Back

Systematic dissection of Cas12a-mediated precision genome editing defines design principles for genome-scale variant engineering

Delhaye, A.;Batagui, V.;Nysten, J.;Troubleyn, D.;Vonesch, S.

2026-06-29 Synthetic Biology
10.64898/2026.06.26.734799 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Cas9 precision editing is increasingly predictable because guide, donor and target-context effects have been systematically characterized. Extending this framework to other nucleases is essential for installing variants outside convenient Cas9 target space. Cas12a provides a T-rich protospacer-adjacent motif (PAM) alternative, but determinants of efficient donor-templated Cas12a editing remain poorly defined. Here, we systematically dissected Cas12a precision editing in Saccharomyces cerevisiae across nuclease, direct repeat, expression, crRNA, donor, genomic context and time-course variables. Reporter and amplicon-sequencing assays showed that cleavage activity alone did not predict precise editing. Highly active configurations often reduced viability or lost edited alleles over time, whereas attenuated configurations better preserved programmed edits. Enhanced AsCas12a edited rapidly and tolerated shorter crRNAs, resulting in a narrower editing window, while an attenuated FnCas12a configuration edited more slowly but maintained higher viability and better distal-edit recovery. Alternative repair outcomes were rare, target-dependent, and further suppressed by LexA-FHA donor recruitment. To define design parameters at scale, we established a pooled Cas12a platform with 530 barcoded edit cassettes and recovered programmed edits for 70.2% of designs. Successful editing was reduced with TTTG PAMs, a C upstream of the PAM and at distal edit positions. Excluding these features increased the edited fraction to 85.4% and adding high predicted cleavage scores further elevated it to 91.4%. Applied retrospectively, these criteria also identified poorly edited loci in the targeted panels. Together, these data define design principles for Cas12a-mediated precision editing and establish a scalable platform for genome-scale pooled variant engineering and phenotyping in yeast.

Matching journals

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

1
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 12%
14.9%
2
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2444 papers in training set
Top 3%
11.8%
3
Nucleic Acids Research
1281 papers in training set
Top 3%
6.2%
4
GENETICS
483 papers in training set
Top 1%
5.4%
5
eLife
5828 papers in training set
Top 24%
5.1%
6
The CRISPR Journal
39 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.3%
7
Cell Systems
201 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.0%
50% of probability mass above
8
Genome Research
468 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.4%
9
Nature
645 papers in training set
Top 4%
3.4%
10
PLOS Genetics
862 papers in training set
Top 5%
2.4%
11
Molecular Cell
350 papers in training set
Top 3%
2.1%
12
Genome Biology
637 papers in training set
Top 5%
2.1%
13
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 51%
1.9%
14
Cell Genomics
172 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.9%
15
Nature Genetics
286 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
16
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 51%
1.5%
17
Molecular Systems Biology
162 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.4%
18
ACS Synthetic Biology
287 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
19
Cell Reports
1498 papers in training set
Top 23%
1.1%
20
Nature Biotechnology
172 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.1%
21
Nature Methods
385 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.1%
22
Cell Reports Methods
165 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.1%
23
Nature Chemical Biology
119 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.0%
24
Advanced Science
286 papers in training set
Top 8%
1.0%
25
Science Advances
1243 papers in training set
Top 29%
0.9%
26
Cell
431 papers in training set
Top 10%
0.8%
27
Science
477 papers in training set
Top 9%
0.8%
28
EMBO Reports
263 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.8%
29
Nature Structural & Molecular Biology
18 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.8%
30
BMC Genomics
406 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.8%