CRISPR-Cas
PART I ContentsBackgroundHighlights
CRISPR-Cas9 has recently emerged as a promising system for multiplexed genome editing as well as epigenome and transcriptome perturbation. Due to its specificity, ease of use and highly modular programmable nature, it has been widely adopted for a variety of applications such as genome editing, transcriptional inhibition and activation, genetic screening, DNA localization imaging, and many more. In this review, we will discuss non-editing applications of CRISPR-Cas9 for transcriptome perturbation, metabolic engineering, and synthetic biology.[1] Since the early days of genetic engineering there has been a need for control of gene expression. Naturally occurring transcription factors (TFs) have traditionally been used to achieve this goal (reviewed in [2]). However, their limited DNA binding sequence space required installing specific sequences within the transcription regulatory elements of the target genes. This can be technically difficult and may have unintended consequences on gene expression. Zinc fingers (ZFs) and transcription activator-like effectors (TALEs) were developed to overcome the fixed binding sequence requirements of native TFs. However, both ZFs and TALEs have significant limitations. ZFs have complicated design criteria and large highly repetitive TALE genes are difficult to synthesize and clone (reviewed in [3][4]). These challenges have recently been overcome using CRISPR-Cas9 based TFs. The biochemical properties of CRISPR-Cas9 based TFs that enable such flexibility and describe their applications to synthetic gene circuit design and multi-plexed perturbation of native gene networks.[1] Many bacteria and archaea possess an adaptive immune system consisting of repetitive genetic elements known as clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPRs) and CRISPR-associated (Cas) proteins. Similar to RNAi pathways in eukaryotes, CRISPR–Cas systems require small RNAs for sequence-specific detection and degradation of complementary nucleic acids. Cas5 and Cas6 enzymes have evolved to specifically recognize and process CRISPR-derived transcripts into functional small RNAs used as guides by interference complexes. Our detailed understanding of these proteins has led to the development of several useful Cas6-based biotechnological methods. The structures, functions, mechanisms, and applications of the enzymes responsible for CRISPR RNA (crRNA) processing, highlighting a fascinating family of endonucleases with exquisite RNA recognition and cleavage activities are reviewed.[5] CRISPR-Cas defenseThe CRISPR-Cas systems provide protection against mobile genetic elements (MGEs) — in particular, viruses and plasmids— by sequence-specific targeting of foreign DNA or RNA [6]. A CRISPR-cas locus generally consists of an operon of CRISPR-associated (cas) genes and a CRISPR array composed of a series of direct repeats interspaced by variable DNA sequences (known as spacers) (Fig. 1A). The repeat sequences and lengths as well as the number of repeats in CRISPR arrays vary broadly, but all arrays possess the characteristic arrangement of alternating repeat and spacer sequences. The spacers are key elements of adaptive immunity, as they store the “memory” of an organism’s encounters with specific MGEs acquired as a result of a previous unsuccessful infection. This memory enables the recognition and neutralization of the invaders upon subsequent infections [6][7]. CRISPR loci are flanked by a diverse set of cas genes that define major CRISPR types based on gene conservation and locus organization[5]. Despite minimal sequence homology, Cas6s have several conserved structural features that facilitate binding of both the pre-crRNA and their crRNA product with high affinity. In most CRISPR systems, due to the pseudo-palindromic nature of the repeat sequence,the pre-crRNA adopts a stem loop structure that is bound sequence- and shape-specifically and cleaved at its base.[5] For example, PaeCas6f (Csy4) from Pseudomonas aeruginosa (2xli) binds selectively and cleaves pre-crRNAs using phylogenetically conserved serine and histidine residues in the active site. Some pre-crRNAs are predicted to be unstructured in solution and thus may be bound differently, although base pairing may be stabilized by protein interactions [8][5]. CRISPR-mediated adaptive immunity involves three steps: adaptation, expression, and interference (Fig. 1B). During the adaptation step, fragments of foreign DNA (known as protospacers) from invading elements are processed and incorporated as new spacers into the CRISPR array. The expression step involves the transcription of the CRISPR array, which is followed by processing of the precursor transcript into mature CRISPR RNAs (crRNAs)[9][7]: Examples of 3D structures of CRISPR RNA (crRNA)
The crRNAs are assembled with one or more Cas proteins into CRISPR ribonucleoprotein (crRNP) complexes[7].
The interference step involves crRNA-directed cleavage of invading cognate virus or plasmid nucleic acids by Cas nucleases within the crRNP complex [7]. An interference complex of CRISPR-associated (Cas) proteins uses the mature crRNA as a guide to target and destroy foreign nucleic acids bearing sequence complementarity [10][9].  CRISPR-Cas diversity, classification, and evolutionClassification according to the Wikipedia page CRISPR [1] with additions CRISPR Class 1 uses a complex of multiple Cas proteins CRISPR type I (Cas3) CRISPR type I-A (Cascade) - see CRISPR subtype I-A CRISPR type I-B (Cascade) - see CRISPR subtype I-B CRISPR type I-C (Cascade) - see CRISPR subtype I-C CRISPR type I-D (Cas10d) CRISPR type I-E (Cascade) - see CRISPR subtype I-E CRISPR type I-F (Csy1, Csy2, Csy3) - see CRISPR subtype I-F CRISPR type I-U (GSU0054) CRISPR type III (Cas10) CRISPR type III-A (Csm complex) - see CRISPR subtype III-A (Csm complex) CRISPR type III-B (Cmr complex) CRISPR type III-C (Cas10 or Csx11) CRISPR type III-D (Csx10) CRISPR type Orphan CRISPR type IV (Csf1) CRISPR type IV-A CRISPR type IV-B CRISPR Class 2 uses a single large Cas protein CRISPR type II-A - see CRISPR-Cas9 CRISPR type II-B (Cas4) CRISPR type II-C CRISPR type V (Cpf1, C2c1, C2c3) - see CRISPR type V CRISPR type VI (Cas13a (previously known as C2c2), Cas13b, Cas13c, Cas13d) - see CRISPR type VI The rapid evolution of highly diverse CRISPR-Cas systems is thought to be driven by the continuous arms race with the invading MGEs. The latest classification scheme for CRISPR-Cas systems, which takes into account the repertoire of cas genes and the sequence similarity between Cas proteins and the locus architecture, includes two classes that are currently subdivided into six types and 19 subtypes [7][11][12]. The key feature of the organization and evolution of the CRISPR-Cas loci is their pronounced modularity. The module responsible for the adaptation step is largely uniform among the diverse CRISPR-Cas systems and consists of the cas1 and cas2 genes, both of which are essential for the acquisition of spacers. In many CRISPR-Cas variants, the adaptation module also includes the cas4 gene. By contrast, the CRISPR-Cas effector module, which is involved in the maturation of the crRNAs as well as in target recognition and cleavage, shows a far greater versatility (Fig. 2A) [7][11].  The 2 classes of CRISPR-Cas systems differ fundamentally with respect to the organization of the effector module [11]. Class 1 systems (including types I, III, and IV) are present in bacteria and archaea, and encompass effector complexes composed of 4-7 Cas protein subunits [e.g., the (CRISPR-associated complex for antiviral defense) (Cascade) of type I systems, and the Csm/Cmr complexes of type III systems]. Most of the subunits of the class 1 effector complexes — in particular, Cas5, Cas6, and Cas7—contain variants of the RNA-binding RRM (RNA recognition motif) domain.[7] Examples of RRM fold
Although the sequence similarity between the individual subunits of type I and type III effector complexes is generally low, the complexes share strikingly similar overall architectures that suggest a common origin [12]. The ancestral CRISPR-Cas effector complex most likely resembled the extant type III complexes, as indicated by the presence of the archetypal type III protein, the large Cas10 subunit, which appears to be an active enzyme of the DNA polymerase–nucleotide cyclase superfamily, unlike its inactive type I counterpart (Cas8) [12][7]. The cas6 gene family encodes a set of RNA endonucleases responsible for crRNA processing in Type I and Type III CRISPR systems. Type II systems use a trans-activating RNA (tracrRNA) together with endogenous RNase III for crRNA maturation. In Type I-B, I-C, I-E, and I-F systems, the endoRNase stays bound to the crRNA and assembles into a complex with other Cas proteins for downstream targeting [9], while in Type I-A and III systems, the crRNA alone is loaded into the targeting complex and Cas6 dissociates [5]. In the less common class 2 CRISPR-Cas systems (types II, V, and VI), which are almost completely restricted to bacteria, the effector complex is represented by a single multidomain protein [11]. The best-characterized class 2 effector is Cas9 (type II), the RNA-dependent endonuclease that contains two unrelated nuclease domains, HNH and RuvC, that are responsible for the cleavage of the target and the displaced strand, respectively, in the crRNA–target DNA complex (Domain organization of nuclease lobe of Cas9 from S. pyogenes, 4zt0). The type II loci also encode a trans-acting CRISPR RNA (tracrRNA) that evolved from the corresponding CRISPR repeat and is essential for pre-crRNA processing and target recognition in type II systems. Cas9 is directed to its DNA targets by forming a ribonucleoprotein complex with these 2 small non-coding RNAs: crRNA and tracrRNA. By elegant engineering, crRNA and tracrRNA can be joined end-to-end and transcribed as a single guide RNA (sgRNA) (4zt9[13]) that too efficiently directs Cas9 protein to DNA targets encoded within the guide sequence of sgRNA [14]: Examples of 3D structures of single guide RNA (sgRNA)
The optimal DNA target of the complex is determined by a Watson–Crick base pairing of a short ∼20-nt sequence within sgRNA (within the crRNA in wild-type), termed the guide sequence, adjacent to a few nucleotide long conserved motif recognized directly by Cas9 protein (protospacer adjacent motif, PAM) [14][15]. Despite this, a few mismatches between guide sequence and target DNA can be tolerated [14][16][17][18], more so within the 5’ proximal position of the guide sequence. The prototype type V effector Cpf1 (subtype V-A) contains only one nuclease domain (RuvC-like) that is identifiable by sequence analysis. However, analysis of the recently solved structure of Cpf1 complexed with the crRNA and target DNA has revealed a second nuclease domain, the fold of which is unrelated to HNH or any other known nucleases. In analogy to the HNH domain in Cas9, the novel nuclease domain (labeled Nuc) in Cpf1 is inserted into the RuvC domain, and it is responsible for cleavage of the target strand.[7][19] Screening of microbial genomes and metagenomes for undiscovered class 2 systems has resulted in the identification of three novel CRISPR-Cas variants. These include subtypes V-B and V-C, which resemble Cpf1 in that their predicted effector proteins contain a single, RuvC-like nuclease domain. Cleavage of target DNA by the type V-B effector, denoted C2c1, has been experimentally demonstrated. Type VI is unique in that its effector protein contains two conserved HEPN domains that possess ribonuclease (RNase) activity (Fig. 2A).[7][12] Recent comparative genomic analyses of variant CRISPR-Cas systems (Fig. 2B) [12] have revealed a strong modular evolution with multiple combinations of adaptation modules and effector modules, as well as a pivotal contribution of mobile genetic elements to the origin and diversification of the CRISPR-Cas systems. The ancestral prokaryotic adaptive immune system could have emerged via the insertion of a casposon (a recently discovered distinct class of self-synthesizing transposons that appear to encode a Cas1 homolog) next to an innate immunity locus (probably consisting of genes encoding a Cas10 nuclease and possibly one or more RNA binding proteins). Apart from providing the Cas1 nuclease/integrase that is required for recombination during spacer acquisition, the casposon may also have contributed the prototype CRISPR repeat unit that could have evolved from one of the inverted terminal repeats of the casposon. An additional toxin-antitoxin module that inserted either in the ancestral casposon or in the evolving adaptive immunity locus probably provided the cas2 gene, thus completing the adaptation module. The Cas10 nuclease and one or more additional proteins with an RRM fold (the ultimate origin of which could be a polymerase or cyclase that gave rise to Cas10) of the hybrid locus could have subsequently evolved to become the ancestral CRISPR-Cas effector module [12][7]. The widespread occurrence of class 1 systems in archaea and bacteria, together with the proliferation of the ancient RRM domain in class 1 effector proteins, strongly suggests that the ancestral CRISPR-Cas belonged to class 1. Most likely, the multiple class 2 variants then evolved via several independent replacements of the class 1 effector locus with nuclease genes that were derived from distinct MGEs (Fig. 2B). In particular, type V effector variants (Cpf1) seem to have evolved from different families of the TnpB transposase genes that are widespread in transposons [12], whereas the type II effector (Cas9) may have evolved from IscB, a protein with two nuclease domains that belongs to a recently identified distinct transposon family. Notably, class 2 CRISPR-Cas systems, in their entirety, appear to have been derived from different MGEs: Cas1 from a casposon, Cas2 from a toxin-antitoxin module, and the different effector proteins (such as Cas9 and Cpf1) from respective transposable elements [12][7]. See aslo
| ||||||||||||
