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 biology of CRISPR–Cas immunity and genome editing enzymes

Nature Reviews Microbiology volume 20, pages 641–656 (2022)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

CRISPR–Cas systems provide resistance against foreign mobile genetic elements and have a wide range of genome editing and biotechnological applications. In this Review, we examine recent advances in understanding the molecular structures and mechanisms of enzymes comprising bacterial RNA-guided CRISPR–Cas immune systems and deployed for wide-ranging genome editing applications. We explore the adaptive and interference aspects of CRISPR–Cas function as well as open questions about the molecular mechanisms responsible for genome targeting. These structural insights reflect close evolutionary links between CRISPR–Cas systems and mobile genetic elements, including the origins and evolution of CRISPR–Cas systems from DNA transposons, retrotransposons and toxin–antitoxin modules. We discuss how the evolution and structural diversity of CRISPR–Cas systems explain their functional complexity and utility as genome editing tools.

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

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

from$1.95

to$39.95

Learn more

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

Fig. 1: CRISPR–Cas systems provide bacteria and archaea with adaptive immunity.
Fig. 2: Modular organization of CRISPR–Cas systems.
Fig. 3: Evolution and diversity of the CRISPR integrase architecture.
Fig. 4: Mechanisms of CRISPR prespacer biogenesis and orientation.
Fig. 5: Mechanism of Cas9.
Fig. 6: Mechanism of Cas12.
Fig. 7: Cas-mediated transposition.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Barrangou, R. et al. CRISPR provides acquired resistance against viruses in prokaryotes. Science 315, 1709–1712 (2007).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Knott, G. J. & Doudna, J. A. CRISPR-Cas guides the future of genetic engineering. Science 361, 866–869 (2018).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Koonin, E. V. & Makarova, K. S. Origins and evolution of CRISPR-Cas systems. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 374, 20180087 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Hille, F. et al. The biology of CRISPR-Cas: backward and forward. Cell 172, 1239–1259 (2018).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Shmakov, S. et al. Discovery and functional characterization of diverse class 2 CRISPR-Cas systems. Mol. Cell 60, 385–397 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Grissa, I., Vergnaud, G. & Pourcel, C. The CRISPRdb database and tools to display CRISPRs and to generate dictionaries of spacers and repeats. BMC Bioinformatics 8, 172 (2007).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. McGinn, J. & Marraffini, L. A. Molecular mechanisms of CRISPR–Cas spacer acquisition. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 17, 7–12 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Gleditzsch, D. et al. PAM identification by CRISPR-Cas effector complexes: diversified mechanisms and structures. RNA Biol. 16, 504–517 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Behler, J. & Hess, W. R. Approaches to study CRISPR RNA biogenesis and the key players involved. Methods 172, 12–26 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Marino, N. D., Pinilla-Redondo, R., Csörgő, B. & Bondy-Denomy, J. Anti-CRISPR protein applications: natural brakes for CRISPR-Cas technologies. Nat. Methods 17, 471–479 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Makarova, K. S. et al. Evolutionary classification of CRISPR–Cas systems: a burst of class 2 and derived variants. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 18, 67–83 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Jia, N. & Patel, D. J. Structure-based functional mechanisms and biotechnology applications of anti-CRISPR proteins. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 22, 563–579 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Liu, T. Y. & Doudna, J. A. Chemistry of class 1 CRISPR-Cas effectors: binding, editing, and regulation. J. Biol. Chem. 295, 14473–14487 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Molina, R., Sofos, N. & Montoya, G. Structural basis of CRISPR-Cas type III prokaryotic defence systems. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 65, 119–129 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Taylor, H. N. et al. Positioning diverse type IV structures and functions within class 1 CRISPR-Cas systems. Front. Microbiol. 12, 674522 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. O’Connell, M. R. Molecular mechanisms of RNA targeting by Cas13-containing type VI CRISPR–Cas systems. J. Mol. Biol. 431, 66–87 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Krupovic, M., Makarova, K. S., Forterre, P., Prangishvili, D. & Koonin, E. V. Casposons: a new superfamily of self-synthesizing DNA transposons at the origin of prokaryotic CRISPR-Cas immunity. BMC Biol. 12, 36 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Hickman, A. B., Kailasan, S., Genzor, P., Haase, A. D. & Dyda, F. Casposase structure and the mechanistic link between DNA transposition and spacer acquisition by CRISPR-Cas. eLife 9, e50004 (2020). This work describes the structure of the casposase and its site specificity, providing insight into the evolutionary origins of the Cas1 protein.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Wang, J. et al. Structural and mechanistic basis of PAM-dependent spacer acquisition in CRISPR-Cas systems. Cell 163, 840–853 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Nuñez, J. K., Harrington, L. B., Kranzusch, P. J., Engelman, A. N. & Doudna, J. A. Foreign DNA capture during CRISPR–Cas adaptive immunity. Nature 527, 535–538 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Xiao, Y., Ng, S., Nam, K. H. & Ke, A. How type II CRISPR–Cas establish immunity through Cas1–Cas2-mediated spacer integration. Nature 550, 137–141 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Wright, A. V. et al. Structures of the CRISPR genome integration complex. Science 357, 1113–1118 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Hickman, A. B. & Dyda, F. DNA transposition at work. Chem. Rev. 116, 12758–12784 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Béguin, P., Charpin, N., Koonin, E. V., Forterre, P. & Krupovic, M. Casposon integration shows strong target site preference and recapitulates protospacer integration by CRISPR-Cas systems. Nucleic Acids Res. 44, 10367–10376 (2016).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Yosef, I., Goren, M. G. & Qimron, U. Proteins and DNA elements essential for the CRISPR adaptation process in Escherichia coli. Nucleic Acids Res. 40, 5569–5576 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Arslan, Z., Hermanns, V., Wurm, R., Wagner, R. & Pul, Ü. Detection and characterization of spacer integration intermediates in type IE CRISPR–Cas system. Nucleic Acids Res. 42, 7884–7893 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Nuñez, J. K., Lee, A. S. Y., Engelman, A. & Doudna, J. A. Integrase-mediated spacer acquisition during CRISPR–Cas adaptive immunity. Nature 519, 193–198 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Rollie, C., Schneider, S., Brinkmann, A. S., Bolt, E. L. & White, M. F. Intrinsic sequence specificity of the Cas1 integrase directs new spacer acquisition. eLife 4, e08716 (2015).

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Wright, A. V. & Doudna, J. A. Protecting genome integrity during CRISPR immune adaptation. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 23, 876–883 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Nuñez, J. K. et al. Cas1–Cas2 complex formation mediates spacer acquisition during CRISPR–Cas adaptive immunity. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 21, 528–534 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Sasnauskas, G. & Siksnys, V. CRISPR adaptation from a structural perspective. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 65, 17–25 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Wilkinson, M. et al. Structure of the DNA-bound spacer Capture complex of a type II CRISPR-Cas system. Mol. Cell 75, 90–101.e5 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Hu, C. et al. Mechanism for Cas4-assisted directional spacer acquisition in CRISPR–Cas. Nature 598, 515–520 (2021). This work provides the mechanism and structural basis for Cas4-assisted PAM processing and describes a model in which PAM sequestration and delayed processing influences the orientation of spacer integration.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Burstein, D. et al. New CRISPR–Cas systems from uncultivated microbes. Nature 542, 237–241 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Makarova, K. S., Wolf, Y. I. & Koonin, E. V. Classification and nomenclature of CRISPR-Cas systems: where from here? CRISPR J. 1, 325–336 (2018).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Wright, A. V. et al. A functional mini-integrase in a two-protein type V-C CRISPR system. Mol. Cell 73, 727–737 (2019). This work describes a tetrameric CRISPR integrase that may represent the ancestral CRISPR integrase.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Santiago-Frangos, A., Buyukyoruk, M., Wiegand, T., Krishna, P. & Wiedenheft, B. Distribution and phasing of sequence motifs that facilitate CRISPR adaptation. Curr. Biol. 31, 3515–3524 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Koonin, E. V. & Makarova, K. S. CRISPR-Cas: evolution of an RNA-based adaptive immunity system in prokaryotes. RNA Biol. 10, 679–686 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Bertelsen, M. B. et al. Structural basis for toxin inhibition in the VapXD toxin-antitoxin system. Structure 29, 139–150 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Kwon, A.-R. et al. Structural and biochemical characterization of HP0315 from Helicobacter pylori as a VapD protein with an endoribonuclease activity. Nucleic Acids Res. 40, 4216–4228 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Ka, D., Kim, D., Baek, G. & Bae, E. Structural and functional characterization of Streptococcus pyogenes Cas2 protein under different pH conditions. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 451, 152–157 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Silas, S. et al. Direct CRISPR spacer acquisition from RNA by a natural reverse transcriptase-Cas1 fusion protein. Science 351, aad4234 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Koonin, E. V. & Makarova, K. S. Mobile genetic elements and evolution of CRISPR-Cas systems: all the way there and back. Genome Biol. Evol. 9, 2812–2825 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Silas, S. et al. On the origin of reverse transcriptase-using CRISPR-Cas systems and their hyperdiverse, enigmatic spacer repertoires. mBio 8, e00897-17 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Mohr, G. et al. A reverse transcriptase-Cas1 fusion protein contains a Cas6 domain required for both CRISPR RNA biogenesis and RNA spacer acquisition. Mol. Cell 72, 700–714 (2018).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Wang, J. Y. et al. Structural coordination between active sites of a CRISPR reverse transcriptase-integrase complex. Nat. Commun. 12, 2571 (2021). This work describes the structure of a Cas6–RT–Cas1–Cas2 complex, highlighting interactions between the three domains and the potential functional implications for CRISPR adaptation.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Stamos, J. L., Lentzsch, A. M. & Lambowitz, A. M. Structure of a thermostable group II intron reverse transcriptase with template-primer and its functional and evolutionary implications. Mol. Cell 68, 926–939 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Nussenzweig, P. M. & Marraffini, L. A. Molecular mechanisms of CRISPR-Cas immunity in bacteria. Annu. Rev. Genet. 54, 93–120 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Levy, A. et al. CRISPR adaptation biases explain preference for acquisition of foreign DNA. Nature 520, 505–510 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Wigley, D. B. Bacterial DNA repair: recent insights into the mechanism of RecBCD, AddAB and AdnAB. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 11, 9–13 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Kim, S. et al. Selective loading and processing of prespacers for precise CRISPR adaptation. Nature 579, 141–145 (2020). This work describes how the kinetic coordination of prespacer processing and PAM trimming affects the orientation of spacer integration and presents a model for prespacer selection and processing.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Ramachandran, A., Summerville, L., Learn, B. A., DeBell, L. & Bailey, S. Processing and integration of functionally oriented prespacers in the Escherichia coli CRISPR system depends on bacterial host exonucleases. J. Biol. Chem. 295, 3403–3414 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Kieper, S. N. et al. Cas4 facilitates PAM-compatible spacer selection during CRISPR adaptation. Cell Rep. 22, 3377–3384 (2018).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Lee, H., Dhingra, Y. & Sashital, D. G. The Cas4-Cas1-Cas2 complex mediates precise prespacer processing during CRISPR adaptation. eLife 8, e44248 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Musharova, O. et al. Prespacers formed during primed adaptation associate with the Cas1–Cas2 adaptation complex and the Cas3 interference nuclease–helicase. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 118, e2021291118 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Wu, C. et al. Mechanisms of spacer acquisition by sequential assembly of the adaptation module in Synechocystis. Nucleic Acids Res. 49, 2973–2984 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Drabavicius, G. et al. DnaQ exonuclease-like domain of Cas2 promotes spacer integration in a type I-E CRISPR-Cas system. EMBO Rep. 19, e45543 (2018).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Lee, H., Zhou, Y., Taylor, D. W. & Sashital, D. G. Cas4-dependent prespacer processing ensures high-fidelity programming of CRISPR arrays. Mol. Cell 70, 48–59.e5 (2018).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  60. Heler, R. et al. Cas9 specifies functional viral targets during CRISPR–Cas adaptation. Nature 519, 199–202 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  61. Heler, R. et al. Mutations in Cas9 enhance the rate of acquisition of viral spacer sequences during the CRISPR-Cas immune response. Mol. Cell 65, 168–175 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  62. Jakhanwal, S. et al. A CRISPR-Cas9–integrase complex generates precise DNA fragments for genome integration. Nucleic Acids Res. 49, 3546–3556 (2021).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  63. Swarts, D. C., Mosterd, C., van Passel, M. W. J. & Brouns, S. J. J. CRISPR interference directs strand specific spacer acquisition. PLoS ONE 7, e35888 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. Dillard, K. E. et al. Assembly and translocation of a CRISPR-Cas primed acquisition complex. Cell 175, 934–946.e15 (2018).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  65. Xue, C., Whitis, N. R. & Sashital, D. G. Conformational control of Cascade interference and priming activities in CRISPR immunity. Mol. Cell 64, 826–834 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  66. Nicholson, T. J. et al. Bioinformatic evidence of widespread priming in type I and II CRISPR-Cas systems. RNA Biol. 16, 566–576 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Nussenzweig, P. M., McGinn, J. & Marraffini, L. A. Cas9 cleavage of viral genomes primes the acquisition of new immunological memories. Cell Host Microbe 26, 515–526.e6 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  68. Shipman, S. L., Nivala, J., Macklis, J. D. & Church, G. M. Molecular recordings by directed CRISPR spacer acquisition. Science 353, aaf1175 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  69. Sheth, R. U., Yim, S. S., Wu, F. L. & Wang, H. H. Multiplex recording of cellular events over time on CRISPR biological tape. Science 358, 1457–1461 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  70. Schmidt, F., Cherepkova, M. Y. & Platt, R. J. Transcriptional recording by CRISPR spacer acquisition from RNA. Nature 562, 380–385 (2018).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  71. Munck, C., Sheth, R. U., Freedberg, D. E. & Wang, H. H. Recording mobile DNA in the gut microbiota using an Escherichia coli CRISPR-Cas spacer acquisition platform. Nat. Commun. 11, 95 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  72. Jinek, M. et al. A programmable dual-RNA-guided DNA endonuclease in adaptive bacterial immunity. Science 337, 816–821 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  73. Gasiunas, G. & Barrangou, R. Cas9–crRNA ribonucleoprotein complex mediates specific DNA cleavage for adaptive immunity in bacteria. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 109, E2579–E2586 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  74. Cong, L. et al. Multiplex genome engineering using CRISPR/Cas systems. Science 339, 819–823 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  75. Mali, P. et al. RNA-guided human genome engineering via Cas9. Science 339, 823–826 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  76. Hwang, W. Y. et al. Efficient genome editing in zebrafish using a CRISPR-Cas system. Nat. Biotechnol. 31, 227–229 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  77. Cho, S. W., Kim, S., Kim, J. M. & Kim, J.-S. Targeted genome engineering in human cells with the Cas9 RNA-guided endonuclease. Nat. Biotechnol. 31, 230–232 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  78. Jinek, M. et al. RNA-programmed genome editing in human cells. eLife 2, e00471 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  79. Zetsche, B. et al. Cpf1 is a single RNA-guided endonuclease of a class 2 CRISPR-Cas system. Cell 163, 759–771 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  80. Zetsche, B. et al. Multiplex gene editing by CRISPR–Cpf1 using a single crRNA array. Nat. Biotechnol. 35, 31–34 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  81. Liu, J.-J. et al. CasX enzymes comprise a distinct family of RNA-guided genome editors. Nature 566, 218–223 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  82. Strecker, J. et al. Engineering of CRISPR-Cas12b for human genome editing. Nat. Commun. 10, 212 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  83. Pausch, P. et al. CRISPR-CasΦ from huge phages is a hypercompact genome editor. Science 369, 333–337 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  84. Anzalone, A. V., Koblan, L. W. & Liu, D. R. Genome editing with CRISPR–Cas nucleases, base editors, transposases and prime editors. Nat. Biotechnol. 38, 824–844 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  85. Swarts, D. C. & Jinek, M. Cas9 versus Cas12a/Cpf1: structure-function comparisons and implications for genome editing. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. RNA 9, e1481 (2018).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  86. Stella, S., Alcón, P. & Montoya, G. Class 2 CRISPR–Cas RNA-guided endonucleases: Swiss Army knives of genome editing. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 24, 882–892 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  87. Altae-Tran, H. et al. The widespread IS200/IS605 transposon family encodes diverse programmable RNA-guided endonucleases. Science 374, 57–65 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  88. Jinek, M. et al. Structures of Cas9 endonucleases reveal RNA-mediated conformational activation. Science 343, 1247997 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  89. Nishimasu, H. et al. Crystal structure of Cas9 in complex with guide RNA and target DNA. Cell 156, 935–949 (2014). This study reveals for the first time how Cas9 recognizes DNA.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  90. Jiang, F., Zhou, K., Ma, L., Gressel, S. & Doudna, J. A. A Cas9–guide RNA complex preorganized for target DNA recognition. Science 348, 1477–1481 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  91. 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  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  92. Jiang, F. et al. Structures of a CRISPR-Cas9 R-loop complex primed for DNA cleavage. Science 351, 867–871 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  93. Sternberg, S. H., LaFrance, B., Kaplan, M. & Doudna, J. A. Conformational control of DNA target cleavage by CRISPR-Cas9. Nature 527, 110–113 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  94. Zhang, Y. et al. Catalytic-state structure and engineering of Streptococcus thermophilus Cas9. Nat. Catal. 3, 813–823 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  95. Sun, W. et al. Structures of Neisseria meningitidis Cas9 complexes in catalytically poised and anti-CRISPR-inhibited states. Mol. Cell 76, 938–952.e5 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  96. Pacesa, M. & Jinek, M. Mechanism of R-loop formation and conformational activation of Cas9. Preprint at bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.09.16.460614 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  97. Bravo, J. P. K. et al. Structural basis for mismatch surveillance by CRISPR-Cas9. Nature 603, 343–347 (2022). This study demonstrates how excessive target mismatches inhibit DNA cutting by Cas9 and reveals a most comprehensive structure of Cas9 bound to the DNA cleavage product.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  98. Zhu, X. et al. Cryo-EM structures reveal coordinated domain motions that govern DNA cleavage by Cas9. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 26, 679–685 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  99. Chen, J. S. et al. Enhanced proofreading governs CRISPR–Cas9 targeting accuracy. Nature 550, 407–410 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  100. Palermo, G. et al. Protospacer adjacent motif-induced allostery activates CRISPR-Cas9. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 139, 16028–16031 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  101. Palermo, G. et al. Key role of the REC lobe during CRISPR-Cas9 activation by ‘sensing’, ‘regulating’, and ‘locking’ the catalytic HNH domain. Q. Rev. Biophys. 51, e91 (2018).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  102. Nierzwicki, L. et al. Enhanced specificity mutations perturb allosteric signaling in CRISPR-Cas9. eLife 10, e73601 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  103. Zuo, Z. et al. Structural and functional insights into the bona fide catalytic state of Streptococcus pyogenes Cas9 HNH nuclease domain. eLife 8, e46500 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  104. Belato, H. B. et al. Structural and dynamic insights into the HNH nuclease of divergent Cas9 species. J. Struct. Biol. 214, 107814 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  105. Globyte, V., Lee, S. H., Bae, T., Kim, J. & Joo, C. CRISPR /Cas9 searches for a protospacer adjacent motif by lateral diffusion. EMBO J. 38, e99466 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  106. 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  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  107. Cofsky, J. C., Soczek, K. M., Knott, G. J., Nogales, E. & Doudna, J. A. CRISPR-Cas9 bends and twists DNA to read its sequence. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 29, 395–402 (2022). This article for the first time reveals structural insights into how Cas9 opens dsDNA to interrogate target sequences.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  108. Ivanov, I. E. et al. Cas9 interrogates DNA in discrete steps modulated by mismatches and supercoiling. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 117, 5853–5860 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  109. Liu, M.-S. et al. Engineered CRISPR/Cas9 enzymes improve discrimination by slowing DNA cleavage to allow release of off-target DNA. Nat. Commun. 11, 3576 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  110. Kleinstiver, B. P. et al. High-fidelity CRISPR–Cas9 nucleases with no detectable genome-wide off-target effects. Nature 529, 490–495 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  111. Yamano, T. et al. Crystal structure of Cpf1 in complex with guide RNA and target DNA. Cell 165, 949–962 (2016). This study reveals for the first time how Cas12a recognizes DNA.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  112. Dong, D. et al. The crystal structure of Cpf1 in complex with CRISPR RNA. Nature 532, 522–526 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  113. Pausch, P. et al. DNA interference states of the hypercompact CRISPR-CasΦ effector. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 28, 652–661 (2021). This article describes how a minimal Cas12 enzyme binds dsDNA and catalyses DNA cleavage.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  114. Carabias, A. et al. Structure of the mini-RNA-guided endonuclease CRISPR-Cas12j3. Nat. Commun. 12, 4476 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  115. Yang, H., Gao, P., Rajashankar, K. R. & Patel, D. J. PAM-dependent target DNA recognition and cleavage by C2c1 CRISPR-Cas endonuclease. Cell 167, 1814–1828 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  116. Tsuchida, C. A. et al. Chimeric CRISPR-CasX enzymes and guide RNAs for improved genome editing activity. Mol. Cell 82, 1199–1209.e6 (2022).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  117. Harrington, L. B. et al. A scoutRNA is required for some type V CRISPR-Cas systems. Mol. Cell 79, 416–424.e5 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  118. Huang, C. J., Adler, B. A. & Doudna, J. A. A naturally DNase-free CRISPR-Cas12c enzyme silences gene expression. Preprint at bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.12.06.471469 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  119. Kurihara, N. et al. Structure of the type V-C CRISPR-Cas effector enzyme. Mol. Cell 82, 1–13 (2022).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  120. Harrington, L. B. et al. Programmed DNA destruction by miniature CRISPR-Cas14 enzymes. Science 362, 839–842 (2018).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  121. Takeda, S. N. et al. Structure of the miniature type V-F CRISPR-Cas effector enzyme. Mol. Cell 81, 558–570 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  122. Xiao, R., Li, Z., Wang, S., Han, R. & Chang, L. Structural basis for substrate recognition and cleavage by the dimerization-dependent CRISPR–Cas12f nuclease. Nucleic Acids Res. 49, 4120–4128 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  123. Li, Z., Zhang, H., Xiao, R., Han, R. & Chang, L. Cryo-EM structure of the RNA-guided ribonuclease Cas12g. Nat. Chem. Biol. 17, 387–393 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  124. Swarts, D. C., van der Oost, J. & Jinek, M. Structural basis for guide RNA processing and seed-dependent DNA targeting by CRISPR-Cas12a. Mol. Cell 66, 221–233 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  125. Gao, P., Yang, H., Rajashankar, K. R., Huang, Z. & Patel, D. J. Type V CRISPR-Cas Cpf1 endonuclease employs a unique mechanism for crRNA-mediated target DNA recognition. Cell Res. 26, 901–913 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  126. Stella, S., Alcón, P. & Montoya, G. Structure of the Cpf1 endonuclease R-loop complex after target DNA cleavage. Nature 546, 559–563 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  127. Cofsky, J. C. et al. CRISPR-Cas12a exploits R-loop asymmetry to form double-strand breaks. eLife 9, e55143 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  128. Stella, S. et al. Conformational activation promotes CRISPR-Cas12a catalysis and resetting of the endonuclease activity. Cell 175, 1856–1871 (2018). This study provides extensive structural and mechanistic insights into the conformational activation of Cas12a.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  129. Huang, X. et al. Structural basis for two metal-ion catalysis of DNA cleavage by Cas12i2. Nat. Commun. 11, 5241 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  130. Chen, J. S. et al. CRISPR-Cas12a target binding unleashes indiscriminate single-stranded DNase activity. Science 360, 436–439 (2018).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  131. Swarts, D. C. & Jinek, M. Mechanistic insights into the cis- and trans-acting DNase activities of Cas12a. Mol. Cell 73, 589–600 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  132. Jiang, W. et al. CRISPR-Cas12a nucleases bind flexible DNA duplexes without RNA/DNA complementarity. ACS Omega 4, 17140–17147 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  133. Paul, B., Chaubet, L., Verver, D. E. & Montoya, G. Mechanics of CRISPR-Cas12a and engineered variants on λ-DNA. Nucleic Acids Res. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkab1272 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  134. Losito, M., Smith, Q. M., Newton, M. D., Cuomo, M. E. & Rueda, D. S. Cas12a target search and cleavage on force-stretched DNA. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 23, 26640–26644 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  135. Kapitonov, V. V., Makarova, K. S. & Koonin, E. V. ISC, a novel group of bacterial and archaeal DNA transposons that encode Cas9 homologs. J. Bacteriol. 198, 797–807 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  136. Shmakov, S. et al. Diversity and evolution of class 2 CRISPR-Cas systems. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 15, 169–182 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  137. Karvelis, T. et al. Transposon-associated TnpB is a programmable RNA-guided DNA endonuclease. Nature 599, 692–696 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  138. Weinberg, Z., Perreault, J., Meyer, M. M. & Breaker, R. R. Exceptional structured noncoding RNAs revealed by bacterial metagenome analysis. Nature 462, 656–659 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  139. Stoddard, B. L. Homing endonucleases from mobile group I introns: discovery to genome engineering. Mob. DNA 5, 7 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  140. Stoddard, B. L. Homing endonucleases: from microbial genetic invaders to reagents for targeted DNA modification. Structure 19, 7–15 (2011).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  141. Klompe, S. E., Vo, P. L. H., Halpin-Healy, T. S. & Sternberg, S. H. Transposon-encoded CRISPR–Cas systems direct RNA-guided DNA integration. Nature 571, 219–225 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  142. Strecker, J. et al. RNA-guided DNA insertion with CRISPR-associated transposases. Science 365, 48–53 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  143. Faure, G. et al. CRISPR–Cas in mobile genetic elements: counter-defence and beyond. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 17, 513–525 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  144. Peters, J. E., Makarova, K. S., Shmakov, S. & Koonin, E. V. Recruitment of CRISPR-Cas systems by Tn7-like transposons. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, E7358–E7366 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  145. Rybarski, J. R., Hu, K., Hill, A. M., Wilke, C. O. & Finkelstein, I. J. Metagenomic discovery of CRISPR-associated transposons. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 118, e2112279118 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  146. Halpin-Healy, T. S., Klompe, S. E., Sternberg, S. H. & Fernández, I. S. Structural basis of DNA targeting by a transposon-encoded CRISPR-Cas system. Nature 577, 271–274 (2020). This work provides mechanistic insights into subtype I-F3 CRISPR transposases by describing the structures of a TniQ–Cascade complex and reveals interactions between TniQ and Cas6 and Cas7.1 within the Cascade complex.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  147. Li, Z., Zhang, H., Xiao, R. & Chang, L. Cryo-EM structure of a type I-F CRISPR RNA guided surveillance complex bound to transposition protein TniQ. Cell Res. 30, 179–181 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  148. Jia, N., Xie, W., de la Cruz, M. J., Eng, E. T. & Patel, D. J. Structure-function insights into the initial step of DNA integration by a CRISPR-Cas-Transposon complex. Cell Res. 30, 182–184 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  149. Wang, B., Xu, W. & Yang, H. Structural basis of a Tn7-like transposase recruitment and DNA loading to CRISPR-Cas surveillance complex. Cell Res. 30, 185–187 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  150. Park, J.-U. et al. Structural basis for target site selection in RNA-guided DNA transposition systems. Science 373, 768–774 (2021). This work provides mechanistic insights into subtype V-K CRISPR transposases by describing a transposition regulator, TnsC, from a subtype V-K CAST system and its interaction with TniQ and proposing a model for subtype V-K CAST transposition.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  151. Querques, I., Schmitz, M., Oberli, S., Chanez, C. & Jinek, M. Target site selection and remodelling by type V CRISPR-transposon systems. Nature 599, 497–502 (2021). This work provides mechanistic insights into subtype V-K CRISPR transposases by describing target recognition by Cas12k and the role of the transposition regulator TnsC and proposing an alternative model for subtype V-K CAST transposition.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  152. Xiao, R. et al. Structural basis of target DNA recognition by CRISPR-Cas12k for RNA-guided DNA transposition. Mol. Cell 81, 4457–4466.e5 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  153. Chowdhury, S. et al. Structure reveals mechanisms of viral suppressors that intercept a CRISPR RNA-guided surveillance complex. Cell 169, 47–57.e11 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  154. Guo, T. W. et al. Cryo-EM structures reveal mechanism and inhibition of DNA targeting by a CRISPR-Cas surveillance complex. Cell 171, 414–426.e12 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  155. Pausch, P. et al. Structural variation of type I-F CRISPR RNA guided DNA surveillance. Mol. Cell 67, 622–632.e4 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  156. Rollins, M. F. et al. Structure reveals a mechanism of CRISPR-RNA-guided nuclease recruitment and anti-CRISPR viral mimicry. Mol. Cell 74, 132–142.e5 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  157. Hayes, R. P. et al. Structural basis for promiscuous PAM recognition in type I–E Cascade from E. coli. Nature 530, 499–503 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  158. Greene, E. C. & Mizuuchi, K. Dynamics of a protein polymer: the assembly and disassembly pathways of the MuB transposition target complex. EMBO J. 21, 1477–1486 (2002).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  159. Vo, P. L. H. et al. CRISPR RNA-guided integrases for high-efficiency, multiplexed bacterial genome engineering. Nat. Biotechnol. 39, 480–489 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  160. Rubin, B. E. et al. Species- and site-specific genome editing in complex bacterial communities. Nat. Microbiol. 7, 34–47 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  161. Stellwagen, A. E. & Craig, N. L. Avoiding self: two Tn7-encoded proteins mediate target immunity in Tn7 transposition. EMBO J. 16, 6823–6834 (1997).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  162. Saito, M. et al. Dual modes of CRISPR-associated transposon homing. Cell 184, 2441–2453 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  163. Petassi, M. T., Hsieh, S.-C. & Peters, J. E. Guide RNA categorization enables target site choice in Tn7-CRISPR-Cas transposons. Cell 183, 1757–1771.e18 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  164. Waddell, C. S. & Craig, N. L. Tn7 transposition: two transposition pathways directed by five Tn7-encoded genes. Genes Dev. 2, 137–149 (1988).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  165. Klompe, S. E. et al. Evolutionary and mechanistic diversity of type I-F CRISPR-associated transposons. Mol. Cell 82, 616–628 (2022).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  166. Liu, G., Lin, Q., Jin, S. & Gao, C. The CRISPR-Cas toolbox and gene editing technologies. Mol. Cell 82, 333–347 (2022).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  167. Nambiar, T. S., Baudrier, L., Billon, P. & Ciccia, A. CRISPR-based genome editing through the lens of DNA repair. Mol. Cell 82, 348–388 (2022).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  168. Lapinaite, A. et al. DNA capture by a CRISPR-Cas9 guided adenine base editor. Science 369, 566–571 (2022).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  169. Hirano, S., Nishimasu, H., Ishitani, R. & Nureki, O. Structural basis for the altered PAM specificities of engineered CRISPR-Cas9. Mol. Cell 61, 886–894 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  170. Chen, W. et al. Molecular basis for the PAM expansion and fidelity enhancement of an evolved Cas9 nuclease. PLoS Biol. 17, e3000496 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  171. Anders, C., Bargsten, K. & Jinek, M. Structural plasticity of PAM recognition by engineered variants of the RNA-guided endonuclease Cas9. Mol. Cell 61, 895–902 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  172. Guo, M. et al. Structural insights into a high fidelity variant of SpCas9. Cell Res. 29, 183–192 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  173. Nishimasu, H. et al. Structural basis for the altered PAM recognition by engineered CRISPR-Cpf1. Mol. Cell 67, 139–147.e2 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  174. Shams, A. et al. Comprehensive deletion landscape of CRISPR-Cas9 identifies minimal RNA-guided DNA-binding modules. Nat. Commun. 12, 5664 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  175. Donohoue, P. D. et al. Conformational control of Cas9 by CRISPR hybrid RNA-DNA guides mitigates off-target activity in T cells. Mol. Cell 81, 3637–3649.e5 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  176. Jumper, J. et al. Highly accurate protein structure prediction with AlphaFold. Nature 596, 583–589 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  177. Townshend, R. J. L. et al. Geometric deep learning of RNA structure. Science 373, 1047–1051 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  178. Wei, J., Chen, S., Zong, L., Gao, X. & Li, Y. Protein-RNA interaction prediction with deep learning: structure matters. Preprint at arXiv https://arxiv.org/abs/2107.12243 (2021).

  179. Nierzwicki, Ł. & Palermo, G. Molecular dynamics to predict cryo-EM: capturing transitions and short-lived conformational states of biomolecules. Front. Mol. Biosci. 8, 641208 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  180. Wang, J. et al. Gaussian accelerated molecular dynamics: principles and applications. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Comput. Mol. Sci. 11, e1521 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  181. Xiao, Y., Luo, M., Dolan, A. E., Liao, M. & Ke, A. Structure basis for RNA-guided DNA degradation by Cascade and Cas3. Science 361, eaat0839 (2018).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank J. C. Cofsky, K. M. Soczek and G. J. Knott for sharing the coordinates of Cas9 bound to linear and bent double-stranded DNA before publication. J.Y.W. is supported by the US National Science Foundation Graduate Fellowship and was previously supported by the Berkeley Graduate Fellowship. P.P. receives funding from the European Regional Development Fund under grant agreement number 01.2.2-CPVA-V-716-01-0001 with the Central Project Management Agency (CPVA), Lithuania, and from the Research Council of Lithuania (LMTLT) under grant agreement number S-MIP-22-10. This material is based upon work supported by the US National Science Foundation under award number 1817593 and by the Somatic Cell Genome Editing Program of the Common Fund of the US National Institutes of Health under award number U01AI142817-02. J.A.D. is a Howard Hughes Medical Institute investigator. The authors thank G. J. Knott and A. Lapinaite for helpful discussions.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Chemistry, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, USA

    Joy Y. Wang & Jennifer A. Doudna

  2. Innovative Genomics Institute, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, USA

    Joy Y. Wang & Jennifer A. Doudna

  3. VU LSC-EMBL Partnership for Genome Editing Technologies, Life Sciences Center, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania

    Patrick Pausch

  4. Howard Hughes Medical Institute, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, USA

    Jennifer A. Doudna

  5. Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, USA

    Jennifer A. Doudna

  6. California Institute for Quantitative Biosciences (QB3), University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, USA

    Jennifer A. Doudna

  7. MBIB Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA, USA

    Jennifer A. Doudna

  8. Gladstone Institutes, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA

    Jennifer A. Doudna

  9. Gladstone-UCSF Institute of Genomic Immunology, San Francisco, CA, USA

    Jennifer A. Doudna

Authors
  1. Joy Y. Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Patrick Pausch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jennifer A. Doudna
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to writing, reviewing and editing the manuscript.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Patrick Pausch or Jennifer A. Doudna.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

J.A.D. is a cofounder of Caribou Biosciences, Editas Medicine, Scribe Therapeutics, Intellia Therapeutics and Mammoth Biosciences. J.A.D. is a scientific advisory board member of Vertex, Caribou Biosciences, Intellia Therapeutics, Scribe Therapeutics, Mammoth Biosciences, Synthego, Algen Biotechnologies, Felix Biosciences, The Column Group and Inari. J.A.D. is the Chief Science Advisor of Sixth Street, is on the Board of Directors at Altos, Johnson & Johnson and Tempus, and has research projects sponsored by Biogen, Pfizer, AppleTree Partners and Roche. The Regents of the University of California have patents issued and pending for CRISPR technologies on which P.P. and J.A.D. are named as inventors. J.Y.W. declares no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information

Nature Reviews Microbiology thanks Hong Li, Guillermo Montoya and Dinshaw Patel 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.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wang, J.Y., Pausch, P. & Doudna, J.A. Structural biology of CRISPR–Cas immunity and genome editing enzymes. Nat Rev Microbiol 20, 641–656 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41579-022-00739-4

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41579-022-00739-4

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing: Translational Research

Sign up for the Nature Briefing: Translational Research newsletter — top stories in biotechnology, drug discovery and pharma.

Get what matters in translational research, free to your inbox weekly. Sign up for Nature Briefing: Translational Research