Abstract
CRISPR–CasΦ, a small RNA-guided enzyme found uniquely in bacteriophages, achieves programmable DNA cutting as well as genome editing. To investigate how the hypercompact enzyme recognizes and cleaves double-stranded DNA, we determined cryo-EM structures of CasΦ (Cas12j) in pre- and post-DNA-binding states. The structures reveal a streamlined protein architecture that tightly encircles the CRISPR RNA and DNA target to capture, unwind and cleave DNA. Comparison of the pre- and post-DNA-binding states reveals how the protein rearranges for DNA cleavage upon target recognition. On the basis of these structures, we created and tested mutant forms of CasΦ that cut DNA up to 20-fold faster relative to wild type, showing how this system may be naturally attenuated to improve the fidelity of DNA interference. The structural and mechanistic insights into how CasΦ binds and cleaves DNA should allow for protein engineering for both in vitro diagnostics and genome editing.
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
$29.99 / 30 days
cancel any time
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 print issues and online access
$209.00 per year
only $17.42 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
References
Barrangou, R. et al. CRISPR provides acquired resistance against viruses in prokaryotes. Science 315, 1709–1712 (2007).
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 (2020).
Knott, G. J. & Doudna, J. A. CRISPR–Cas guides the future of genetic engineering. Science 361, 866–869 (2018).
Swarts, D. C. & Jinek, M. Cas9 versus Cas12a/Cpf1: structure–function comparisons and implications for genome editing. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. RNA 9, e1481 (2018).
Gleditzsch, D. et al. PAM identification by CRISPR-Cas effector complexes: diversified mechanisms and structures. RNA Biol. 16, 504–517 (2019).
Westra, E. R., Dowling, A. J., Broniewski, J. M. & van Houte, S. Evolution and ecology of CRISPR. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 47, 307–331 (2016).
Al-Shayeb, B. et al. Clades of huge phages from across Earth’s ecosystems. Nature 578, 425–431 (2020).
Pausch, P. et al. CRISPR-CasΦ from huge phages is a hypercompact genome editor. Science 369, 333–337 (2020).
Swarts, D. C. Stirring up the type V alphabet soup. CRISPR J. 2, 14–16 (2019).
Jinek, M. et al. A programmable dual-RNA-guided DNA endonuclease in adaptive bacterial immunity. Science 337, 816–821 (2012).
Jinek, M. et al. Structures of Cas9 endonucleases reveal RNA-mediated conformational activation. Science 343, 1247997 (2014).
Nishimasu, H. et al. Crystal structure of Cas9 in complex with guide RNA and target DNA. Cell 156, 935–949 (2014).
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).
Zetsche, B. et al. Cpf1 is a single RNA-guided endonuclease of a class 2 CRISPR-Cas system. Cell 163, 759–771 (2015).
Yamano, T. et al. Crystal structure of Cpf1 in complex with guide RNA and target DNA. Cell 165, 949–962 (2016).
Burstein, D. et al. New CRISPR-Cas systems from uncultivated microbes. Nature 542, 237–241 (2017).
Liu, J.-J. et al. CasX enzymes comprise a distinct family of RNA-guided genome editors. Nature 566, 218–223 (2019).
Takeda, S. N. et al. Structure of the miniature type V-F CRISPR-Cas effector enzyme. Mol. Cell 81, 558–570 (2021).
Karvelis, T. et al. PAM recognition by miniature CRISPR–Cas12f nucleases triggers programmable double-stranded DNA target cleavage. Nucleic Acids Res. 48, 5016–5023 (2020).
Kluska, K., Adamczyk, J. & Krężel, A. Metal binding properties, stability and reactivity of zinc fingers. Coord. Chem. Rev. 367, 18–64 (2018).
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.e12 (2016).
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.e4 (2017).
Swarts, D. C. & Jinek, M. Mechanistic insights into the cis- and trans-acting DNase activities of Cas12a. Mol. Cell 73, 589–600.e4 (2019).
Huang, X. et al. Structural basis for two metal-ion catalysis of DNA cleavage by Cas12i2. Nat. Commun. 11, 5241 (2020).
Gorski, S. A., Vogel, J. & Doudna, J. A. RNA-based recognition and targeting: sowing the seeds of specificity. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 18, 215–228 (2017).
Zhang, H., Li, Z., Xiao, R. & Chang, L. Mechanisms for target recognition and cleavage by the Cas12i RNA-guided endonuclease. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 27, 1069–1076 (2020).
Stella, S. et al. Conformational activation promotes CRISPR-Cas12a catalysis and resetting of the endonuclease activity. Cell 175, 1856–1871.e21 (2018).
Wu, D., Guan, X., Zhu, Y., Ren, K. & Huang, Z. Structural basis of stringent PAM recognition by CRISPR-C2c1 in complex with sgRNA. Cell Res. 27, 705–708 (2017).
Kleinstiver, B. P. et al. Engineered CRISPR-Cas9 nucleases with altered PAM specificities. Nature 523, 481–485 (2015).
Kleinstiver, B. P. et al. Engineered CRISPR–Cas12a variants with increased activities and improved targeting ranges for gene, epigenetic and base editing. Nat. Biotechnol. 37, 276–282 (2019).
Walton, R. T., Christie, K. A., Whittaker, M. N. & Kleinstiver, B. P. Unconstrained genome targeting with near-PAMless engineered CRISPR-Cas9 variants. Science 368, 290–296 (2020).
Stella, S., Alcón, P. & Montoya, G. Structure of the Cpf1 endonuclease R-loop complex after target DNA cleavage. Nature 546, 559–563 (2017).
Cofsky, J. C. et al. CRISPR-Cas12a exploits R-loop asymmetry to form double-strand breaks. eLife 9, e55143 (2020).
Punjani, A. & Fleet, D. J. 3D variability analysis: resolving continuous flexibility and discrete heterogeneity from single particle cryo-EM. J. Struct. Biol. 213, 107702 (2021).
Chen, J. S. et al. CRISPR-Cas12a target binding unleashes indiscriminate single-stranded DNase activity. Science 360, 436–439 (2018).
Harrington, L. B. et al. Programmed DNA destruction by miniature CRISPR-Cas14 enzymes. Science 362, 839–842 (2018).
East-Seletsky, A. et al. Two distinct RNase activities of CRISPR-C2c2 enable guide-RNA processing and RNA detection. Nature 538, 270–273 (2016).
Hopfield, J. J. Kinetic proofreading: a new mechanism for reducing errors in biosynthetic processes requiring high specificity. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 71, 4135–4139 (1974).
Ninio, J. Kinetic amplification of enzyme discrimination. Biochimie 57, 587–595 (1975).
Mallory, J. D., Igoshin, O. A. & Kolomeisky, A. B. Do we understand the mechanisms used by biological systems to correct their errors? J. Phys. Chem. B 124, 9289–9296 (2020).
Kleinstiver, B. P. et al. High-fidelity CRISPR–Cas9 nucleases with no detectable genome-wide off-target effects. Nature 529, 490–495 (2016).
Chen, J. S. et al. Enhanced proofreading governs CRISPR–Cas9 targeting accuracy. Nature 550, 407–410 (2017).
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).
Strecker, J. et al. Engineering of CRISPR-Cas12b for human genome editing. Nat. Commun. 10, 212 (2019).
Punjani, A., Zhang, H. & Fleet, D. J. Non-uniform refinement: adaptive regularization improves single-particle cryo-EM reconstruction. Nat. Methods 17, 1214–1221 (2020).
Kaur, S. et al. Local computational methods to improve the interpretability and analysis of cryo-EM maps. Nat. Commun. 12, 1240 (2021).
Bepler, T. et al. Positive-unlabeled convolutional neural networks for particle picking in cryo-electron micrographs. Nat. Methods 16, 1153–1160 (2019).
Punjani, A. & Fleet, D. J. 3D variability analysis: resolving continuous flexibility and discrete heterogeneity from single particle cryo-EM. J. Struct. Biol. 213, 107702 (2021).
Emsley, P. & Cowtan, K. Coot: model-building tools for molecular graphics. Acta Crystallogr. D, Biol. Crystallogr. 60, 2126–2132 (2004).
Afonine, P. V. et al. Real-space refinement in PHENIX for cryo-EM and crystallography. Acta Crystallogr. D, Struct. Biol. 74, 531–544 (2018).
Liebschner, D. et al. Macromolecular structure determination using X-rays, neutrons and electrons: recent developments in Phenix. Acta Crystallogr. D, Struct. Biol. 75, 861–877 (2019).
Moriarty, N. W., Grosse-Kunstleve, R. W. & Adams, P. D. electronic Ligand Builder and Optimization Workbench (eLBOW): a tool for ligand coordinate and restraint generation. Acta Crystallogr. D, Biol. Crystallogr. 65, 1074–1080 (2009).
Pettersen, E. F. et al. UCSF ChimeraX: structure visualization for researchers, educators, and developers. Protein Sci. 30, 70–82 (2021).
Pettersen, E. F. et al. UCSF Chimera—a visualization system for exploratory research and analysis. J. Comput. Chem. 25, 1605–1612 (2004).
Asarnow, D., Palovcak, E. & Cheng, Y. asarnow/pyem: UCSF pyem v.0.5. Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3576630 (2019).
Afonine, P. V. et al. New tools for the analysis and validation of cryo-EM maps and atomic models. Acta Crystallogr. D Struct. Biol. 74, 814–840 (2018).
Schneider, C. A., Rasband, W. S. & Eliceiri, K. W. NIH Image to ImageJ: 25 years of image analysis. Nat. Methods 9, 671–675 (2012).
Madeira, F. et al. The EMBL-EBI search and sequence analysis tools APIs in 2019. Nucleic Acids Res. 47, W636–W641 (2019).
Waterhouse, A. M., Procter, J. B., Martin, D. M. A., Clamp, M. & Barton, G. J. Jalview version 2—a multiple sequence alignment editor and analysis workbench. Bioinformatics 25, 1189–1191 (2009).
Laskowski, R. A., Jabłońska, J., Pravda, L., Vařeková, R. S. & Thornton, J. M. PDBsum: structural summaries of PDB entries. Protein Sci. 27, 129–134 (2018).
Acknowledgements
We thank E. Charles, C. Huang, G. Knott, D. Smock and members of the Doudna and Nogales laboratories for discussion. We thank J. Cofsky and G. Knott for critical reading and comments on the manuscript. We thank J. Remis, D. Toso and G. Knott for electron microscopy assistance and A. Chintangal for computational support. EM data were collected at the Cal-Cryo facility located at UC Berkeley. P.P. is supported by the NIH Somatic Cell Genome Editing consortium (NIH U01AI142817-02). C.A.T. is supported by Campus Executive Grants 2101705 and 1655264 through Sandia National Laboratories. B.A.-S. was supported by an NSF Graduate Research Fellowship (DGE 1752814). J.A.D. receives funding from the Centers for Excellence in Genomic Science of the National Institutes of Health under award number RM1HG009490, from the Somatic Cell Genome Editing Program of the Common Fund of the National Institutes of Health under award number U01AI142817-02, and from the National Science Foundation under award number 1817593. D.A.H. was supported by the EMBO (ALTF 1002-2018) and SNSF (P2BSP3_181878). J.A.D. and E.N. are Howard Hughes Medical Institute Investigators.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
P.P. conceived the study with input from J.A.D. P.P. designed experiments and analyzed data. P.P. cloned constructs, purified proteins and performed biochemical experiments. K.M.S. and P.P. prepared cryo-EM grids. K.M.S. collected and processed cryo-EM data for 3D image reconstruction and 3DVA with input from E.N. and D.A.H. P.P. built and refined structure models. C.A.T. provided materials. B.A.-S. and J.F.B. provided the sequence information and bioinformatics analysis for CRISPR–CasΦ homologs, before publication of refs. 7,8. P.P. wrote the manuscript and prepared figures with input from K.M.S. and J.A.D.. The manuscript was reviewed and approved by all co-authors.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The Regents of the University of California, Berkeley have patents pending for CRISPR technologies on which the authors are inventors. 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, eFFECTOR Therapeutics, Scribe Therapeutics, Mammoth Biosciences, Synthego, Algen Biotechnologies, Felix Biosciences, The Column Group and Inari. J.A.D. is a director at Johnson & Johnson and Tempus and has research projects sponsored by Biogen, Pfizer, AppleTree Partners and Roche. J.F.B. is a founder of Metagenomi. The remaining authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Peer review information Nature Structural and Molecular Biology thanks Ryan Jackson and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work. Peer reviewer reports are available. Anke Sparmann was the primary editor on this article and managed its editorial process and peer review in collaboration with the rest of the editorial team.
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Extended data
Extended Data Fig. 1 Cryo-EM data processing for CasΦ in the binary state.
a, Cryo-EM data processing schematic. b, Local resolution map for the final cryoSPARC map calculated in cryoSPARC v3.1 with FSC threshold 0.5. Figure was generated in Chimera v.1.14 using the Surface color function and Chimera map sigma level 3.67 with dust removal size 5. c, Particle orientation distribution plot. d, Left: Gold standard FSC curves for the binary complex from the final round of the refinement in cryoSPARC v.3.1. Right: Map vs model FSC plots of the final binary model refined to the LocSpiral map and plotted with the final cryoSPARC sharp experimental map.
Extended Data Fig. 2 The architecture of CasΦ is similar to, but distinct from the architecture of large type V effectors.
For comparison to CasΦ (above), ternary structures of a representative set of type V effectors in the crRNA (Cas12a and Cas12i), or crRNA/tracrRNA (Cas12b, CasX and Cas14), and DNA bound states are shown. Ternary states were selected for comparison, since binary structures were not available for all effectors. Structures are shown as colored cartoons. Domains are color coded according to the legend on the right. Following models were used to prepare the figure: CasΦ binary structure (this study); Cas12a (PDB-ID: 6I1K23); Cas12b (PDB-ID: 5WTI28); CasX (PDB-ID: 6NY217); Cas14 (PDB-ID: 7C7L18) and Cas12i (PDB-ID: 6W5C26).
Extended Data Fig. 3 A Cas12-typical OBD domain recruits the crRNA to CasΦ.
For comparison to CasΦ (above, left), the OBD domains from representative type V effectors in the crRNA (Cas12a and Cas12i), or crRNA/tracrRNA (Cas12b, CasX and Cas14), and DNA bound states are shown. Following models were used to prepare the figure: CasΦ binary structure (this study); Cas12a (PDB-ID: 6I1K23); Cas12b (PDB-ID: 5WTI28); CasX (PDB-ID: 6NY217); Cas14 (PDB-ID: 7C7L18) and Cas12i (PDB-ID: 6W5C26).
Extended Data Fig. 4 Cryo-EM data processing for CasΦ in the ternary state.
a, Cryo-EM data processing schematic. b, Local resolution map for the final cryoSPARC map calculated in cryoSPARC v3.1 with FSC threshold 0.5. Figure was generated in Chimera v.1.14 using the Surface color function and Chimera map sigma level 3.71 with dust removal size 5. c, Particle orientation distribution plot. d, Left: Gold standard FSC curves for the binary complex from the final round of the refinement in cryoSPARC v.3.1. Right: Map vs model FSC plots of the final binary model refined to the LocSpiral map and plotted with the final cryoSPARC sharp experimental map.
Extended Data Fig. 5 Superhelical DNA is efficiently cut in the presence of alternative PAMs.
a, dsDNA cleavage assay in probing the ability of CasΦ to cleave linear PCR fragments (left) and supercoiled plasmid targets (right) in dependence of different PAM motifs. b, Quantified cleavage efficiencies for linear PCR fragments (left) and supercoiled plasmid targets (right) in dependence of different PAM motifs. (n = 3 independent reaction replicates; means ± SD). c, Analytical agarose gel electrophoresis images of three subsequently run independent technical replicates corresponding to the plot shown in b. Samples were processed in parallel.
Extended Data Fig. 6 Helix α7 repositions close to the NTS upon transition from the binary to the ternary state.
CasΦ in the ternary state is shown as a colored cartoon. To highlight the rearrangement of Helix α7 (arrow), the structure of CasΦ in the binary state (purple) was superimposed to the ternary state structure. For clarity, only the RecI domain of the CasΦ binary structure is shown.
Extended Data Fig. 7 The lid-loop associates with the crRNA:TS duplex in the ternary state.
a, CasΦ in the ternary state is shown as a colored cartoon. The lid-loop element is highlighted in purple and the corresponding LocSpiral cryo-EM map around residues 610-638 is shown as a translucent surface, contoured at 12 σ. b, dsDNA cleavage assay probing the ability of WT and mutant CasΦ to cleave linear PCR fragments. Shown is the analytical agarose gel electrophoresis image of three independent reaction replicates that were processed in parallel. Analyzed time point, t = 1h. c, analytical size-exclusion chromatogram showing that the analyzed variants elute as single peaks. d, FQ-assay testing the ability of wild type and variant CasΦ to indiscriminately cut the FQ-reporter in dependence of a crRNA complementary ssDNA activator at a concentration of 2 nM. (n = 3 independent reaction replicates; means).
Extended Data Fig. 8 Cryo-EM data processing for CasΦ in the ternary state with phosphorothioate DNA and Mg2+.
a, Cryo-EM data processing schematic. b, Local resolution map for the final cryoSPARC map calculated in cryoSPARC v3.1 with FSC threshold 0.5. Figure was generated in Chimera v.1.14 using the Surface color function and Chimera map sigma level 4.75 with dust removal size 5. c, Particle orientation distribution plot. d, Left: Gold standard FSC curves for the binary complex from the final round of the refinement in cryoSPARC v.3.1. Right: Map vs model FSC plots of the final binary model refined to the LocSpiral map and plotted with the final cryoSPARC sharp experimental map.
Extended Data Fig. 9 The PAM-distal TS is single-stranded.
Above: Overview of the LocSpiral map (left panel, colored volume, contoured at 7.6 σ) and model of CasΦ (right panel) in the ternary state in presence of the phosphorothioate NTS-DNA and the magnesium cofactors (purple spheres). Below: Close up onto the DNA arrangement observed in the ternary structure. The hexagons (magenta) highlight the active site (AS).
Extended Data Fig. 10 3D variability analysis of heterogeneous DNA states around the active site.
Shown are two 90°-rotated views of the states observed in the 3DVA for the CasΦ ternary complexes in absence (above) and presence (below) of the magnesium cofactor. Two distinct states (frame 1 and frame 20) for each mode are shown to highlight the structural heterogeneity. Purple density indicates density corresponding to dynamic DNA, not accounted for by our model.
Supplementary information
Supplementary Information
Supplementary Notes, Supplementary Figs. 1–12, Supplementary Tables 1–4 and Source Data for Supplementary Figs. 1, 2, 7, 9 and 10.
Source data
Source Data Fig. 2
Source data for binding curves (numerical values).
Source Data Fig. 3
Source data for binding curves (numerical values).
Source Data Fig. 5
Source data for cleavage kinetics (numerical values).
Source Data Fig. 6
Source data for DNA cleavage assay and FQ reporter kinetics (numerical values).
Source Data Extended Data Fig. 1
Source data for FSC curves (numerical values).
Source Data Extended Data Fig. 4
Source data for FSC curves (numerical values).
Source Data Extended Data Fig. 5
Source data for DNA cleavage assay (numerical values).
Source Data Extended Data Fig. 5
Source data for DNA cleavage assay (images).
Source Data Extended Data Fig. 7
Source data for FQ reporter kinetics (numerical values).
Source Data Extended Data Fig. 7
Source data for DNA cleavage assay (images).
Source Data Extended Data Fig. 8
Source data for FSC curves (numerical values).
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Pausch, P., Soczek, K.M., Herbst, D.A. et al. DNA interference states of the hypercompact CRISPR–CasΦ effector. Nat Struct Mol Biol 28, 652–661 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41594-021-00632-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41594-021-00632-3
This article is cited by
-
Eukaryotic-driven directed evolution of Cas9 nucleases
Genome Biology (2024)
-
Precise genome-editing in human diseases: mechanisms, strategies and applications
Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy (2024)
-
Structure of Fanzor2 reveals insights into the evolution of the TnpB superfamily
Nature Structural & Molecular Biology (2024)
-
Advances in miniature CRISPR-Cas proteins and their applications in gene editing
Archives of Microbiology (2024)
-
Targeting miRNA by CRISPR/Cas in cancer: advantages and challenges
Military Medical Research (2023)