IDT_Logo

CRISPR-Cpf1, an alternative to Cas9 for targeting AT-rich genomes

Alt-R® CRISPR-Cpf1 reagents expand regions available for genome editing

Did you know that use of CRISPR endonuclease Cpf1 (also known as Cas12a) can greatly expand the number of target sites available for genome editing? Unlike the G-rich PAM requirement of Cas9, Cpf1 recognizes a T-rich PAM, TTTV. Not only is this enzyme useful for targeting AT-rich genomes, but it has applications in altering disease or phenotype-linked mutations in AT-rich regions through homology-directed repair. In addition, Cpf1 does not require a tracrRNA for function. Learn more about Cpf1 editing efficiency and TTTV site frequency in this article.

Jul 7, 2017

CRISPR genome editing has revolutionized genomics research over the past few years, largely facilitated by the CRISPR associated (Cas) enzyme, Cas9. However, occasionally researchers performing genome editing are confronted with a narrow target region that lacks suitable Cas9 protospacer adjacent motifs (PAMs). S. pyogenes Cas9, which is the most frequently used CRISPR enzyme for genome editing, does not efficiently cleave target sequences without its PAM site, NGG [1,2]. Thus, functional target sites may be limited or even non-existent in sequences with low GC content. This poses a significant technical obstacle for editing in AT-rich regions.

Cpf1, a CRISPR endonuclease that recognizes an AT-rich PAM

Cpf1 (also known as Cas12a), a putative class II CRISPR endonuclease recently identified and characterized in Prevotella and Francisella [3], potentially overcomes some of the Cas9 enzyme shortcomings, such as its G-rich PAM requirement. Cpf1 endonuclease from IDT is derived from Acidaminococcus sp. BV3L6. It recognizes a T-rich PAM, TTTV, and creates a staggered, double-stranded DNA cut with a 5′ overhang. By including Cpf1 in one’s genome editing toolbox, researchers greatly expand the number of target sites available for editing. Not only is this enzyme useful for targeting AT-rich genomes, such as that of Plasmodium falcipracum, but it also has applications in altering disease or phenotype-linked mutations in AT-rich regions through homology-directed repair. In addition, Cpf1 does not require a tracrRNA for function.

Cpf1 can serve as an alternative to Cas9 endonuclease due to its many unique features. However, Cpf1 presents its own challenges. Unlike S. pyogenes Cas9, which cleaves most NGG PAM sites to some degree, Cpf1 exhibits a lower rate of cleavage for the Cpf1 PAM sequence. Here we summarize a few findings made by researchers at IDT that provide guidance for improving Cpf1 editing efficiency in your own experiments.

Maximize editing efficacy of Cpf1 by using TTTV rather than TTTT as the PAM site

Cpf1 editing efficacy is PAM-sequence dependent [3]. IDT scientists conducted a comprehensive study that investigated the correlation between choice of Cpf1 PAM sites and final editing efficacy. We tested 1240 crRNAs targeting 22 human genes, and found that TTTV PAM sequences (TTTA, TTTC or TTTG) direct DNA cleavage more robustly in comparison to those with TTTT PAM sequences (Figures 1 and 2). It is important to include this principle in your experimental design since, for example, the TTTT motif is significantly more prevalent in the human genome in comparison to its 3 other TTTN counterparts (Figure 3).

art166-CC-GE-Cpf1-Fig1_1

Figure 1. Cpf1 genome editing efficacy increases with the use of TTTV PAM sites across 22 human gene exons.  The dots represent individual PAM sites ranked by increasing editing activities. TTTN sites from 22 human gene exons were used to design 1240 Alt-R CRISPR-Cpf1 crRNAs. HEK-293 cells were transfected with ribonucleoprotein (RNP: Alt-R A.s. Cpf1 Nuclease 2NLS complexed with Alt-R CRISPR-Cpf1 crRNA). Editing efficiency was determined 48 hr after elecroporation using the Alt-R Genome Editing Detection Kit, which provides the major components required for T7E1 endonuclease assays.

D-GE17CC-Cpf1alternative-F2

Figure 2. Cpf1 genome editing efficacy increases with the use of TTTV PAM sites in 64 sites of human BCAT gene. The dots represent individual PAM sites ranked by increasing editing activities. 64 TTTN sites in the human BCAT gene were targeted by Alt-R CRISPR-Cpf1 crRNAs. HEK-293 cells were transfected with RNP as instructed in the user guide, Alt-R CRISPR-Cpf1—RNP electroporation, Amaxa Nucleofector system. Editing efficiency was determined 48 hr after electroporation using the Alt-R Cpf1 Genome Editing Detection Kit.

art166-CC-GE-Cpf1-Fig2

Figure 3. The frequency of TTTN motifs across chromosomes in the human genome. The 4 TTTN motifs and their reverse complements are counted and plotted for each individual human chromosome. The TTTT motif, which is not an effective PAM sequence for A.s. Cpf1, occurs much more frequently than the other 3 motifs (TTTA, TTTC, and TTTG), which are the recommended PAM sequences for A.s. Cpf1.

Enable efficient Cpf1 RNP delivery by including Alt-R Cpf1 Electroporation Enhancer

Cell delivery of Cpf1 endonuclease appears to be more difficult than for S. pyogenes Cas9. We have yet to identify a transfection reagent that provides robust lipofection of Cpf1 RNPs in most of the cell lines we tested. However, electroporation that includes the Alt-R Cpf1 Electroporation Enhancer serves as an effective alternative for Cpf1 RNP delivery to cultured cells. The Alt-R Cpf1 Electroporation Enhancer is a Cpf1-specific, non-targeting, single-stranded carrier DNA, optimized to work with the Amaxa® Nucleofector® technology (Lonza) and the Neon® Transfection System (Thermo Fisher). It provides increased transfection efficiency, and therefore, increased genome editing efficacy. The Alt-R Cpf1 Electroporation Enhancer is computationally designed to be void of sequence homology to human, mouse, and rat genomes.

The effectiveness of this reagent has been tested in multiple cell lines derived from major model organisms, including HEK-293, Jurkat, HeLa, and Hep1-6; although, the level of improvement in editing efficiency may vary by cell type. Figure 4 shows targeting of 2 sites in the human and mouse HPRT genes. Their total editing efficiency was compared between groups with or without the addition of the Alt-R Cpf1 Electroporation Enhancer. The data clearly indicate that Alt-R Cpf1 Electroporation Enhancer is necessary for efficient Cpf1-mediated editing in RNP electroporation experiments.

art166-CC-GE-Cpf1-Fig3

Figure 4. Alt-R Cpf1 Electroporation Enhancer is required for efficient CRISPR-Cpf1 editing in RNP electroporation experiments. Mouse Hepa1-6 cells and human HEK-293 cells were transfected with 5 µM RNP (Alt-R A.s. Cpf1 Nuclease 2NLS complexed with Alt-R CRISPR-Cpf1 crRNA) as instructed in the user guide, Alt-R CRISPR-Cpf1—RNP electroporation, Neon system. Electroporation reactions contained either no (dark blue) or 1.8 µM (light blue) Alt-R Cpf1 Electroporation Enhancer. Genomic DNA was isolated 48 hr after electroporation, and total editing efficiency was determined using the Alt-R Genome Editing Detection Kit.

Use of the Alt-R Genome Editing Detection Kit to precisely assess total editing efficiency of CRISPR-Cpf1

As a simple and fast detection method, the T7EI mismatch endonuclease assay has been widely used to estimate genome editing efficiency in CRISPR experiments [4,5]. T7 endonuclease effectively targets and digests mismatched heteroduplex DNA, which results from annealing DNA strands that undergo CRISPR-mediated modifications to a wide-type DNA strand. Assay results are analyzed by visualizing cleavage products and full-length amplicons by gel or capillary electrophoresis.

However, T7 endonuclease is less robust in recognizing single-base mismatches [5]. Previously, we have shown that the T7EI assay underestimates the efficiency of genome editing mediated by CRISPR-Cas9, when compared to next-generation sequencing (NGS) approach, which captures all editing events regardless of type [6]. Interestingly, in Cpf1 edited samples, the editing efficiencies estimated by T7EI are much closer to the corresponding NGS results, suggesting that T7EI is more accurate in quantifying on-target genome editing events for CRISPR-Cpf1 (Figures 5 and 6).

IDT makes the reagents and protocol for ourT7EI mismatch endonuclease assay available as the Alt-R Genome Editing Detection Kit. Use it to detect on-target genome editing and estimate genome editing efficiency in CRISPR-treated cells.

art166-CC-GE-Cpf1-Fig4_1

Figure 5. Genome editing efficiency estimated by T7EI assay parallel NGS results in 8 Cpf1 edited PAM sites in the human HPRT gene. Alt-R CRISPR-Cpf1 crRNAs (30 nM) were introduced by lipofection into HEK-293 cells that constitutively express A.s. Cpf1 nuclease. 8 PAM sites in the human HPRT gene were targeted. To assess editing efficiency, genomic DNA samples were harvested 48 hr after transfection and tested using the Alt-R Genome Editing Detection Kit (dark blue bars). The same DNA samples were also analyzed using targeted NGS (light blue bars). Amplicons were run on a MiSeq® system (Illumina) and sequencing data were analyzed using a proprietary data processing program developed in-house. Error bars represent standard deviation for triplicate lipofection experiments. The correlation coefficient for the two analysis is shown as the R value.

art166-CC-GE-Cpf1-Fig4_2

Figure 6. Genome editing efficiency estimated by T7EI assay parallel NGS results in 3 Cpf1 edited PAM sites across each of 4 human genes. Alt-R CRISPR-Cas9 crRNA (30 nM) were introduced by lipofection into HEK-293 cells that stably express S. pyogenes Cas9 nuclease. 3 PAM sites were targeted in each of the 4 genes, BCAT, ALDH2, BIRC5, and AR. Similar to the experiment described in Figure 4A, genomic DNA was isolated 48 hr after lipofection, and was tested using both the Alt-R Genome Editing Detection Kit and amplicon sequencing.

What we have learned about CRISPR-Cpf1 genome editing

  • With the ability to recognize T-rich PAM sites, Cpf1 further expands the number of available target sites for genome editing. This feature can be especially useful when design space is limited.
  • When designing CRISPR-Cpf1 experiments, we recommend testing 3 or more crRNAs per target gene. For optimal results, we suggest designing Cpf1 guide RNAs that use TTTV (i.e., TTTA, TTTC, or TTTG) instead of TTTN as the PAM site.
  • Compared to Cas9, which efficiently cleaves DNA when targeted using most potential NGG PAM sites, Cpf1 is less potent in introducing double strand breaks when DNA is targeted using the TTTV PAM sites.
  • The Alt-R Cpf1 Electroporation Enhancer is critical for optimal delivery of Cpf1 RNPs by electroporation and is recommended for experiments using this delivery method.

References

  1. Hsu PD, Scott DA, et al. (2013) DNA targeting specificity of RNA-guided Cas9 nucleases. Nat Biotechnol, 31(9):827–832.
  2. Jiang W, Bikard D, et al. (2013) RNA-guided editing of bacterial genomes using CRISPR-Cas systems. Nat Biotechnol, 31(3):233–239.
  3. Zetsche B, Gootenberg JS, et al. (2015) Cpf1 is a single RNA-guided endonuclease of a class 2 CRISPR-Cas system. Cell, 163(3):759–771.
  4. Mean RJ, Pierides A, et al. (2004) Modification of the enzyme mismatch cleavage method using T7 endonuclease I and silver staining. Biotechniques, 36(5):758–760.
  5. Vouillot L, Thelie A, Pollet N. (2015) Comparison of T7E1 and Surveyor mismatch cleavage assays to detect mutations triggered by engineered nucleases. G3 (Bethesda), 5(3):407–415.
  6. Young M. (2017) A simple method to detect on-target editing or measure genome editing efficiency in CRISPR experiments. [Online] Coralville, Integrated DNA Technologies. [Accessed 29 Jun, 2017.]

lockup_1
lockup_2