Anti-CRISPR AcrIF9 functions by inducing the CRISPR–Cas complex to bind DNA non-specifically

Phages and other mobile genetic elements express anti-CRISPR proteins (Acrs) to protect their genomes from destruction by CRISPR–Cas systems. Acrs usually block the ability of CRISPR–Cas systems to bind or cleave their nucleic acid substrates. Here, we investigate an unusual Acr, AcrIF9, that induces a gain-of-function to a type I-F CRISPR–Cas (Csy) complex, causing it to bind strongly to DNA that lacks both a PAM sequence and sequence complementarity. We show that specific and non-specific dsDNA compete for the same site on the Csy:AcrIF9 complex with rapid exchange, but specific ssDNA appears to still bind through complementarity to the CRISPR RNA. Induction of non-specific DNA-binding is a shared property of diverse AcrIF9 homologues. Substitution of a conserved positively charged surface on AcrIF9 abrogated non-specific dsDNA-binding of the Csy:AcrIF9 complex, but specific dsDNA binding was maintained. AcrIF9 mutants with impaired non-specific dsDNA binding activity in vitro displayed a reduced ability to inhibit CRISPR–Cas activity in vivo. We conclude that misdirecting the CRISPR–Cas complex to bind non-specific DNA is a key component of the inhibitory mechanism of AcrIF9. This inhibitory mechanism is distinct from a previously characterized anti-CRISPR, AcrIF1, that sterically blocks DNA-binding, even though AcrIF1and AcrIF9 bind to the same site on the Csy complex.     

Insights into the dual functions of AcrIF14 during the inhibition of type I-F CRISPR–Cas surveillance complex

CRISPR–Cas systems are bacterial adaptive immune systems, and phages counteract these systems using many approaches such as producing anti-CRISPR (Acr) proteins. Here, we report the structures of both AcrIF14 and its complex with the crRNA-guided surveillance (Csy) complex. Our study demonstrates that apart from interacting with the Csy complex to block the hybridization of target DNA to the crRNA, AcrIF14 also endows the Csy complex with the ability to interact with non-sequence-specific dsDNA as AcrIF9 does. Further structural studies of the Csy–AcrIF14–dsDNA complex and biochemical studies uncover that the PAM recognition loop of the Cas8f subunit of the Csy complex and electropositive patches within the N-terminal domain of AcrIF14 are essential for the non-sequence-specific dsDNA binding to the Csy–AcrIF14 complex, which is different from the mechanism of AcrIF9. Our findings highlight the prevalence of Acr-induced non-specific DNA binding and shed light on future studies into the mechanisms of such Acr proteins.     

Mechanistic insights into the inhibition of the CRISPR-Cas surveillance complex by anti-CRISPR protein AcrIF13

Clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPRs) and CRISPR-associated (Cas) proteins provide prokaryotes with nucleic acid–based adaptive immunity against infections of mobile genetic elements, including phages. To counteract this immune process, phages have evolved various anti-CRISPR (Acr) proteins which deactivate CRISPR-Cas–based immunity. However, the mechanisms of many of these Acr-mediated inhibitions are not clear. Here, we report the crystal structure of AcrIF13 and explore its inhibition mechanism. The structure of AcrIF13 is unique and displays a negatively charged surface. Additionally, biochemical studies identified that AcrIF13 interacts with the type I-F CRISPR-Cas surveillance complex (Csy complex) to block target DNA recognition and that the Cas5f-8f tail and Cas7.6f subunit of the Csy complex are specific binding targets of AcrIF13. Further mutational studies demonstrated that several negatively charged residues of AcrIF13 and positively charged residues of Cas8f and Cas7f of the Csy complex are involved in AcrIF13–Csy binding. Together, our findings provide mechanistic insights into the inhibition mechanism of AcrIF13 and further suggest the prevalence of the function of Acr proteins as DNA mimics.     

Mobile element warfare via CRISPR and anti-CRISPR in Pseudomonas aeruginosa

Bacteria deploy multiple defenses to prevent mobile genetic element (MGEs) invasion. CRISPR–Cas immune systems use RNA-guided nucleases to target MGEs, which counter with anti-CRISPR (Acr) proteins. Our understanding of the biology and co-evolutionary dynamics of the common Type I-C CRISPR–Cas subtype has lagged because it lacks an in vivo phage-host model system. Here, we show the anti-phage function of a Pseudomonas aeruginosa Type I-C CRISPR–Cas system encoded on a conjugative pKLC102 island, and its Acr-mediated inhibition by distinct MGEs. Seven genes with anti-Type I-C function (acrIC genes) were identified, many with highly acidic amino acid content, including previously described DNA mimic AcrIF2. Four of the acr genes were broad spectrum, also inhibiting I-E or I-F P. aeruginosa CRISPR–Cas subtypes. Dual inhibition comes at a cost, however, as simultaneous expression of Type I-C and I-F systems renders phages expressing the dual inhibitor AcrIF2 more sensitive to targeting. Mutagenesis of numerous acidic residues in AcrIF2 did not impair anti-I-C or anti-I-F function per se but did exacerbate inhibition defects during competition, suggesting that excess negative charge may buffer DNA mimics against competition. Like AcrIF2, five of the Acr proteins block Cascade from binding DNA, while two function downstream, likely preventing Cas3 recruitment or activity. One such inhibitor, AcrIC3, is found in an ‘anti-Cas3’ cluster within conjugative elements, encoded alongside bona fide Cas3 inhibitors AcrIF3 and AcrIE1. Our findings demonstrate an active battle between an MGE-encoded CRISPR–Cas system and its diverse MGE targets.     

Discovery of potent and versatile CRISPR–Cas9 inhibitors engineered for chemically controllable genome editing

Anti-CRISPR (Acr) proteins are encoded by many mobile genetic elements (MGEs) such as phages and plasmids to combat CRISPR–Cas adaptive immune systems employed by prokaryotes, which provide powerful tools for CRISPR–Cas-based applications. Here, we discovered nine distinct type II-A anti-CRISPR (AcrIIA24–32) families from Streptococcus MGEs and found that most Acrs can potently inhibit type II-A Cas9 orthologs from Streptococcus (SpyCas9, St1Cas9 or St3Cas9) in bacterial and human cells. Among these Acrs, AcrIIA26, AcrIIA27, AcrIIA30 and AcrIIA31 are able to block Cas9 binding to DNA, while AcrIIA24 abrogates DNA cleavage by Cas9. Notably, AcrIIA25.1 and AcrIIA32.1 can inhibit both DNA binding and DNA cleavage activities of SpyCas9, exhibiting unique anti-CRISPR characteristics. Importantly, we developed several chemically inducible anti-CRISPR variants based on AcrIIA25.1 and AcrIIA32.1 by comprising hybrids of Acr protein and the 4-hydroxytamoxifen-responsive intein, which enabled post-translational control of CRISPR–Cas9-mediated genome editing in human cells. Taken together, our work expands the diversity of type II-A anti-CRISPR families and the toolbox of Acr proteins for the chemically inducible control of Cas9-based applications.     

Molecular basis of dual anti-CRISPR and auto-regulatory functions of AcrIF24

CRISPR-Cas systems are adaptive immune systems in bacteria and archaea that provide resistance against phages and other mobile genetic elements. To fight against CRISPR-Cas systems, phages and archaeal viruses encode anti-CRISPR (Acr) proteins that inhibit CRISPR-Cas systems. The expression of acr genes is controlled by anti-CRISPR-associated (Aca) proteins encoded within acr-aca operons. AcrIF24 is a recently identified Acr that inhibits the type I-F CRISPR-Cas system. Interestingly, AcrIF24 was predicted to be a dual-function Acr and Aca. Here, we elucidated the crystal structure of AcrIF24 from Pseudomonas aeruginosa and identified its operator sequence within the regulated acr-aca operon promoter. The structure of AcrIF24 has a novel domain composition, with wing, head and body domains. The body domain is responsible for recognition of promoter DNA for Aca regulatory activity. We also revealed that AcrIF24 directly bound to type I-F Cascade, specifically to Cas7 via its head domain as part of its Acr mechanism. Our results provide new molecular insights into the mechanism of a dual functional Acr-Aca protein.     

The structure of AcrIE4-F7 reveals a common strategy for dual CRISPR inhibition by targeting PAM recognition sites

Bacteria and archaea use the CRISPR-Cas system to fend off invasions of bacteriophages and foreign plasmids. In response, bacteriophages encode anti-CRISPR (Acr) proteins that potently inhibit host Cas proteins to suppress CRISPR-mediated immunity. AcrIE4-F7, which was isolated from Pseudomonas citronellolis, is a fused form of AcrIE4 and AcrIF7 that inhibits both type I-E and type I-F CRISPR-Cas systems. Here, we determined the structure of AcrIE4-F7 and identified its Cas target proteins. The N-terminal AcrIE4 domain adopts a novel α-helical fold that targets the PAM interaction site of the type I-E Cas8e subunit. The C-terminal AcrIF7 domain exhibits an αβ fold like native AcrIF7, which disables target DNA recognition by the PAM interaction site in the type I-F Cas8f subunit. The two Acr domains are connected by a flexible linker that allows prompt docking onto their cognate Cas8 targets. Conserved negative charges in each Acr domain are required for interaction with their Cas8 targets. Our results illustrate a common mechanism by which AcrIE4-F7 inhibits divergent CRISPR-Cas types.     

Structural and mechanistic insights into the inhibition of type I-F CRISPR-Cas system by anti-CRISPR protein AcrIF23

Prokaryotes evolved clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR) and CRISPR-associated (Cas) proteins as a kind of adaptive immune defense against mobile genetic elements including harmful phages. To counteract this defense, many mobile genetic elements in turn encode anti-CRISPR proteins (Acrs) to inactivate the CRISPR-Cas system. While multiple mechanisms of Acrs have been uncovered, it remains unknown whether other mechanisms are utilized by uncharacterized Acrs. Here, we report a novel mechanism adopted by recently identified AcrIF23. We show that AcrIF23 interacts with the Cas2/3 helicase-nuclease in the type I-F CRISPR-Cas system, similar to AcrIF3. The structure of AcrIF23 demonstrated a novel fold and structure-based mutagenesis identified a surface region of AcrIF23 involved in both Cas2/3-binding and its inhibition capacity. Unlike AcrIF3, however, we found AcrIF23 only potently inhibits the DNA cleavage activity of Cas2/3 but does not hinder the recruitment of Cas2/3 to the CRISPR RNA-guided surveillance complex (the Csy complex). Also, in contrast to AcrIF3 which hinders substrate DNA recognition by Cas2/3, we show AcrIF23 promotes DNA binding to Cas2/3. Taken together, our study identifies a novel anti-CRISPR mechanism used by AcrIF23 and highlights the diverse mechanisms adopted by Acrs.     

Expanding the plant genome editing toolbox with recently developed CRISPR–Cas systems

Since its first appearance, CRISPR–Cas9 has been developed extensively as a programmable genome-editing tool, opening a new era in plant genome engineering. However, CRISPR–Cas9 still has some drawbacks, such as limitations of the protospacer-adjacent motif (PAM) sequence, target specificity, and the large size of the cas9 gene. To combat invading bacterial phages and plasmid DNAs, bacteria and archaea have diverse and unexplored CRISPR–Cas systems, which have the potential to be developed as a useful genome editing tools. Recently, discovery and characterization of additional CRISPR–Cas systems have been reported. Among them, several CRISPR–Cas systems have been applied successfully to plant and human genome editing. For example, several groups have achieved genome editing using CRISPR–Cas type I-D and type I-E systems, which had never been applied for genome editing previously. In addition to higher specificity and recognition of different PAM sequences, recently developed CRISPR–Cas systems often provide unique characteristics that differ from well-known Cas proteins such as Cas9 and Cas12a. For example, type I CRISPR–Cas10 induces small indels and bi-directional long-range deletions ranging up to 7.2 kb in tomatoes (Solanum lycopersicum L.). Type IV CRISPR–Cas13 targets RNA, not double-strand DNA, enabling highly specific knockdown of target genes. In this article, we review the development of CRISPR–Cas systems, focusing especially on their application to plant genome engineering. Recent CRISPR–Cas tools are helping expand our plant genome engineering toolbox.

Recently discovered and characterized clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats-CRISPR associated (CRISPR–Cas) systems allow additional applications to plant genome editing.     

Foreign DNA acquisition by the I-F?CRISPR–Cas system requires all components of the interference machinery

CRISPR immunity depends on acquisition of fragments of foreign DNA into CRISPR arrays. For type I-E CRISPR–Cas systems two modes of spacer acquisition, naïve and primed adaptation, were described. Naïve adaptation requires just two most conserved Cas1 and Cas2 proteins; it leads to spacer acquisition from both foreign and bacterial DNA and results in multiple spacers incapable of immune response. Primed adaptation requires all Cas proteins and a CRISPR RNA recognizing a partially matching target. It leads to selective acquisition of spacers from DNA molecules recognized by priming CRISPR RNA, with most spacers capable of protecting the host. Here, we studied spacer acquisition by a type I-F CRISPR–Cas system. We observe both naïve and primed adaptation. Both processes require not just Cas1 and Cas2, but also intact Csy complex and CRISPR RNA. Primed adaptation shows a gradient of acquisition efficiency as a function of distance from the priming site and a strand bias that is consistent with existence of single-stranded adaption intermediates. The results provide new insights into the mechanism of spacer acquisition and illustrate surprising mechanistic diversity of related CRISPR–Cas systems.     

Genome editing in mammalian cells using the CRISPR type I-D nuclease

Adoption of CRISPR–Cas systems, such as CRISPR–Cas9 and CRISPR–Cas12a, has revolutionized genome engineering in recent years; however, application of genome editing with CRISPR type I—the most abundant CRISPR system in bacteria—remains less developed. Type I systems, such as type I-E, and I-F, comprise the CRISPR-associated complex for antiviral defense (‘Cascade’: Cas5, Cas6, Cas7, Cas8 and the small subunit) and Cas3, which degrades the target DNA; in contrast, for the sub-type CRISPR–Cas type I-D, which lacks a typical Cas3 nuclease in its CRISPR locus, the mechanism of target DNA degradation remains unknown. Here, we found that Cas10d is a functional nuclease in the type I-D system, performing the role played by Cas3 in other CRISPR–Cas type I systems. The type I-D system can be used for targeted mutagenesis of genomic DNA in human cells, directing both bi-directional long-range deletions and short insertions/deletions. Our findings suggest the CRISPR–Cas type I-D system as a unique effector pathway in CRISPR that can be repurposed for genome engineering in eukaryotic cells.     

CRISPR–Cas9-assisted recombineering in Lactobacillus reuteri

Clustered regularly interspaced palindromic repeats (CRISPRs) and the CRISPR-associated (Cas) nuclease protect bacteria and archeae from foreign DNA by site-specific cleavage of incoming DNA. Type-II CRISPR–Cas systems, such as the Streptococcus pyogenes CRISPR–Cas9 system, can be adapted such that Cas9 can be guided to a user-defined site in the chromosome to introduce double-stranded breaks. Here we have developed and optimized CRISPR–Cas9 function in the lactic acid bacterium Lactobacillus reuteri ATCC PTA 6475. We established proof-of-concept showing that CRISPR–Cas9 selection combined with single-stranded DNA (ssDNA) recombineering is a realistic approach to identify at high efficiencies edited cells in a lactic acid bacterium. We show for three independent targets that subtle changes in the bacterial genome can be recovered at efficiencies ranging from 90 to 100%. By combining CRISPR–Cas9 and recombineering, we successfully applied codon saturation mutagenesis in the L. reuteri chromosome. Also, CRISPR–Cas9 selection is critical to identify low-efficiency events such as oligonucleotide-mediated chromosome deletions. This also means that CRISPR–Cas9 selection will allow identification of recombinant cells in bacteria with low recombineering efficiencies, eliminating the need for ssDNA recombineering optimization procedures. We envision that CRISPR–Cas genome editing has the potential to change the landscape of genome editing in lactic acid bacteria, and other Gram-positive bacteria.     

Prophages are associated with extensive CRISPR–Cas auto-immunity

CRISPR–Cas systems require discriminating self from non-self DNA during adaptation and interference. Yet, multiple cases have been reported of bacteria containing self-targeting spacers (STS), i.e. CRISPR spacers targeting protospacers on the same genome. STS has been suggested to reflect potential auto-immunity as an unwanted side effect of CRISPR–Cas defense, or a regulatory mechanism for gene expression. Here we investigated the incidence, distribution, and evasion of STS in over 100 000 bacterial genomes. We found STS in all CRISPR–Cas types and in one fifth of all CRISPR-carrying bacteria. Notably, up to 40% of I-B and I-F CRISPR–Cas systems contained STS. We observed that STS-containing genomes almost always carry a prophage and that STS map to prophage regions in more than half of the cases. Despite carrying STS, genetic deterioration of CRISPR–Cas systems appears to be rare, suggesting a level of escape from the potentially deleterious effects of STS by other mechanisms such as anti-CRISPR proteins and CRISPR target mutations. We propose a scenario where it is common to acquire an STS against a prophage, and this may trigger more extensive STS buildup by primed spacer acquisition in type I systems, without detrimental autoimmunity effects as mechanisms of auto-immunity evasion create tolerance to STS-targeted prophages.     

Global detection of DNA repair outcomes induced by CRISPR–Cas9

CRISPR–Cas9 generates double-stranded DNA breaks (DSBs) to activate cellular DNA repair pathways for genome editing. The repair of DSBs leads to small insertions or deletions (indels) and other complex byproducts, including large deletions and chromosomal translocations. Indels are well understood to disrupt target genes, while the other deleterious byproducts remain elusive. We developed a new in silico analysis pipeline for the previously described primer-extension-mediated sequencing assay to comprehensively characterize CRISPR–Cas9-induced DSB repair outcomes in human or mouse cells. We identified tremendous deleterious DSB repair byproducts of CRISPR–Cas9 editing, including large deletions, vector integrations, and chromosomal translocations. We further elucidated the important roles of microhomology, chromosomal interaction, recurrent DSBs, and DSB repair pathways in the generation of these byproducts. Our findings provide an extra dimension for genome editing safety besides off-targets. And caution should be exercised to avoid not only off-target damages but also deleterious DSB repair byproducts during genome editing.     

Structural basis for substrate recognition and cleavage by the dimerization-dependent CRISPR–Cas12f nuclease

Cas12f, also known as Cas14, is an exceptionally small type V-F CRISPR–Cas nuclease that is roughly half the size of comparable nucleases of this type. To reveal the mechanisms underlying substrate recognition and cleavage, we determined the cryo-EM structures of the Cas12f-sgRNA-target DNA and Cas12f-sgRNA complexes at 3.1 and 3.9 Å, respectively. An asymmetric Cas12f dimer is bound to one sgRNA for recognition and cleavage of dsDNA substrate with a T-rich PAM sequence. Despite its dimerization, Cas12f adopts a conserved activation mechanism among the type V nucleases which requires coordinated conformational changes induced by the formation of the crRNA-target DNA heteroduplex, including the close-to-open transition in the lid motif of the RuvC domain. Only one RuvC domain in the Cas12f dimer is activated by substrate recognition, and the substrate bound to the activated RuvC domain is captured in the structure. Structure-assisted truncated sgRNA, which is less than half the length of the original sgRNA, is still active for target DNA cleavage. Our results expand our understanding of the diverse type V CRISPR–Cas nucleases and facilitate potential genome editing applications using the miniature Cas12f.     

Epigenetic features drastically impact CRISPR–Cas9 efficacy in plants

CRISPR–Cas9-mediated genome editing has been widely adopted for basic and applied biological research in eukaryotic systems. While many studies consider DNA sequences of CRISPR target sites as the primary determinant for CRISPR mutagenesis efficiency and mutation profiles, increasing evidence reveals the substantial role of chromatin context. Nonetheless, most prior studies are limited by the lack of sufficient epigenetic resources and/or by only transiently expressing CRISPR–Cas9 in a short time window. In this study, we leveraged the wealth of high-resolution epigenomic resources in Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) to address the impact of chromatin features on CRISPR–Cas9 mutagenesis using stable transgenic plants. Our results indicated that DNA methylation and chromatin features could lead to substantial variations in mutagenesis efficiency by up to 250-fold. Low mutagenesis efficiencies were mostly associated with repressive heterochromatic features. This repressive effect appeared to persist through cell divisions but could be alleviated through substantial reduction of DNA methylation at CRISPR target sites. Moreover, specific chromatin features, such as H3K4me1, H3.3, and H3.1, appear to be associated with significant variation in CRISPR–Cas9 mutation profiles mediated by the non-homologous end joining repair pathway. Our findings provide strong evidence that specific chromatin features could have substantial and lasting impacts on both CRISPR–Cas9 mutagenesis efficiency and DNA double-strand break repair outcomes.

Epigenetic features substantially influence genome editing efficiency and DNA repair outcomes.     

Customized optical mapping by CRISPR–Cas9 mediated DNA labeling with multiple sgRNAs

Whole-genome mapping technologies have been developed as a complementary tool to provide scaffolds for genome assembly and structural variation analysis (1,2). We recently introduced a novel DNA labeling strategy based on a CRISPR–Cas9 genome editing system, which can target any 20bp sequences. The labeling strategy is specifically useful in targeting repetitive sequences, and sequences not accessible to other labeling methods. In this report, we present customized mapping strategies that extend the applications of CRISPR–Cas9 DNA labeling. We first design a CRISPR–Cas9 labeling strategy to interrogate and differentiate the single allele differences in NGG protospacer adjacent motifs (PAM sequence). Combined with sequence motif labeling, we can pinpoint the single-base differences in highly conserved sequences. In the second strategy, we design mapping patterns across a genome by selecting sets of specific single-guide RNAs (sgRNAs) for labeling multiple loci of a genomic region or a whole genome. By developing and optimizing a single tube synthesis of multiple sgRNAs, we demonstrate the utility of CRISPR–Cas9 mapping with 162 sgRNAs targeting the 2Mb Haemophilus influenzae chromosome. These CRISPR–Cas9 mapping approaches could be particularly useful for applications in defining long-distance haplotypes and pinpointing the breakpoints in large structural variants in complex genomes and microbial mixtures.