Back

Experimental Methods for CRISPR Enzyme Assays with Fluorescence Readout

Jiang, Q.; Avaro, A. S.; Bae, H.; Sorensen, A.; Santiago, J. G.

2026-06-03 biochemistry
10.64898/2026.06.03.729647 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Fluorescence-based CRISPR diagnostic assays have become a popular platform for nucleic acid detection due to their programmability, configurability, specificity, and compatibility with standard laboratory equipment. However, reported enzymatic kinetic rates and limits of detection for CRISPR trans-cleavage assays vary by several orders of magnitude across the literature. This variation in performance parameters is coupled with and exacerbated by inconsistent calibration, incomplete correction of measurement biases, and nonstandardized or incomplete data-analysis procedures. We present an experimental protocol and quantitative analysis framework for fluorescence-based enzyme assays using routine laboratory instrumentation, including thermocyclers and fluorescence microplate readers. Building on previous studies of CRISPR enzyme kinetics and fluorescence calibration, we describe procedures for flat-field and background correction; comprehensive fluorescence calibration including correction for inner-filter-effect; quantification and implications of reporter degradation; extraction of Michaelis-Menten kinetic parameters; and determination of assay limits of detection. We provide step-by-step experimental guidelines and open-source Python implementations for each stage of the workflow. Using representative Cas12 trans-cleavage datasets, we demonstrate that explicit fluorescence calibration and correction procedures substantially reduce systematic bias in measured kinetic rates and improve consistency between experiments. Our framework aims to establish standardized practices for quantitative fluorescence-based CRISPR assays and provides researchers with practical tools for reproducible kinetic characterization and rational assay design.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Analytical Chemistry
218 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
9.8%
2
SLAS Discovery
25 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
9.8%
3
ACS Synthetic Biology
287 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
7.9%
4
Methods
34 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.8%
5
Nucleic Acids Research
1281 papers in training set
Top 3%
6.8%
6
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 31%
4.9%
7
Cell Reports Methods
165 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
4.5%
50% of probability mass above
8
Biochemistry
148 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
4.1%
9
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 30%
3.4%
10
SLAS Technology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.2%
11
ACS Chemical Biology
167 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.5%
12
Analytical Biochemistry
26 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.4%
13
Journal of Biological Chemistry
690 papers in training set
Top 4%
2.4%
14
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 40%
2.4%
15
Synthetic Biology
24 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.9%
16
Nature Protocols
33 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.7%
17
The CRISPR Journal
39 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.5%
18
Biosensors and Bioelectronics
57 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.5%
19
BioTechniques
25 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.1%
20
Biophysical Journal
631 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.0%
21
ACS Sensors
49 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.9%
22
Communications Biology
993 papers in training set
Top 30%
0.8%
23
Biochemical Journal
91 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
24
ACS Infectious Diseases
82 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%
25
RSC Chemical Biology
39 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.6%