2019
DOI: 10.7554/elife.41439
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Molecular safeguarding of CRISPR gene drive experiments

Abstract: CRISPR-based homing gene drives have sparked both enthusiasm and deep concerns due to their potential for genetically altering entire species. This raises the question about our ability to prevent the unintended spread of such drives from the laboratory into a natural population. Here, we experimentally demonstrate the suitability of synthetic target site drives as well as split drives as flexible safeguarding strategies for gene drive experiments by showing that their performance closely resembles that of sta… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

9
122
7

Year Published

2019
2019
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
1
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 109 publications
(138 citation statements)
references
References 33 publications
(57 reference statements)
9
122
7
Order By: Relevance
“…This indicates that any contribution of deposited nuclease to homing of these alleles in the germline is at best minimal. This is in contrast to reports in Drosophila where use of the nanos promoter can lead to 'shadow drive' in which perduring maternally deposited Cas9 can cause in homing in the germline even in the absence of genetically encoded Cas9 [29,30].…”
Section: New Gene Drive Constructs Confer Significantly Less Fecunditcontrasting
confidence: 84%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…This indicates that any contribution of deposited nuclease to homing of these alleles in the germline is at best minimal. This is in contrast to reports in Drosophila where use of the nanos promoter can lead to 'shadow drive' in which perduring maternally deposited Cas9 can cause in homing in the germline even in the absence of genetically encoded Cas9 [29,30].…”
Section: New Gene Drive Constructs Confer Significantly Less Fecunditcontrasting
confidence: 84%
“…The propensity for maternal and paternal deposition of the nuclease under control of the promoters of the drive constructs is an important variable that we have shown can vary greatly. There is also the possibility that both the end-joining/HDR ratio and the magnitude of parental effect might additionally be locus dependent to some extent [12,29]. Indeed when the zpg promoter was used to control expression of a homing based gene drive at the doublesex locus we noticed a paternal effect contributing to reduced fecundity that was not observed here [8].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 89%
“…In fact, proof-of-concept CRISPR-based homing gene drives have recently been developed in several organisms including yeast (29)(30)(31)(32), flies (33)(34)(35)(36)(37)(38), mice (39), and two malaria vector species, Anopheles gambiae (40)(41)(42) and Anopheles stephensi (43).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…2The gRNA-only gene drive (gRNA GD) is based on CopyCat gRNA elements 19 that are capable of allelic conversion in the presence of a separate genetic source of Cas9. Since only the gRNA element is propagated in this case, its spread is regulated by the presence of a separate, static Cas9 transgene 10,[19][20][21] . The use of a full GD is causing concern to the scientific community as an accidental release could spread unchecked 15 .…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%