Research PaperNo Access

Prokaryote autoimmunity in the context of self-targeting by CRISPR-Cas systems

Department of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Minnesota, 4-192 Keller Hall, 200 Union Street SE, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455, USA

E-mail Address: lensk010@umn.edu

Search for more papers by this author

and

Daniel Boley

Department of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Minnesota, 4-192 Keller Hall, 200 Union Street SE, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455, USA

E-mail Address: boley@umn.edu

Search for more papers by this author

https://doi.org/10.1142/S021972002050033XCited by:0 (Source: Crossref)

Abstract

Prokaryote adaptive immunity (CRISPR-Cas systems) can be a threat to its carriers. We analyze the risks of autoimmune reactions related to adaptive immunity in prokaryotes by computational methods. We found important differences between bacteria and archaea with respect to autoimmunity potential. According to the results of our analysis, CRISPR-Cas systems in bacteria are more prone to self-targeting even though they possess fewer spacers per organism on average than archaea. The results of our study provide opportunities to use self-targeting in prokaryotes for biological and medical applications.

Keywords:

References

1. Ishino Y, Krupovic M, Forterre P, History of CRISPR-Cas from encounter with a mysterious repeated sequence to genome editing technology, J Bacteriol 200(7) :e00580-17, 2018. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
2. Barrangou R, Fremaux C, Deveau H, Richards M, Boyaval P, Moineau S, Romero DA, Horvath P, CRISPR provides acquired resistance against viruses in prokaryotes, Science 315 :1709–1712, 2007, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1138140. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
3. Pickar-Oliver A, Gersbach CA, The next generation of CRISPR–Cas technologies and applications, Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 20(8) :490–507, 2019. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
4. Koonin EV, Open questions: CRISPR biology. BMC Biol 16(1) :1–3, 2018. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
5. McGinn J, Marraffini LA, Molecular mechanisms of CRISPR–Cas spacer acquisition, Nat Rev Microbiol 17(1) :7–12, 2019. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
6. Nasko DJ, Ferrell BD, Moore RM, Bhavsar JD, Polson SW, Wommack KE, CRISPR spacers indicate preferential matching of specific virioplankton genes, mBio, 10(2) :e02651-18, 2019. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
7. Nuñez JK, Harrington LB, Kranzusch PJ, Engelman A, Doudna JA, Foreign DNA capture during CRISPR–Cas adaptive immunity, Nature, 527(7579) :535, 2015. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
8. Oliveira PH, Touchon, M, Cury J, Rocha EP, The chromosomal organization of horizontal gene transfer in bacteria, Nat Commun 8(1) :1–11, 2017. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
9. Edgar R, Qimron U, The escherichia coli CRISPR system protects from $λ$ lysogenization, lysogens, and prophage induction, J Bacteriol 192(23) :6291–6294, 2010. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
10. Hille F, Richter H, Wong SP, Bratovič M, Ressel S, Charpentier E, The biology of CRISPR-Cas: Backward and forward, Cell, 172(6) :1239–1259, 2018. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
11. Stern A, Keren L, Wurtzel O, Amitai G, Sorek R, Self-targeting by CRISPR: Gene regulation or autoimmunity? Trends Gen 26(8) :335–340, 2010. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
12. Grissa I, Vergnaud G, Pourcel C, The CRISPRdb database and tools to display CRISPRs and to generate dictionaries of spacers and repeats, BMC Bioinform 8(1) :172, 2007. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
13. Altschul SF, Madden TL, Schäffer AA, Zhang J, Zhang Z, Miller W, Lipman DJ, Gapped BLAST and PSI-BLAST: A new generation of protein database search programs, Nucleic Acids Res 25(17) :3389–3402, 1997. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
14. Gomaa AA, Klumpe HE, Luo ML, Selle K, Barrangou R, Beisel CL Programmable removal of bacterial strains by use of genome-targeting CRISPR-Cas systems, MBio, 5(1) :e00928-13, 2014. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
15. Samai P, Pyenson N, Jiang W, Goldberg GW, Hatoum-Aslan A, Marraffini LA, Co-transcriptional DNA and RNA cleavage during type III CRISPR-Cas immunity, Cell, 161(5) :1164–1174, 2015. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
16. Georg J, Hess WR, Widespread antisense transcription in prokaryotes, Regulating RNA Bacteria Archaea, 29 :191–210, 2018. Crossref, Google Scholar
17. Rauch BJ, Silvis MR, Hultquist JF, Waters CS, McGregor MJ, Krogan NJ, Bondy-Denomy J, Inhibition of CRISPR-Cas9 with bacteriophage proteins. Cell, 168(1–2): 150–158, 2017. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
18. Watters KE, Fellmann C, Bai HB, Ren SM, Doudna JA, Systematic discovery of natural CRISPR-Cas12a inhibitors, Science, 362(6411) :236–239, 2018. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
19. Pourcel C, Touchon M, Villeriot N, Vernadet JP, Couvin D, Toffano-Nioche C, Vergnaud G, CRISPRCasdb a successor of CRISPRdb containing CRISPR arrays and cas genes from complete genome sequences, and tools to download and query lists of repeats and spacers, Nucleic Acids Res 48(D1) :D535–D544, 2020. Medline, Google Scholar
20. Liu M, Li X, Xie Y, Bi D, Sun J, Li J, Tai C, Deng Z, Ou HY, ICEberg 2.0: An updated database of bacterial integrative and conjugative elements, Nucleic Acids Res 47(D1) :D660–D665, 2019. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
21. Wimmer F, Beisel CL, CRISPR-Cas systems and the paradox of self-targeting spacers, Front Microbiol 10 :3078, 2020. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar