↓ Skip to main content

Systematic evaluation of CRISPR-Cas systems reveals design principles for genome editing in human cells

Overview of attention for article published in Genome Biology (Online Edition), May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
92 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
62 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
221 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Systematic evaluation of CRISPR-Cas systems reveals design principles for genome editing in human cells
Published in
Genome Biology (Online Edition), May 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13059-018-1445-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yuanming Wang, Kaiwen Ivy Liu, Norfala-Aliah Binte Sutrisnoh, Harini Srinivasan, Junyi Zhang, Jia Li, Fan Zhang, Charles Richard John Lalith, Heyun Xing, Raghuvaran Shanmugam, Jia Nee Foo, Hwee Ting Yeo, Kean Hean Ooi, Tore Bleckwehl, Yi Yun Rachel Par, Shi Mun Lee, Nur Nadiah Binte Ismail, Nur Aidah Binti Sanwari, Si Ting Vanessa Lee, Jan Lew, Meng How Tan

Abstract

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. 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. Our work delineates design parameters for each CRISPR-Cas system and will serve as a useful reference for future genome engineering studies.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 92 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 221 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 221 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 62 28%
Student > Ph. D. Student 42 19%
Student > Master 23 10%
Student > Bachelor 16 7%
Other 11 5%
Other 24 11%
Unknown 43 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 78 35%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 44 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 9 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 3%
Other 24 11%
Unknown 49 22%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 50. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 February 2019.
All research outputs
#715,379
of 22,908,162 outputs
Outputs from Genome Biology (Online Edition)
#515
of 4,127 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,747
of 330,553 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Biology (Online Edition)
#6
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,908,162 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,127 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 330,553 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.