Daisy-chain gene drives for the alteration of local populations

Abstract

If they are able to spread in wild populations, CRISPR-based gene-drive elements would provide new ways to address ecological problems by altering the traits of wild organisms, but the potential for uncontrolled spread tremendously complicates ethical development and use. Here, we detail a self-exhausting form of CRISPR-based drive system comprising genetic elements arranged in a daisy chain such that each drives the next. “Daisy-drive” systems can locally duplicate any effect achievable by using an equivalent self-propagating drive system, but their capacity to spread is limited by the successive loss of nondriving elements from one end of the chain. Releasing daisy-drive organisms constituting a small fraction of the local wild population can drive a useful genetic element nearly to local fixation for a wide range of fitness parameters without self-propagating spread. We additionally report numerous highly active guide RNA sequences sharing minimal homology that may enable evolutionarily stable daisy drive as well as self-propagating CRISPR-based gene drive. Especially when combined with threshold dependence, daisy drives could simplify decision-making and promote ethical use by enabling local communities to decide whether, when, and how to alter local ecosystems.

Full text

Its licence does not allow us to show the full text. Read it at PubMed Central:

References 42

1. 1.
   Concerning RNA-guided gene drives for the alteration of wild populations · 2014

   No notice
2. 2.

   Burt A. Site-specific selfish genes as tools for the control and genetic engineering of natural populations. Proc. R. Soc. London Ser B Biol Sci. 2003;270:921-928.

   Not in our library10.1098/rspb.2002.2319

3. 3.

   DiCarlo JE, Chavez A, Dietz SL, Esvelt KM, Church GM. Safeguarding CRISPR-Cas9 gene drives in yeast. Nat Biotechnol. 2015;33:1250-1255.

   Not in our library10.1038/nbt.3412

4. 4.

   Gantz VM, Bier E. The mutagenic chain reaction: A method for converting heterozygous to homozygous mutations. Science. 2015;348:442-444.

   Not in our library10.1126/science.aaa5945

5. 5.
   Novel CRISPR/Cas9 gene drive constructs reveal insights into mechanisms of resistance allele formation and drive efficiency in genetically diverse populations · 2017

   No notice
6. 6.

   Gantz VM, et al. Highly efficient Cas9-mediated gene drive for population modification of the malaria vector mosquito Anopheles stephensi. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2015;112:E6736-E6743.

   Not in our library10.1073/pnas.1521077112

7. 7.
   A CRISPR-Cas9 gene drive system targeting female reproduction in the malaria mosquito vector Anopheles gambiae · 2016

   No notice
8. 8.

   Marshall JM. The effect of gene drive on containment of transgenic mosquitoes. J Theor Biol. 2009;258:250-265.

   Not in our library10.1016/j.jtbi.2009.01.031

9. 9.

   Noble C, Adlam B, Church GM, Esvelt KM, Nowak MA. Current CRISPR gene drive systems are likely to be highly invasive in wild populations. eLife. 2018;7:e33423.

   Not in our library10.7554/elife.33423

10. 10.

    Esvelt KM, Gemmell NJ. Conservation demands safe gene drive. PLoS Biol. 2017;15:e2003850.

    Not in our library10.1371/journal.pbio.2003850

11. 11.

    Gould F, Huang Y, Legros M, Lloyd AL. A killer-rescue system for self-limiting gene drive of anti-pathogen constructs. Proc. R. Soc. London Biol Sci. 2008;275:2823-2829.

    Not in our library10.1098/rspb.2008.0846

12. 12.

    Rasgon JL. Multi-locus assortment (MLA) for transgene dispersal and elimination in mosquito populations. PLoS One. 2009;4:e5833.

    Not in our library10.1371/journal.pone.0005833

13. 13.

    Curtis CF. Possible use of translocations to fix desirable genes in insect pest populations. Nature. 1968;218:368-369.

    Not in our library10.1038/218368a0

14. 14.

    Akbari OS, et al. A synthetic gene drive system for local, reversible modification and suppression of insect populations. Curr Biol. 2013;23:671-677.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.cub.2013.02.059

15. 15.

    Reeves RG, et al. First steps towards underdominant genetic transformation of insect populations. PLoS One. 2014;9:e97557.

    Not in our library10.1371/journal.pone.0097557

16. 16.

    Akbari BOS, et al. Safeguarding gene drive experiments in the laboratory. Science. 2015;349:927-929.

    Not in our library10.1126/science.aac7932

17. 17.

    Noble C, Olejarz J, Esvelt KM, Church GM, Nowak MA. Evolutionary dynamics of CRISPR gene drives. Sci Adv. 2017;3:e1601964.

    Not in our library10.1126/sciadv.1601964

18. 18.

    Unckless RL, Clark AG, Messer PW. Evolution of resistance against CRISPR/Cas9 gene drive. Genetics. 2017;205:827-841.

    Not in our library10.1534/genetics.116.197285

19. 19.

    Champer J, et al.

    Not in our library10.1073/pnas.1720354115

20. 20.

    Ostrov N, et al. Design, synthesis, and testing toward a 57-codon genome. Science. 2016;353:819-822.

    Not in our library10.1126/science.aaf3639

21. 21.
    Overcoming evolved resistance to population-suppressing homing-based gene drives · 2017

    No notice
22. 22.

    Marrelli MT, et al. Mosquito transgenesis: What is the fitness cost? Trends Parasitol. 2006;22:197-202.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.pt.2006.03.004

23. 23.

    Harvey-Samuel T, Ant T, Gong H, Morrison NI, Alphey L. Population-level effects of fitness costs associated with repressible female-lethal transgene insertions in two pest insects. Evol Appl. 2014;7:597-606.

    Not in our library10.1111/eva.12159

24. 24.

    Slaymaker IM, et al. Rationally engineered Cas9 nucleases with improved specificity. Science. 2015;351:84-88.

    Not in our library10.1126/science.aad5227

25. 25.

    Kleinstiver BP, et al. High-fidelity CRISPR–Cas9 nucleases with no detectable genome-wide off-target effects. Nature. 2016;529:490-495.

    Not in our library10.1038/nature16526

26. 26.

    Wyss JH. Screwworm eradication in the Americas. Ann New York Acad Sci. 2006;916:186-193.

    Not in our library10.1111/j.1749-6632.2000.tb05289.x

27. 27.

    Port F, Chen HM, Lee T, Bullock SL. Optimized CRISPR/Cas tools for efficient germline and somatic genome engineering in Drosophila. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2014;111:E2967-E2976.

    Not in our library10.1073/pnas.1405500111

28. 28.

    Ranganathan V, Wahlin K, Maruotti J, Zack DJ. Expansion of the CRISPR–Cas9 genome targeting space through the use of H1 promoter-expressed guide RNAs. Nat Commun. 2014;5:4516.

    Not in our library10.1038/ncomms5516

29. 29.

    Mefferd AL, Kornepati AV, Bogerd HP, Kennedy EM, Cullen BR. Expression of CRISPR/Cas single guide RNAs using small tRNA promoters. RNA. 2015;21:1683-1689.

    Not in our library10.1261/rna.051631.115

30. 30.

    Xie K, Minkenberg B, Yang Y. Boosting CRISPR/Cas9 multiplex editing capability with the endogenous tRNA-processing system. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2015;112:3570-3575.

    Not in our library10.1073/pnas.1420294112

31. 31.

    Port F, Bullock SL. Augmenting CRISPR applications in Drosophila with tRNA-flanked sgRNAs. Nat Methods. 2016;13:852-854.

    Not in our library10.1038/nmeth.3972

32. 32.

    Yan Q, et al. Multiplex CRISPR/Cas9-based genome engineering enhanced by Drosha-mediated sgRNA-shRNA structure. Sci Rep. 2016;6:38970.

    Not in our library10.1038/srep38970

33. 33.

    Wang J, et al. The gRNA-miRNA-gRNA ternary cassette combining CRISPR/Cas9 with RNAi approach strongly inhibits hepatitis B virus replication. Theranostics. 2017;7:3090-3105.

    Not in our library10.7150/thno.18114

34. 34.

    Xie C, et al. SgRNA expression of CRIPSR-Cas9 system based on MiRNA polycistrons as a versatile tool to manipulate multiple and tissue-specific genome editing. Sci Rep. 2017;7:5795.

    Not in our library10.1038/s41598-017-06216-w

35. 35.

    Esvelt KM, et al. Orthogonal Cas9 proteins for RNA-guided gene regulation and editing. Nat Methods. 2013;10:1116-1121.

    Not in our library10.1038/nmeth.2681

36. 36.
    Optimizing sgRNA structure to improve CRISPR-Cas9 knockout efficiency · 2015

    No notice
37. 37.

    Simoni A, et al. Development of synthetic selfish elements based on modular nucleases in Drosophila melanogaster. Nucleic Acids Res. 2014;42:7461-7472.

    Not in our library10.1093/nar/gku387

38. 38.

    Min J, Noble C, Najjar D, Esvelt K.

    Not in our library

39. 39.

    Burt A, Deredec A.

    Not in our library10.1098/rspb.2018.0776

40. 40.

    Wu B, Luo L, Gao XJ. Cas9-triggered chain ablation of Cas9 as a gene drive brake. Nat Biotechnol. 2016;34:137-138.

    Not in our library10.1038/nbt.3444

Cited by papers we hold 2

• Combating mosquito-borne diseases using genetic control technologies · 2021
  No notice
• Pathway to Deployment of Gene Drive Mosquitoes as a Potential Biocontrol Tool for Elimination of Malaria in Sub-Saharan Africa: Recommendations of a Scientific Working Group † · 2018
  No notice

Reads

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.