It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing has revolutionized functional genomics in vertebrates. However, CRISPR/Cas9 edited F0 animals too often demonstrate variable phenotypic penetrance due to the mosaic nature of editing outcomes after double strand break (DSB) repair. Even with high efficiency levels of genome editing, phenotypes may be obscured by proportional presence of in-frame mutations that still produce functional protein. Recently, studies in cell culture systems have shown that the nature of CRISPR/Cas9-mediated mutations can be dependent on local sequence context and can be predicted by computational methods. Here, we demonstrate that similar approaches can be used to forecast CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing outcomes in Xenopus tropicalis, Xenopus laevis, and zebrafish. We show that a publicly available neural network previously trained in mouse embryonic stem cell cultures (InDelphi-mESC) is able to accurately predict CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing outcomes in early vertebrate embryos. Our observations can have direct implications for experiment design, allowing the selection of guide RNAs with predicted repair outcome signatures enriched towards frameshift mutations, allowing maximization of CRISPR/Cas9 phenotype penetrance in the F0 generation.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 Ghent University, Department of Biomedical Molecular Biology, Ghent (Zwijnaarde), Belgium (GRID:grid.5342.0) (ISNI:0000 0001 2069 7798); Cancer Research Institute Ghent, Ghent, Belgium (GRID:grid.5342.0)
2 Cincinnati Children’s Hospital, Division of Developmental Biology, Perinatal Institute, and Center for Stem Cell and Organoid Medicine (CuSTOM), Cincinnati, USA (GRID:grid.239573.9) (ISNI:0000 0000 9025 8099)
3 Ghent University, Department of Biomedical Molecular Biology, Ghent (Zwijnaarde), Belgium (GRID:grid.5342.0) (ISNI:0000 0001 2069 7798); Ghent University, Center for Medical Genetics, Department of Biomolecular Medicine, Ghent, Belgium (GRID:grid.5342.0) (ISNI:0000 0001 2069 7798)
4 Marine Biological Laboratory, National Xenopus Resource and Eugene Bell Center for Regenerative Biology and Tissue Engineering, Woods Hole, USA (GRID:grid.144532.5) (ISNI:000000012169920X)
5 Ghent University, Center for Medical Genetics, Department of Biomolecular Medicine, Ghent, Belgium (GRID:grid.5342.0) (ISNI:0000 0001 2069 7798)
6 Ghent University, Department of Biomedical Molecular Biology, Ghent (Zwijnaarde), Belgium (GRID:grid.5342.0) (ISNI:0000 0001 2069 7798); Cancer Research Institute Ghent, Ghent, Belgium (GRID:grid.5342.0); Ghent University, Center for Medical Genetics, Department of Biomolecular Medicine, Ghent, Belgium (GRID:grid.5342.0) (ISNI:0000 0001 2069 7798)