Back

Efficient Homology-directed Repair with Circular ssDNA Donors

Iyer, S.; Mir, A.; Ibraheim, R.; Lee, J.; VegaBadillo, J.; Roscoe, B.; Zhu, L. J.; Liu, P.; Luk, K.; Mintzer, E.; de Brito, J. S.; Zamore, P.; Sontheimer, E. J.; Wolfe, S.

2019-12-05 molecular biology
10.1101/864199 bioRxiv
Show abstract

While genome editing has been revolutionized by the advent of CRISPR-based nucleases, difficulties in achieving efficient, nuclease-mediated, homology-directed repair (HDR) still limit many applications. Commonly used DNA donors such as plasmids suffer from low HDR efficiencies in many cell types, as well as integration at unintended sites. In contrast, single-stranded DNA (ssDNA) donors can produce efficient HDR with minimal off-target integration. Here, we describe the use of ssDNA phage to efficiently and inexpensively produce long circular ssDNA (cssDNA) donors. These cssDNA donors serve as efficient HDR templates when used with Cas9 or Cas12a, with integration frequencies superior to linear ssDNA (lssDNA) donors. To evaluate the relative efficiencies of imprecise and precise repair for a suite of different Cas9 or Cas12a nucleases, we have developed a modified Traffic Light Reporter (TLR) system [TLR-Multi-Cas Variant 1 (MCV1)] that permits side-by-side comparisons of different nuclease systems. We used this system to assess editing and HDR efficiencies of different nuclease platforms with distinct DNA donor types. We then extended the analysis of DNA donor types to evaluate efficiencies of fluorescent tag knock-ins at endogenous sites in HEK293T and K562 cells. Our results show that cssDNA templates produce efficient and robust insertion of reporter tags. Targeting efficiency is high, allowing production of biallelic integrants using cssDNA donors. cssDNA donors also outcompete lssDNA donors in template-driven repair at the target site. These data demonstrate that circular donors provide an efficient, cost-effective method to achieve knock-ins in mammalian cell lines.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Nucleic Acids Research
1128 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
23.1%
2
The CRISPR Journal
33 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
12.7%
3
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 16%
10.4%
4
ACS Synthetic Biology
256 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
7.4%
50% of probability mass above
5
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 26%
6.5%
6
Cell Reports Methods
141 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
3.7%
7
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 34%
3.7%
8
Nature Biotechnology
147 papers in training set
Top 3%
2.4%
9
ACS Chemical Biology
150 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
2.1%
10
Molecular Therapy Nucleic Acids
32 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.7%
11
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 51%
1.0%
12
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 42%
0.8%
13
Mobile DNA
27 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.8%
14
Viruses
318 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.8%
15
Journal of Biological Chemistry
641 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.7%
16
Genome Biology
555 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.7%
17
The Plant Journal
197 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.7%
18
Cell Reports
1338 papers in training set
Top 35%
0.7%
19
Molecular Therapy - Methods & Clinical Development
38 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.7%
20
G3 Genes|Genomes|Genetics
351 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.5%
21
Biology Methods and Protocols
53 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.5%
22
PLOS Genetics
756 papers in training set
Top 18%
0.5%
23
BMC Genomics
328 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.5%
24
Molecular Therapy
71 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.5%
25
Journal of the American Chemical Society
199 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.5%
26
Molecular Therapy - Nucleic Acids
24 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.5%