Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25981466›Full record

ReviewMethods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.)2015

Annotation and Classification of CRISPR-Cas Systems.

Kira S Makarova, Eugene V Koonin

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 208 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
208citing papers in PubMed
33.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

208 citing papers in PubMed, 433 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Quinolone Resistance and Zoonotic Potential ofAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Whole-genome sequencing ofMicrobial genomics · 2025
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

148 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Kira S MakarovaNational Center for Biotechnology Information, National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, 8600 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, MD, 20894, USA, makarova@ncbi.nlm.nih.gov.
Eugene V Koonin
National Institutes of Health · US

Funding

Comparative Analysis Of Completely Sequenced GenomesZIALM000073 · NLM · NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE · PI KOONIN, EUGENE V · 2009 to 2025
$43.1M
Finding Protein Sequence Motifs--Methods And ApplicationsZIALM000061 · NLM · NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE · PI KOONIN, EUGENE V · 2009 to 2025
$10.6M
FINDING PROTEIN SEQUENCE MOTIFS--METHODS AND APPLICATIONSZ01LM000061 · NLM · NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE · PI KOONIN, EUGENE V · 1994 to 2008
$645k
Intramural NIH HHS Z01 LM000061
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR)-Cas (CRISPR-associated proteins) is a prokaryotic adaptive immune system that is represented in most archaea and many bacteria. Among the currently known prokaryotic defense systems, the CRISPR-Cas genomic loci show unprecedented complexity and diversity. Classification of CRISPR-Cas variants that would capture their evolutionary relationships to the maximum possible extent is essential for comparative genomic and functional characterization of this theoretically and practically important system of adaptive immunity. To this end, a multipronged approach has been developed that combines phylogenetic analysis of the conserved Cas proteins with comparison of gene repertoires and arrangements in CRISPR-Cas loci. This approach led to the current classification of CRISPR-Cas systems into three distinct types and ten subtypes for each of which signature genes have been identified. Comparative genomic analysis of the CRISPR-Cas systems in new archaeal and bacterial genomes performed over the 3 years elapsed since the development of this classification makes it clear that new types and subtypes of CRISPR-Cas need to be introduced. Moreover, this classification system captures only part of the complexity of CRISPR-Cas organization and evolution, due to the intrinsic modularity and evolutionary mobility of these immunity systems, resulting in numerous recombinant variants. Moreover, most of the cas genes evolve rapidly, complicating the family assignment for many Cas proteins and the use of family profiles for the recognition of CRISPR-Cas subtype signatures. Further progress in the comparative analysis of CRISPR-Cas systems requires integration of the most sensitive sequence comparison tools, protein structure comparison, and refined approaches for comparison of gene neighborhoods.

Indexed as

Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic RepeatsCRISPR-Associated ProteinsGenomicsImmunityMolecular Sequence AnnotationPhylogenyTerminology as TopicCRISPR-Associated Proteins

Identifiers

PMID25981466
PMCPMC5901762
OpenAlexW2304692062

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.