Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Structural basis for promiscuous PAM recognition in type I–E Cascade from E. coli

Nature volume 530, pages 499–503 (2016)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPRs) and the cas (CRISPR-associated) operon form an RNA-based adaptive immune system against foreign genetic elements in prokaryotes1. Type I accounts for 95% of CRISPR systems, and has been used to control gene expression and cell fate2,3. During CRISPR RNA (crRNA)-guided interference, Cascade (CRISPR-associated complex for antiviral defence) facilitates the crRNA-guided invasion of double-stranded DNA for complementary base-pairing with the target DNA strand while displacing the non-target strand, forming an R-loop4,5. Cas3, which has nuclease and helicase activities, is subsequently recruited to degrade two DNA strands4,6,7. A protospacer adjacent motif (PAM) sequence flanking target DNA is crucial for self versus foreign discrimination4,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16. Here we present the 2.45 Å crystal structure of Escherichia coli Cascade bound to a foreign double-stranded DNA target. The 5′-ATG PAM is recognized in duplex form, from the minor groove side, by three structural features in the Cascade Cse1 subunit. The promiscuity inherent to minor groove DNA recognition rationalizes the observation that a single Cascade complex can respond to several distinct PAM sequences. Optimal PAM recognition coincides with wedge insertion, initiating directional target DNA strand unwinding to allow segmented base-pairing with crRNA. The non-target strand is guided along a parallel path 25 Å apart, and the R-loop structure is further stabilized by locking this strand behind the Cse2 dimer. These observations provide the structural basis for understanding the PAM-dependent directional R-loop formation process17,18.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Get just this article for as long as you need it

$39.95

Learn more

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Foreign-DNA-bound Cascade structure.
Figure 2: PAM recognition by Cse1 subunit of Cascade.
Figure 3: Active guidance of the non-target DNA strand by Cascade.
Figure 4: Model for PAM-dependent directional R-loop formation in type I CRISPR-Cas system.

Accession codes

Primary accessions

Protein Data Bank

Data deposits

The structure factors and coordinates for Cascade–partial-R-loop structures with 10-nucleotide and 35-nucleotide non-target protospacer have been deposited in the Protein Data Bank (PDB) under accession numbers 5H9F and 5H9E, respectively.

References

  1. van der Oost, J., Westra, E. R., Jackson, R. N. & Wiedenheft, B. Unravelling the structural and mechanistic basis of CRISPR-Cas systems. Nature Rev. Microbiol. 12, 479–492 (2014)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Luo, M. L., Mullis, A. S., Leenay, R. T. & Beisel, C. L. Repurposing endogenous type I CRISPR-Cas systems for programmable gene repression. Nucleic Acids Res. 43, 674–681 (2015)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Caliando, B. J. & Voigt, C. A. Targeted DNA degradation using a CRISPR device stably carried in the host genome. Nature Commun. 6, 6989 (2015)

    Article  CAS  ADS  Google Scholar 

  4. Westra, E. R. et al. CRISPR immunity relies on the consecutive binding and degradation of negatively supercoiled invader DNA by Cascade and Cas3. Mol. Cell 46, 595–605 (2012)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Jore, M. M. et al. Structural basis for CRISPR RNA-guided DNA recognition by Cascade. Nature Struct. Mol. Biol. 18, 529–536 (2011)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Brouns, S. J. et al. Small CRISPR RNAs guide antiviral defense in prokaryotes. Science 321, 960–964 (2008)

    Article  CAS  ADS  Google Scholar 

  7. Wiedenheft, B. et al. Structures of the RNA-guided surveillance complex from a bacterial immune system. Nature 477, 486–489 (2011)

    Article  CAS  ADS  Google Scholar 

  8. Westra, E. R. et al. Type I-E CRISPR-Cas systems discriminate target from non-target DNA through base pairing-independent PAM recognition. PLoS Genet. 9, e1003742 (2013)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Marraffini, L. A. & Sontheimer, E. J. Self versus non-self discrimination during CRISPR RNA-directed immunity. Nature 463, 568–571 (2010)

    Article  CAS  ADS  Google Scholar 

  10. Mojica, F. J., Díez-Villaseñor, C., Garcia-Martinez, J. & Almendros, C. Short motif sequences determine the targets of the prokaryotic CRISPR defence system. Microbiology 155, 733–740 (2009)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Mulepati, S. & Bailey, S. In vitro reconstitution of an Escherichia coli RNA-guided immune system reveals unidirectional, ATP-dependent degradation of DNA target. J. Biol. Chem. 288, 22184–22192 (2013)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Rollins, M. F., Schuman, J. T., Paulus, K., Bukhari, H. S. & Wiedenheft, B. Mechanism of foreign DNA recognition by a CRISPR RNA-guided surveillance complex from Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Nucleic Acids Res. 43, 2216–2222 (2015)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Sashital, D. G., Wiedenheft, B. & Doudna, J. A. Mechanism of foreign DNA selection in a bacterial adaptive immune system. Mol. Cell 46, 606–615 (2012)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Sinkunas, T. et al. In vitro reconstitution of Cascade-mediated CRISPR immunity in Streptococcus thermophilus. EMBO J. 32, 385–394 (2013)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Sternberg, S. H., Redding, S., Jinek, M., Greene, E. C. & Doudna, J. A. DNA interrogation by the CRISPR RNA-guided endonuclease Cas9. Nature 507, 62–67 (2014)

    Article  CAS  ADS  Google Scholar 

  16. van Erp, P. B. et al. Mechanism of CRISPR-RNA guided recognition of DNA targets in Escherichia coli. Nucleic Acids Res. 43, 8381–8391 (2015)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Rutkauskas, M. et al. Directional R-loop formation by the CRISPR-Cas surveillance complex cascade provides efficient off-target site rejection. Cell Rep. 10, 1534–1543 (2015)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Blosser, T. R. et al. Two distinct DNA binding modes guide dual roles of a CRISPR-Cas protein complex. Mol. Cell 58, 60–70 (2015)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Anders, C., Niewoehner, O., Duerst, A. & Jinek, M. Structural basis of PAM-dependent target DNA recognition by the Cas9 endonuclease. Nature 513, 569–573 (2014)

    Article  CAS  ADS  Google Scholar 

  20. Nishimasu, H. et al. Crystal Structure of Staphylococcus aureus Cas9. Cell 162, 1113–1126 (2015)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Hochstrasser, M. L. et al. CasA mediates Cas3-catalyzed target degradation during CRISPR RNA-guided interference. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, 6618–6623 (2014)

    Article  CAS  ADS  Google Scholar 

  22. Fineran, P. C. et al. Degenerate target sites mediate rapid primed CRISPR adaptation. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, E1629–E1638 (2014)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Zhao, H. et al. Crystal structure of the RNA-guided immune surveillance Cascade complex in Escherichia coli. Nature 515, 147–150 (2014)

    Article  CAS  ADS  Google Scholar 

  24. Jackson, R. N. et al. Crystal structure of the CRISPR RNA-guided surveillance complex from Escherichia coli. Science 345, 1473–1479 (2014)

    Article  CAS  ADS  Google Scholar 

  25. Huo, Y. et al. Structures of CRISPR Cas3 offer mechanistic insights into Cascade-activated DNA unwinding and degradation. Nature Struct. Mol. Biol. 21, 771–777 (2014)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Jackson, R. N. et al. Crystal structure of the CRISPR RNA-guided surveillance complex from Escherichia coli. Science 345, 1473–1479 (2014)

    Article  CAS  ADS  Google Scholar 

  27. Mulepati, S., Heroux, A. & Bailey, S. Crystal structure of a CRISPR RNA-guided surveillance complex bound to a ssDNA target. Science 345, 1479–1484 (2014)

    Article  CAS  ADS  Google Scholar 

  28. Xue, C. et al. CRISPR interference and priming varies with individual spacer sequences. Nucleic Acids Res. 43, 10831–10847 (2015)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Datsenko, K. A. et al. Molecular memory of prior infections activates the CRISPR/Cas adaptive bacterial immunity system. Nature Commun. 3, 945 (2012)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  30. Redding, S. et al. Surveillance and processing of foreign DNA by the Escherichia coli CRISPR-Cas system. Cell 163, 854–865 (2015)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Otwinowski, Z. & Minor, W. Processing of X-ray diffraction data collected in oscillation mode. Methods Enzymol. 276, 307–326 (1997)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Emsley, P. & Cowtan, K. Coot: model-building tools for molecular graphics. Acta Crystallogr. D 60, 2126–2132 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Adams, P. D. et al. PHENIX: a comprehensive Python-based system for macromolecular structure solution. Acta Crystallogr. D 66, 213–221 (2010)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Collaborative Computational Project, Number 4. The CCP4 suite: programs for protein crystallography. Acta Crystallogr. D 50, 760–763 (1994)

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work is supported by National Institutes of Health (NIH) grants GM102543 and GM086766 to A.K., GM097330 to S.B. and GM108888 to B.W. NE-CAT beamlines were supported by NIH grants P41 GM103403 and S10 RR029205. We thank G. Feigenson and J. Mallon for technical help, and I. Finkelstein, I. Price and A. Dolan for discussions.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Molecular Biology and Genetics, Cornell University, 253 Biotechnology Building, Ithaca, 14853, New York, USA

    Robert P. Hayes, Yibei Xiao, Fran Ding & Ailong Ke

  2. Department of Chemistry and Chemical Biology, Cornell University, NE-CAT, Advanced Photon Source, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, 60439, Illinois, USA

    Kanagalaghatta Rajashankar

  3. Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Johns Hopkins University, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, 21205, Maryland, USA

    Scott Bailey

  4. Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Montana State University, Bozeman, 59717, Montana, USA

    Paul B. G. van Erp & Blake Wiedenheft

Authors
  1. Robert P. Hayes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yibei Xiao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Fran Ding
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Paul B. G. van Erp
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Kanagalaghatta Rajashankar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Scott Bailey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Blake Wiedenheft
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Ailong Ke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

R.P.H. and A.K. designed the research, R.P.H. determined the structure and performed biochemical analyses, Y.X., F.D. and P.B.G.vE. contributed to biochemical analysis, K.R. assisted with diffraction data collection and processing, and B.W. and S.B. contributed to assay setup. R.P.H., B.W. and A.K. wrote the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ailong Ke.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Extended data figures and tables

Extended Data Figure 1 Electron density of nucleic acids in Cascade–dsDNA complex structure.

2Fo − Fc electron density map (1.0σ). Nucleic acid strands are shown as sticks and coloured as previously indicated.

Extended Data Figure 2 Comparison between the Cascade–partial-R-loop crystal structure and the Cascade–full-R-loop EM reconstruction.

Rigid body docking of the partial-R-loop–Cascade crystal structure into the EM reconstruction (EMD-5929) of the full R-loop–Cascade illustrates a similar overall conformation, with a correlation value of 0.83.

Extended Data Figure 3 Conformational changes in Cascade upon partial R-loop formation.

Comparison of free (PDB 4TVX; in a darker shade) and partial R-loop-bound (this study, in lighter shade) Cascade. Arrows indicate the direction of the movement. The CTD of Cse1 pivots 30° about a hinge at the Cse1 NTD–CTD interface. The amplified motion at the tip of the Cse1-CTD slides with the Cse2 dimer ~12 Å relative to the Cas7 scaffold, and protrudes upwards into the R-loop. Cse1-NTD remains in the docked position, stabilized by the clamping of Cse1 L1 loop onto the exposed tri-nucleotide motif on crRNA 5′-handle.

Extended Data Figure 4 Local conformational rearrangement in Cse1 at the proposed Cas3-binding site.

a, Vector map showing global and local conformational changes in Cse1. Cse1-NTD (in cyan) undergoes moderate movement. Cse1-CTD (in green) swings about a pivoting point (Trp307) as part of the global conformational changes, The Cse1 NTD–CTD interface (in orange) undergoes considerable local conformational rearrangement upon partial R-loop formation. b, SDS–PAGE of wild-type and mutant Cascades used in mutagenesis. All mutants contained stoichiometric amounts of Cse1, except Trp307Ala, in which Cse1 failed to assemble. Uncropped gels are shown in Supplementary Fig. 1. c, Detailed structure rearrangement at Cse1 NTD–CTD interface, involving amino acids 300–326. Different colours are used to differentiate structural elements (amino acid numbers tabulated to the right). Partial R-loop-bound and free Cascade structures are rendered in solid and semi-transparent cartoons, respectively. d, Trp307 from Cse1-NTD rotates inside a hydrophobic socket at Cse1-CTD during the conformational change (free-Cascade-CTD rendered in a darker shade of green). Disruption of this interaction (Trp307Ala) caused Cse1 dissociation from Cascade. e, Docking of our structure into the cryoEM reconstruction of the crosslinked Cascade–dsDNA–Cas3 complex (EMD-5930). Cas3 density and the location of the local rearrangement in Cse1 are circled to highlight their proximity.

Extended Data Figure 5 Guided entry of dsDNA into Cascade.

A series of positively charged residues from Cas7.5, Cas7.6, Cas5e and Cse1 (dark blue surfaces) guide the dsDNA into Cascade and towards PAM recognition elements in Cse1-NTD.

Extended Data Figure 6 Influence of PAM−1 base-pair composition on Cascade binding affinity and Cas3 cleavage efficiency.

a, Inosine substitution of GNT−1 led to a mild twofold binding defect, suggesting that the N2 amine of GNT−1 is a minor determinant of specificity. b, Binding Kd values of E. coli Cascade for all four base-pair combinations at PAM−1. Kd values for 5′-ATG, ATA, ATC and ATT PAMs were determined to be ~10, 20, 40 and 100 nM, respectively. c, Cas3 cleavage efficiency was governed by the Cascade affinity for the corresponding PAM-containing target (5′-ATG > ATA >> ATT ≈ ATC). Cascade concentration above the Kd led to efficient Cas3 cleavage. Experiments were done in triplicate and representative results are shown. Uncropped gels are shown in Supplementary Fig. 1.

Extended Data Figure 7 Conservation of PAM recognition elements.

a, Sequence alignment of Cse1 proteins with known structures. Identical residues are highlighted in red, conserved residues in red text. DNA-contacting residues in the Cse1-NTD and -CTD are marked by cyan and green asterisks, respectively. The glycine loop and glutamine wedge are in blue and orange boxes, respectively. Residues mediating the Trp307 ball-and-socket interaction are marked with black asterisks. b, Structural alignment of Cse1 PAM recognition elements. Apo Cse1 from T. Thermus thermophilus (PDB 4AN8), Acidithiobacillus ferrooxidans (PDB 4H3T) and T. fusca (PDB 3WVO) were superimposed with the Cse1 in our partial R-loop-forming E. coli Cascade structure. Despite sequence variation, a glycine-rich loop is present in each Cse1 structure, and probably has a similar function to recognize PAM from the minor groove (left inset). The glutamine-wedge protrusion is highly conserved in 3D. Each wedge features a long side chain at the tip (right inset), which probably stacks underneath PAM in a similar fashion.

Extended Data Figure 8 Rationalization of PAM−2 and PAM−3 specificity using nucleotide substitution and modelling.

a, Modelling of alternative base pairs at PAM−2 suggests that only the N2 amine of GT−2 would cause steric clashes with Cα of Gly160 (bottom right quadrant), this amine therefore may serve as the anti-determinant for the rejection of GT–CNT at PAM−2. b, EMSAs demonstrating that removal of this amine in inosine substitution rescued the Cascade binding defect. c, Whereas Lys268Ala contained reduced affinity for the correct PAM, it still possessed strong discrimination against GT–CNT at PAM−3 (5′-CTG), suggesting the further presence of a mechanism to reject GT−3. d, Inosine substitution of GT−3 restored the Cascade binding Kd to ~40 nM, leading to the conclusion that the N2 amine of GT−3 is a minor determinant of specificity. Experiments were done in triplicate and representative results are shown. Uncropped gels are shown in Supplementary Fig. 1.

Extended Data Table 1 Oligonucleotides used in this study
Full size table
Extended Data Table 2 Data collection and refinement statistics
Full size table

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

This file contains Supplementary Figure 1, uncropped gel data. Part a is related to Fig. 2e. Part b is related to Fig. 2f. Part c is related to Fig. 3b. d, Related to Extended Data Fig. 4b. e, Related to Extended Data Fig. 6a. f, Related to Extended Data Fig. 6b. g, Related to Extended Data Fig. 6c. h, Related to Extended Data Fig. 8b. i, Related to Extended Data Fig. 8c. j, Related to Extended Data Fig. 8d. (PDF 508 kb)

Global structure of Cascade-dsDNA structure docked into EM reconstruction of full R-loop Cascade complex (EMD-5929).

Global structure of Cascade-dsDNA structure docked into EM reconstruction of full R-loop Cascade complex (EMD-5929). (MP4 18526 kb)

Conformational change between Cascade-apo (PDB: 4TVX) and Cascade-dsDNA structures.

The first half of the video compares the global conformational changes between the two structures. The second half focuses on the local conformational changes near the Cas3 binding site. The Cse1-CTD pivots around W307 in Cse1-NTD. The local structural elements around W307 in Cse1-NTD undergo rearrangement. The surface exposed β-hairpin (aa 316-326) melts away, the nearby α-helix rotates ˜90° at the Cse1-NTD/CTD interface. The altered surface landscape, together with the altered alignment between Cse1-NTD and Cse1-CTD, likely licenses Cas3 to bind. (MP4 29890 kb)

Conformational change between Cascade-ssDNA (PDB: 4QYZ) and Cascade-dsDNA structures.

Conformational change between Cascade-ssDNA (PDB: 4QYZ) and Cascade-dsDNA structures. (MP4 9127 kb)

PowerPoint slides

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hayes, R., Xiao, Y., Ding, F. et al. Structural basis for promiscuous PAM recognition in type I–E Cascade from E. coli. Nature 530, 499–503 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature16995

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature16995

This article is cited by

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing