 66. Labun, K., Montague, T. G., Krause, M., Torres Cleuren, Y. N., Tjeldnes, H., & Valen, E. (2019). CHOPCHOP v3: expanding the CRISPR web toolbox beyond genome editing. Nucleic Acids Research, 47(W1), W171–W174. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkz365
  • 67. Liang, Z., Chen, K., Li, T., Zhang, Y., Wang, Y., Zhao, Q., Liu, J., Zhang, H., Liu, C., Ran, Y., & Gao, C. (2017). Efficient DNA-free genome editing of bread wheat using CRISPR/Cas9 ribonucleoprotein complexes. Nature Communications, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms14261 addgene_link
  • 68. Li, J., Zhang, H., Si, X., Tian, Y., Chen, K., Liu, J., Chen, H., & Gao, C. (2017). Generation of thermosensitive male-sterile maize by targeted knockout of the ZmTMS5 gene. Journal of Genetics and Genomics, 44(9), 465–468. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jgg.2017.02.002
  • 69. Li, A., Jia, S., Yobi, A., Ge, Z., Sato, S. J., Zhang, C., Angelovici, R., Clemente, T. E., & Holding, D. R. (2018). Editing of an Alpha-Kafirin Gene Family Increases, Digestibility and Protein Quality in Sorghum. Plant Physiology, 177(4), 1425–1438. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.18.00200
  • 70. Li, T., Yang, X., Yu, Y., Si, X., Zhai, X., Zhang, H., Dong, W., Gao, C., & Xu, C. (2018). Domestication of wild tomato is accelerated by genome editing. Nature Biotechnology, 36(12), 1160–1163. https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.4273
  • 71. Malnoy, M., Viola, R., Jung, M.-H., Koo, O.-J., Kim, S., Kim, J.-S., Velasco, R., & Nagamangala Kanchiswamy, C. (2016). DNA-Free Genetically Edited Grapevine and Apple Protoplast Using CRISPR/Cas9 Ribonucleoproteins. Frontiers in Plant Science, 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2016.01904
  • 72. Naim, F., Dugdale, B., Kleidon, J., Brinin, A., Shand, K., Waterhouse, P., & Dale, J. (2018). Gene editing the phytoene desaturase alleles of Cavendish banana using CRISPR/Cas9. Transgenic Research, 27(5), 451–460. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11248-018-0083-0
  • 73. Foss, D. V., Muldoon, J. J., Nguyen, D. N., Carr, D., Sahu, S. U., Hunsinger, J. M., Wyman, S. K., Krishnappa, N., Mendonsa, R., Schanzer, E. V., Shy, B. R., Vykunta, V. S., Allain, V., Li, Z., Marson, A., Eyquem, J., & Wilson, R. C. (2023). Peptide-mediated delivery of CRISPR enzymes for the efficient editing of primary human lymphocytes. Nature Biomedical Engineering, 7(5), 647–660. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41551-023-01032-2 addgene_link
  • 74. Doench, J. G., Fusi, N., Sullender, M., Hegde, M., Vaimberg, E. W., Donovan, K. F., Smith, I., Tothova, Z., Wilen, C., Orchard, R., Virgin, H. W., Listgarten, J., & Root, D. E. (2016). Optimized sgRNA design to maximize activity and minimize off-target effects of CRISPR-Cas9. Nature Biotechnology, 34(2), 184–191. https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.3437 addgene_link
  • 75. Zhuo, C., Zhang, J., Lee, J.-H., Jiao, J., Cheng, D., Liu, L., Kim, H.-W., Tao, Y., & Li, M. (2021). Spatiotemporal control of CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing. Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41392-021-00645-w
  • 76. Rahman, F., Mishra, A., Gupta, A., & Sharma, R. (2022). Spatiotemporal Regulation of CRISPR/Cas9 Enables Efficient, Precise, and Heritable Edits in Plant Genomes. Frontiers in Genome Editing, 4. https://doi.org/10.3389/fgeed.2022.870108
  • Unresolved reference for sciadv.abb1777
  • Unresolved reference for sciadv.abb1777
  • 79. Liu, K. I., Ramli, M. N. B., Woo, C. W. A., Wang, Y., Zhao, T., Zhang, X., Yim, G. R. D., Chong, B. Y., Gowher, A., Chua, M. Z. H., Jung, J., Lee, J. H. J., & Tan, M. H. (2016). A chemical-inducible CRISPR–Cas9 system for rapid control of genome editing. Nature Chemical Biology, 12(11), 980–987. https://doi.org/10.1038/nchembio.2179 addgene_link
  • 80. Davis, K. M., Pattanayak, V., Thompson, D. B., Zuris, J. A., & Liu, D. R. (2015). Small molecule–triggered Cas9 protein with improved genome-editing specificity. Nature Chemical Biology, 11(5), 316–318. https://doi.org/10.1038/nchembio.1793 addgene_link
  • 81. Maji, B., Moore, C. L., Zetsche, B., Volz, S. E., Zhang, F., Shoulders, M. D., & Choudhary, A. (2016). Multidimensional chemical control of CRISPR–Cas9. Nature Chemical Biology, 13(1), 9–11. https://doi.org/10.1038/nchembio.2224 addgene_link
  • 82. Chen, X., Chen, Y., Xin, H., Wan, T., & Ping, Y. (2020). Near-infrared optogenetic engineering of photothermal nanoCRISPR for programmable genome editing. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(5), 2395–2405. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1912220117
  • 83. Lee, J. K., Jeong, E., Lee, J., Jung, M., Shin, E., Kim, Y., Lee, K., Jung, I., Kim, D., Kim, S., & Kim, J.-S. (2018). Directed evolution of CRISPR-Cas9 to increase its specificity. Nature Communications, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-05477-x addgene_link
  • 84. Bravo, J. P. K., Liu, M.-S., Hibshman, G. N., Dangerfield, T. L., Jung, K., McCool, R. S., Johnson, K. A., & Taylor, D. W. (2022). Structural basis for mismatch surveillance by CRISPR–Cas9. Nature, 603(7900), 343–347. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-04470-1 addgene_link
  • 85. Vakulskas, C. A., Dever, D. P., Rettig, G. R., Turk, R., Jacobi, A. M., Collingwood, M. A., Bode, N. M., McNeill, M. S., Yan, S., Camarena, J., Lee, C. M., Park, S. H., Wiebking, V., Bak, R. O., Gomez-Ospina, N., Pavel-Dinu, M., Sun, W., Bao, G., Porteus, M. H., & Behlke, M. A. (2018). A high-fidelity Cas9 mutant delivered as a ribonucleoprotein complex enables efficient gene editing in human hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells. Nature Medicine, 24(8), 1216–1224. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-018-0137-0
  • 86. Kulcsár, P. I., Tálas, A., Huszár, K., Ligeti, Z., Tóth, E., Weinhardt, N., Fodor, E., & Welker, E. (2017). Crossing enhanced and high fidelity SpCas9 nucleases to optimize specificity and cleavage. Genome Biology, 18(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13059-017-1318-8
  • 87. Pedrazzoli, E., Bianchi, A., Umbach, A., Amistadi, S., Brusson, M., Frati, G., Ciciani, M., Badowska, K. A., Arosio, D., Miccio, A., Cereseto, A., & Casini, A. (2023). An optimized SpCas9 high-fidelity variant for direct protein delivery. Molecular Therapy, 31(7), 2257–2265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymthe.2023.03.007 addgene_link
  • 88. Kleinstiver, B. P., Prew, M. S., Tsai, S. Q., Topkar, V. V., Nguyen, N. T., Zheng, Z., Gonzales, A. P. W., Li, Z., Peterson, R. T., Yeh, J.-R. J., Aryee, M. J., & Joung, J. K. (2015). Engineered CRISPR-Cas9 nucleases with altered PAM specificities. Nature, 523(7561), 481–485. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature14592 addgene_link
  • 89. Anders, C., Bargsten, K., & Jinek, M. (2016). Structural Plasticity of PAM Recognition by Engineered Variants of the RNA-Guided Endonuclease Cas9. Molecular Cell, 61(6), 895–902. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2016.02.020 addgene_link
  • 90. Miller, S. M., Wang, T., Randolph, P. B., Arbab, M., Shen, M. W., Huang, T. P., Matuszek, Z., Newby, G. A., Rees, H. A., & Liu, D. R. (2020). Continuous evolution of SpCas9 variants compatible with non-G PAMs. Nature Biotechnology, 38(4), 471–481. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41587-020-0412-8 addgene_link
  • 91. Kim, Y., Kim, N., Okafor, I., Choi, S., Min, S., Lee, J., Bae, S.-M., Choi, K., Choi, J., Harihar, V., Kim, Y., Kim, J.-S., Kleinstiver, B. P., Lee, J. K., Ha, T., & Kim, H. H. (2023). Sniper2L is a high-fidelity Cas9 variant with high activity. Nature Chemical Biology, 19(8), 972–980. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41589-023-01279-5 addgene_link
  • 92. Chatterjee, P., Lee, J., Nip, L., Koseki, S. R. T., Tysinger, E., Sontheimer, E. J., Jacobson, J. M., & Jakimo, N. (2020). A Cas9 with PAM recognition for adenine dinucleotides. Nature Communications, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-16117-8 addgene_link