Abstract
Gene drive elements promote the spread of linked traits and can be used to change the composition or fate of wild populations. Cleave and Rescue (ClvR) drive elements sit at a fixed chromosomal position and include a DNA sequence-modifying enzyme such as Cas9/gRNAs that disrupts endogenous versions of an essential gene and a recoded version of the essential gene resistant to cleavage. ClvR spreads by creating conditions in which those lacking ClvR die because they lack functional versions of the essential gene. Here we demonstrate the essential features of the ClvR gene drive in the plant Arabidopsis thaliana through killing of gametes that fail to inherit a ClvR that targets the essential gene YKT61. Resistant alleles, which can slow or prevent drive, were not observed. Modelling shows plant ClvRs are robust to certain failure modes and can be used to rapidly drive population modification or suppression. Possible applications are discussed.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals
Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription
24,99 € / 30 days
cancel any time
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 digital issues and online access to articles
133,45 € per year
only 11,12 € per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on SpringerLink
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout








Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
All data are available in the main text and the Supplementary Information files. Illumina sequencing reads were deposited to SRA (bioproject, PRJNA1074841). The Arabidopsis TAIR 10 genome assembly was used in this study. Constructs and seeds of transgenic plants created in this study are available upon request.
Code availability
Modelling code and more information on the model, the scripts and parameters used to generate the data, and the data itself can be found at https://github.com/HayLab/Pigss. Plots were generated in R (version 4.2.3) with the ggplot2 package122.
References
Hay, B. A., Oberhofer, G. & Guo, M. Engineering the composition and fate of wild populations with gene drive. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 66, 407–434 (2021).
Bier, E. Gene drives gaining speed. Nat. Rev. Genet. 23, 5–22 (2022).
Raban, R., Marshall, J. M., Hay, B. A. & Akbari, O. S. Manipulating the destiny of wild populations using CRISPR. Annu. Rev. Genet. 57, 361–390 (2023).
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Gene Drives on the Horizon: Advancing Science, Navigating Uncertainty, and Aligning Research with Public Values (The National Academies Press, 2016).
Neve, P. Gene drive systems: do they have a place in agricultural weed management? Pest Manag. Sci. 74, 2671–2679 (2018).
Barrett, L. G. et al. Gene drives in plants: opportunities and challenges for weed control and engineered resilience. Proc. Biol. Sci. 286, 20191515 (2019).
Burga, A., Ben-David, E. & Kruglyak, L. Toxin–antidote elements across the tree of life. Annu. Rev. Genet. 54, 387–415 (2020).
De Carvalho, M. et al. The wtf meiotic driver gene family has unexpectedly persisted for over 100 million years. Elife 11, e81149 (2022).
Wang, C. et al. A natural gene drive system confers reproductive isolation in rice. Cell 186, 3577–3592.e18 (2023).
Jurėnas, D., Fraikin, N., Goormaghtigh, F. & Van Melderen, L. Biology and evolution of bacterial toxin–antitoxin systems. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 20, 335–350 (2022).
Sweigart, A. L., Brandvain, Y. & Fishman, L. Making a murderer: the evolutionary framing of hybrid gamete-killers. Trends Genet. 35, 245–252 (2019).
Xia, F. & Ouyang, Y. Recurrent breakdown and rebalance of segregation distortion in the genomes: battle for the transmission advantage. aBIOTECH 1, 246–254 (2020).
Hamilton, W. D. Extraordinary sex ratios. A sex-ratio theory for sex linkage and inbreeding has new implications in cytogenetics and entomology. Science 156, 477–488 (1967).
Wade, M. J. & Beeman, R. W. The population dynamics of maternal-effect selfish genes. Genetics 138, 1309–1314 (1994).
Hastings, I. M. Selfish DNA as a method of pest control. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 344, 313–324 (1994).
Smith, N. G. The dynamics of maternal-effect selfish genetic elements. J. Theor. Biol. 191, 173–180 (1998).
Ward, C. M. et al. Medea selfish genetic elements as tools for altering traits of wild populations: a theoretical analysis. Evolution 65, 1149–1162 (2011).
Marshall, J. M. & Hay, B. A. General principles of single-construct chromosomal gene drive. Evolution 66, 2150–2166 (2012).
Oberhofer, G., Ivy, T. & Hay, B. A. Cleave and Rescue, a novel selfish genetic element and general strategy for gene drive. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 116, 6250–6259 (2019).
Champer, J. et al. A toxin–antidote CRISPR gene drive system for regional population modification. Nat. Commun. 11, 1082 (2020).
Champer, J., Kim, I. K., Champer, S. E., Clark, A. G. & Messer, P. W. Performance analysis of novel toxin–antidote CRISPR gene drive systems. BMC Biol. 18, 27 (2020).
Martinossi‐Allibert, I. et al. Invasion and maintenance of meiotic drivers in populations of ascomycete fungi. Evolution 75, 1150–1169 (2021).
Li, J. & Champer, J. Harnessing Wolbachia cytoplasmic incompatibility alleles for confined gene drive: a modeling study. PLoS Genet. 19, e1010591 (2023).
Burt, A. & Trivers, R. Genes in Conflict: The Biology of Selfish Genetic Elements (Belknap Press of Harvard Univ. Press, 2006).
You, S. et al. A toxin–antidote system contributes to interspecific reproductive isolation in rice. Nat. Commun. 14, 7528 (2023).
Yang, J. et al. A killer–protector system regulates both hybrid sterility and segregation distortion in rice. Science 337, 1336–1340 (2012).
Simon, M. et al. APOK3, a pollen killer antidote in Arabidopsis thaliana. Genetics 221, iyac089 (2022).
Yu, X. et al. A selfish genetic element confers non-Mendelian inheritance in rice. Science 360, 1130–1132 (2018).
Xie, Y. et al. An asymmetric allelic interaction drives allele transmission bias in interspecific rice hybrids. Nat. Commun. 10, 2501 (2019).
Shen, R. et al. Genomic structural variation-mediated allelic suppression causes hybrid male sterility in rice. Nat. Commun. 8, 1310 (2017).
Chen, J. et al. A triallelic system of S5 is a major regulator of the reproductive barrier and compatibility of indica–japonica hybrids in rice. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 105, 11436–11441 (2008).
Long, Y. et al. Hybrid male sterility in rice controlled by interaction between divergent alleles of two adjacent genes. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 105, 18871–18876 (2008).
Koide, Y. et al. Lineage-specific gene acquisition or loss is involved in interspecific hybrid sterility in rice. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 115, E1955–E1962 (2018).
Chen, C. H. et al. A synthetic maternal-effect selfish genetic element drives population replacement in Drosophila. Science 316, 597–600 (2007).
Akbari, O. S. et al. Novel synthetic Medea selfish genetic elements drive population replacement in Drosophila; a theoretical exploration of Medea-dependent population suppression. ACS Synth. Biol. 3, 915–928 (2014).
Buchman, A., Marshall, J. M., Ostrovski, D., Yang, T. & Akbari, O. S. Synthetically engineered Medea gene drive system in the worldwide crop pest Drosophila suzukii. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 115, 4725–4730 (2018).
Oberhofer, G., Ivy, T. & Hay, B. A. Gene drive and resilience through renewal with next generation Cleave and Rescue selfish genetic elements. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 117, 9013–9021 (2020).
Oberhofer, G., Ivy, T. & Hay, B. A. Split versions of Cleave and Rescue selfish genetic elements for measured self limiting gene drive. PLoS Genet. 17, e1009385 (2021).
Oberhofer, G., Ivy, T. & Hay, B. A. Gene drive that results in addiction to a temperature-sensitive version of an essential gene triggers population collapse in Drosophila. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 118, e2107413118 (2021).
Metzloff, M. et al. Experimental demonstration of tethered gene drive systems for confined population modification or suppression. BMC Biol. 20, 119 (2022).
Champer, J., Champer, S. E., Kim, I. K., Clark, A. G. & Messer, P. W. Design and analysis of CRISPR‐based underdominance toxin–antidote gene drives. Evol. Appl. 14, 1052–1069 (2021).
Lyttle, T. W. Experimental population genetics of meiotic drive systems. I. Pseudo-Y chromosomal drive as a means of eliminating cage populations of Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics 86, 413–445 (1977).
Courret, C., Wei, X. & Larracuente, A. M. New perspectives on the causes and consequences of male meiotic drive. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 83, 102111 (2023).
Lai, E. C. & Vogan, A. A. Proliferation and dissemination of killer meiotic drive loci. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 82, 102100 (2023).
Bhutani, K. et al. Widespread haploid-biased gene expression enables sperm-level natural selection. Science 371, eabb1723 (2021).
Immler, S. Haploid selection in ‘diploid’ organisms. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 50, 219–236 (2019).
Hay, B. A., Oberhofer, G., & Ivy, T. DNA sequence modification-based gene drive. US patent 2018/0320164 Al (2018).
Somers, J. & Nelms, B. The sporophyte-to-gametophyte transition: the haploid generation comes of age. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 75, 102416 (2023).
Howden, R. et al. Selection of T-DNA-tagged male and female gametophytic mutants by segregation distortion in Arabidopsis. Genetics 149, 621–631 (1998).
Christensen, C. A., Subramanian, S. & Drews, G. N. Identification of gametophytic mutations affecting female gametophyte development in Arabidopsis. Dev. Biol. 202, 136–151 (1998).
Berg, M., Rogers, R., Muralla, R. & Meinke, D. Requirement of aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases for gametogenesis and embryo development in Arabidopsis. Plant J. 44, 866–878 (2005).
Ma, T., Li, E., Li, L., Li, S. & Zhang, Y. The Arabidopsis R‐SNARE protein YKT61 is essential for gametophyte development. J. Integr. Plant Biol. 63, 676–694 (2021).
Liu, F. et al. The canonical α-SNAP is essential for gametophytic development in Arabidopsis. PLoS Genet. 17, e1009505 (2021).
Abbott, R. J. & Gomes, M. F. Population genetic structure and outcrossing rate of Arabidopsis thaliana (L.) Heynh. Heredity 62, 411–418 (1989).
Bomblies, K. et al. Local-scale patterns of genetic variability, outcrossing, and spatial structure in natural stands of Arabidopsis thaliana. PLoS Genet. 6, e1000890 (2010).
Hoffmann, M. H. et al. Flower visitors in a natural population of Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant Biol. 5, 491–494 (2003).
Mercier, R. et al. Outcrossing as an explanation of the apparent unconventional genetic behavior of Arabidopsis thaliana hth mutants. Genetics 180, 2295–2297 (2008).
Tan, Y. Y. et al. Transgenic GFP as a molecular marker for approaches to quantify pollination mechanism and gene flow in Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant Biol. 7, 405–410 (2005).
Liu, Y., Jiao, B., Champer, J. & Qian, W. Overriding Mendelian inheritance in Arabidopsis with a CRISPR toxin–antidote gene drive that impairs pollen germination. Preprint at bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.10.10.561637 (2023).
Ma, T., Tan, J.-R., Zhang, Y. & Li, S. R-SNARE protein YKT61 mediates root apical meristem cell division via BRASSINOSTEROID-INSENSITIVE1 recycling. Plant Physiol. 194, 1467–1480 (2023).
Stuttmann, J. et al. Highly efficient multiplex editing: one-shot generation of 8× Nicotiana benthamiana and 12× Arabidopsis mutants. Plant J. 106, 8–22 (2021).
Hand, T. H. et al. Catalytically enhanced Cas9 through directed protein evolution. CRISPR J. 4, 223–232 (2021).
Grützner, R. et al. High-efficiency genome editing in plants mediated by a Cas9 gene containing multiple introns. Plant Commun. 2, 100135 (2021).
Klimyuk, V. I. & Jones, J. D. AtDMC1, the Arabidopsis homologue of the yeast DMC1 gene: characterization, transposon-induced allelic variation and meiosis-associated expression. Plant J. 11, 1–14 (1997).
Fletcher, J. C., Brand, U., Running, M. P., Simon, R. & Meyerowitz, E. M. Signaling of cell fate decisions by CLAVATA3 in Arabidopsis shoot meristems. Science 283, 1911–1914 (1999).
Alejandra Mandel, M., Gustafson-Brown, C., Savidge, B. & Yanofsky, M. F. Molecular characterization of the Arabidopsis floral homeotic gene APETALA1. Nature 360, 273–277 (1992).
Busch, M. A., Bomblies, K. & Weigel, D. Activation of a floral homeotic gene in Arabidopsis. Science 285, 585–587 (1999).
Amack, S. C. & Antunes, M. S. CaMV35S promoter—a plant biology and biotechnology workhorse in the era of synthetic biology. Curr. Plant Biol. 24, 100179 (2020).
Norris, S. R., Meyer, S. E. & Callis, J. The intron of Arabidopsis thaliana polyubiquitin genes is conserved in location and is a quantitative determinant of chimeric gene expression. Plant Mol. Biol. 21, 895–906 (1993).
Geldner, N. et al. Rapid, combinatorial analysis of membrane compartments in intact plants with a multicolor marker set. Plant J. 59, 169–178 (2009).
Kurbidaeva, A. & Purugganan, M. Insulators in plants: progress and open questions. Genes 12, 1422 (2021).
Barrett, S. C. H. & Harder, L. D. The ecology of mating and its evolutionary consequences in seed plants. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 48, 135–157 (2017).
Whitehead, M. R., Lanfear, R., Mitchell, R. J. & Karron, J. D. Plant mating systems often vary widely among populations. Front. Ecol. Evol. 6, 38 (2018).
Zhang, D. et al. Molecular insights into self-incompatibility systems: from evolution to breeding. Plant Commun. 5, 100719 (2023).
Barrett, S. C. H. Mating strategies in flowering plants: the outcrossing–selfing paradigm and beyond. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 358, 991–1004 (2003).
Vieira, F. G., Fumagalli, M., Albrechtsen, A. & Nielsen, R. Estimating inbreeding coefficients from NGS data: impact on genotype calling and allele frequency estimation. Genome Res. 23, 1852–1861 (2013).
Pannell, J. R. & Labouche, A.-M. The incidence and selection of multiple mating in plants. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 368, 20120051 (2013).
Knight, T. M. et al. Pollen limitation of plant reproduction: pattern and process. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 36, 467–497 (2005).
Kosicki, M., Tomberg, K. & Bradley, A. Repair of double-strand breaks induced by CRISPR–Cas9 leads to large deletions and complex rearrangements. Nat. Biotechnol. 36, 765–771 (2018).
Bull, J. J. Lethal gene drive selects inbreeding. Evol. Med. Public Health 2017, 1–16 (2016).
Bull, J. J., Remien, C. H. & Krone, S. M. Gene-drive-mediated extinction is thwarted by population structure and evolution of sib mating. Evol. Med. Public Health 2019, 66–81 (2019).
Champer, J., Kim, I. K., Champer, S. E., Clark, A. G. & Messer, P. W. Suppression gene drive in continuous space can result in unstable persistence of both drive and wild‐type alleles. Mol. Ecol. 30, 1086–1101 (2021).
Birand, A. et al. Gene drives for vertebrate pest control: realistic spatial modelling of eradication probabilities and times for island mouse populations. Mol. Ecol. 31, 1907–1923 (2022).
Marshall, J. M., Buchman, A., Sanchez, C. H. & Akbari, O. S. Overcoming evolved resistance to population-suppressing homing-based gene drives. Sci. Rep. 7, 3776 (2017).
Chaudhury, A. M. Nuclear genes controlling male fertility. Plant Cell 5, 1277–1283 (1993).
Modrusan, Z., Reiser, L., Feldmann, K. A., Fischer, R. L. & Haughn, G. W. Homeotic transformation of ovules into carpel-like structures in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell 6, 333–349 (1994).
Reiser, L. et al. The BELL1 gene encodes a homeodomain protein involved in pattern formation in the Arabidopsis ovule primordium. Cell 83, 735–742 (1995).
Wilson, Z. A., Morroll, S. M., Dawson, J., Swarup, R. & Tighe, P. J. The Arabidopsis MALE STERILITY1 (MS1) gene is a transcriptional regulator of male gametogenesis, with homology to the PHD-finger family of transcription factors: MS1 a transcriptional regulator of male gametogenesis. Plant J. 28, 27–39 (2001).
Leite Montalvão, A. P., Kersten, B., Fladung, M. & Müller, N. A. The diversity and dynamics of sex determination in dioecious plants. Front. Plant Sci. 11, 580488 (2021).
Charlesworth, D. Plant sex chromosomes. Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 67, 397–420 (2016).
Montgomery, J. S., Giacomini, D. A., Weigel, D. & Tranel, P. J. Male‐specific Y‐chromosomal regions in waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus) and Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri). New Phytol. 229, 3522–3533 (2021).
Heinrich, J. C. & Scott, M. J. A repressible female-specific lethal genetic system for making transgenic insect strains suitable for a sterile-release program. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 97, 8229–8232 (2000).
Thomas, D. D., Donnelly, C. A., Wood, R. J. & Alphey, L. S. Insect population control using a dominant, repressible, lethal genetic system. Science 287, 2474–2476 (2000).
Schliekelman, P. & Gould, F. Pest control by the introduction of a conditional lethal trait on multiple loci: potential, limitations, and optimal strategies. J. Econ. Entomol. 93, 1543–1565 (2000).
Isaac, R. S. et al. Nucleosome breathing and remodeling constrain CRISPR-Cas9 function. Elife 5, e13450 (2016).
Horlbeck, M. A. et al. Nucleosomes impede Cas9 access to DNA in vivo and in vitro. Elife 5, e12677 (2016).
Yarrington, R. M., Verma, S., Schwartz, S., Trautman, J. K. & Carroll, D. Nucleosomes inhibit target cleavage by CRISPR-Cas9 in vivo. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 115, 9351–9358 (2018).
Moritz, R. Assessing dual use research of concern (DURC)—lessons learned from the United States government institutional DURC policy. Can. J. Microbiol. 68, 655–660 (2022).
Esvelt, K. Gene Drive Technology: The Thing to Fear Is Fear Itself (George Mason Univ., 2018); https://hdl.handle.net/1920/11337
Deconinck, K. Concentration in seed and biotech markets: extent, causes, and impacts. Annu. Rev. Resour. Econ. 12, 129–147 (2020).
Taxiarchi, C. et al. A genetically encoded anti-CRISPR protein constrains gene drive spread and prevents population suppression. Nat. Commun. 12, 3977 (2021).
D’Amato, R. et al. Anti-CRISPR Anopheles mosquitoes inhibit gene drive spread under challenging behavioural conditions in large cages. Nat. Commun. 15, 952 (2024).
Clark, M. & Maselko, M. Transgene biocontainment strategies for molecular farming. Front. Plant Sci. 11, 210 (2020).
Goulet, B. E., Roda, F. & Hopkins, R. Hybridization in plants: old ideas, new techniques. Plant Physiol. 173, 65–78 (2017).
Heslop-Harrison, J. S. P., Schwarzacher, T. & Liu, Q. Polyploidy: its consequences and enabling role in plant diversification and evolution. Ann. Bot. 131, 1–10 (2023).
Jones, D. L. et al. Kinetics of dCas9 target search in Escherichia coli. Science 357, 1420–1424 (2017).
Roberts, J. & Florentine, S. A review of the biology, distribution patterns and management of the invasive species Amaranthus palmeri S. Watson (Palmer amaranth): current and future management challenges. Weed Res. 62, 113–122 (2022).
Neves, C. J. et al. Male linked genomic region determines sex in dioecious Amaranthus palmeri. J. Hered. 111, 606–612 (2020).
Molin, W. T., Yaguchi, A., Blenner, M. & Saski, C. A. The EccDNA replicon: a heritable, extranuclear vehicle that enables gene amplification and glyphosate resistance in Amaranthus palmeri. Plant Cell 32, 2132–2140 (2020).
Koo, D.-H. et al. Extrachromosomal circular DNA-based amplification and transmission of herbicide resistance in crop weed Amaranthus palmeri. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 115, 3332–3337 (2018).
Gaines, T. A. et al. Interspecific hybridization transfers a previously unknown glyphosate resistance mechanism in Amaranthus species. Evol. Appl. 5, 29–38 (2012).
Gomulkiewicz, R. & Holt, R. D. When does evolution by natural selection prevent extinction? Evolution 49, 201–207 (1995).
Orr, H. A. & Unckless, R. L. The population genetics of evolutionary rescue. PLoS Genet. 10, e1004551 (2014).
Gibson, D. G. et al. Enzymatic assembly of DNA molecules up to several hundred kilobases. Nat. Methods 6, 343–345 (2009).
Kim, Y. et al. The immediate upstream region of the 5′-UTR from the AUG start codon has a pronounced effect on the translational efficiency in Arabidopsis thaliana. Nucleic Acids Res. 42, 485–498 (2014).
Tang, X. et al. A single transcript CRISPR-Cas9 system for efficient genome editing in plants. Mol. Plant 9, 1088–1091 (2016).
Van Ex, F., Verweire, D., Claeys, M., Depicker, A. & Angenon, G. Evaluation of seven promoters to achieve germline directed Cre-lox recombination in Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant Cell Rep. 28, 1509–1520 (2009).
Zhang, X., Henriques, R., Lin, S.-S., Niu, Q.-W. & Chua, N.-H. Agrobacterium-mediated transformation of Arabidopsis thaliana using the floral dip method. Nat. Protoc. 1, 641–646 (2006).
Shimada, T. L., Shimada, T. & Hara-Nishimura, I. A rapid and non-destructive screenable marker, FAST, for identifying transformed seeds of Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant J. 61, 519–528 (2010).
Li, H. Minimap2: pairwise alignment for nucleotide sequences. Bioinformatics 34, 3094–3100 (2018).
Lamesch, P. et al. The Arabidopsis Information Resource (TAIR): improved gene annotation and new tools. Nucleic Acids Res. 40, D1202–D1210 (2012).
Wickham, H. et al. ggplot2: Elegant graphics for data analysis. R version 4.2.3 https://ggplot2.tidyverse.org/ (2016).
Acknowledgements
We thank E. Meyerowitz and members of the Meyerowitz Lab Paul Tarr and Carla de Agostini Verna for introducing us to techniques for Arabidopsis maintenance, transgenesis and crossing. This work was supported by a grant to B.A.H. from the Caltech Center for Evolutionary Science (G.O. and M.L.J.) and the Caltech Resnick Sustainability Institute Explorer Grant (G.O.). T.I. was supported by NIH Training grant number 5T32GM007616-39 and with support to B.A.H. from the US Department of Agriculture, National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) specialty crop initiative under US Department of Agriculture NIFA award number 2012-51181-20086.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Conceptualization, G.O., T.I. and B.A.H.; methodology, G.O., T.I., M.L.J., I.A. and B.A.H.; investigation, G.O., M.L.J., I.A. and B.A.H.; writing—original draft, G.O. and B.A.H.; writing—review and editing, G.O., T.I., M.L.J., I.A. and B.A.H.; funding acquisition, B.A.H.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors have filed patent applications on ClvR and related technologies (US application numbers 15/970,728 and 16/673,823).
Peer review
Peer review information
Nature Plants thanks Meru Sadhu and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.
Additional information
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Extended data
Extended Data Fig. 1 Alignment of the recoded A. lyrata rescue coding region to the A. thaliana target.
Guides are indicated as red arrows. Note that the full sequence of the A. lyrata YKT61 genomic region used for rescue (Supplementary File 1) contains many additional differences from the equivalent A. thaliana sequence, in regulatory sequences, introns and 5′ and 3′ UTR. The amino acid sequences of the two proteins are identical.
Extended Data Fig. 2 T3 heterozygous ClvR crosses for (a) female ClvRap and (b) male ClvRap.
T3 ClvRap/+ heterozygotes were grown to adulthood and their ovules (left three columns) or pollen (right three columns) used in outcrosses to WT. Bar graphs show the number of siliques scored (red circles) and the percent ClvR seeds produced in the T5 generation. The number of seeds within each silique scales with circle size. Counts are in Supplementary Table (ClvRap Crosses).
Extended Data Fig. 3 T3 heterozygous ClvR crosses for (a) female ClvRCaMV35S and (b) male ClvRCaMV35S.
T3 ClvRCaMV35S/+ heterozygotes were grown to adulthood and their ovules (left three columns) or pollen (right three columns) used in outcrosses to WT. Bar graphs show the number of siliques scored (red circles). The number of seeds within each silique scales with circle size. Counts are in Supplementary Table (ClvRCaMV Crosses).
Extended Data Fig. 4 Images of individual (a) and whole pots (b) of heterozygous ClvRubq, homozygous ClvRubq and WT plants.
In a individual plants have been removed from their pots and laid flat against a black background. b shows pots containing multiple plants.
Extended Data Fig. 5 Crossing scheme for (a) T3 and (b) T4 crosses discussed in text and Figs. 2 and 3.
(a) We selected 5 independent ClvRubq lines that showed 100% ClvR in the T2 self cross. Pollen of T2 plants was outcrossed to WT to generate T3 heterozyogtes. For each of these 5 independent lines we set up reciprocal crosses to WT with 4 plants per line (4 crosses/siliques per plant). (b) For 1 of the line from (A) ClvRubq7 we repeated the reciprocal crosses, with seeds coming from a ♀ClvR/+ or ♂ClvR/+ parent. For each of these we again crossed 4 plants (4 crosses/siliques per plant). Arabidopsis icons adapted from BioRender (2023), Structure of Arabidopsis thaliana.
Extended Data Fig. 6 Escaper genotyping.
(a-b) PCR amplifications of a 675 bp DNA fragment of the RFP marker for escapers from a ♀ClvR/+ X WT (a) or ♂ClvR/+ X WT (b) cross. Hetero- and homozygous (het, hom) ClvR plants were used as positive controls, WT as negative control. Only ClvR-bearing plants showed the RFP band. (c-d) Control PCRs on the same DNA samples as in a and b, in which the YKT61 target region was amplified. Note some female escapers in c had larger deletions. This experiment was carried out once.
Extended Data Fig. 7 Predicted behavior of ClvR for population modification and suppression.
(a-c) Population modification. ClvR is introduced as homozygous males at a frequency of 20% of the starting population, which is at carrying capacity, 10,000 individuals. The mating system is monogamous (a), or polyandrous, with 5 males each providing 1/5th of the pollen needed to fertilize all ovules of an individual female (b), or 20 males each providing 1/20th of the pollen needed (c). Fitness costs are incurred by gametes (a probability of not being able to participate in fertilization, if chosen by the model). Maternal carryover is set to zero. Lines represent the average of 10 runs. (d-f) Population suppression with a transgene inserted into a recessive locus required for female sporophyte fertility. ClvR is introduced as above, at a frequency of 20%. The mating system is monogamous (d), or polyandrous, with 5 males each providing 1/5th of the pollen needed to fertilize all ovules of an individual female (e), or 20 males each providing 1/20th of the pollen needed (f). Fitness costs are as above. Maternal carryover is set to zero or 30% (the approximate value observed in our experiments with ClvRubq). (g-i). As with d-f, but with the ClvR inserted into a locus required for male sporophyte fertility. For these simulations homozygous females were released into the population since homozygous males are sterile. Lines represent the average of 10 runs. For all panels compare with 10% introduction frequency data shown in Fig. 5.
Extended Data Fig. 8 Predicted behavior of ClvR for population suppression with 100% maternal carryover.
ClvR is introduced at a frequency of 10%, and is present in a female fertility locus (a-c) or a male fertility locus (d-f), thereby creating a LOF allele. (a-c) When ClvR is located in a gene required for female sporophyte fertility high levels of maternal carryover prevent population extinction. (d-f) In contrast, when ClvR is located in a gene required for male sporophyte fertility, population extinction is slowed but not prevented.
Extended Data Fig. 9 Effects of higher levels of elements lacking Cas9 on ClvR-mediated population suppression.
(a) ClvR, located inside a gene required in the sporophyte for female fertility, is introduced at a frequency of 10%, with 20% of these elements lacking Cas9. Individual runs are shown in thin lines and the average as a thick line. (b) ClvR, located in a gene required in the sporophyte for female fertility, is introduced at a frequency of 10%. Cas9 is located 1 map unit (1% recombination rate) away from the Rescue/gRNAs. Multiple individual runs fail to go to extinction while others that do go to extinction take much longer than under the conditions shown in Fig. 5.
Extended Data Fig. 10 Movement of a population suppression ClvR or a WT allele of the sporophyte fertility gene to a new unlinked location negatively affects population suppression.
(a-b) ClvR, located inside a gene required in the sporophyte for female fertility, is introduced at a frequency of 10%, with 1 × 10-6 of the ClvR elements having been transposed to a new unlinked locus, which is not required for female fertility. Individual runs are shown here, in a linear scale (a) and logarithmic scale (b). (c-d) ClvR, located inside a gene required in the sporophyte for female fertility, is introduced at a frequency of 10%. Additionally, a translocated WT version of the fertility locus is present at a third locus, not associated with ClvR, at an allele frequency of 5 × 10-7 (100 out of 100,000,000 individuals are heterozygous for this translocated fertility gene), such that individuals with that gene may be both ClvR homozygous and fertile. Individuals runs are shown on a linear scale (c) and a logarithmic scale (d).
Supplementary information
Supplementary Information
Supplementary Figs. 1 and 2.
Supplementary Table 1
Cross data and cleavage events.
Supplementary Data 1
Annotated plasmid maps with primers.
Supplementary Data 2
Sequencing files.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Oberhofer, G., Johnson, M.L., Ivy, T. et al. Cleave and Rescue gamete killers create conditions for gene drive in plants. Nat. Plants 10, 936–953 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41477-024-01701-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41477-024-01701-3


