ReviewBiomolecules2020
Heavily Armed Ancestors: CRISPR Immunity and Applications in Archaea with a Comparative Analysis of CRISPR Types in Sulfolobales.
Review in Biomolecules, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Asgard archaea: have we found our microbial ancestors?The EMBO journal · 2026Review
- Diversity and evolution of archaeal immune strategies.Nucleic acids research · 2026Article
- Synthetic Biology of Plants and Microbes for Agriculture, Environment, and Future Applications.Chemical reviews · 2026Review
- Role of CRISPR in bioremediation of heavy metal(loid): a breakthrough in environmental biotechnology.World journal of microbiology & biotechnology · 2026Review
- Archaeal RNA processing and regulation: expanding the functional landscape.Microbiology and molecular biology reviews : MMBR · 2025Review
- The Archaeal Cell Cycle.Annual review of cell and developmental biology · 2024Review
- Teaching old dogs new tricks: genetic engineering methanogens.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2024Review
- Regulatory sequence-based discovery of anti-defense genes in archaeal viruses.Nature communications · 2024Article
- Article
- The influence of the copy number of invader on the fate of bacterial host cells in the antiviral defense by CRISPR-Cas10 DNases.Engineering microbiology · 2023Article
- Archaea as a Model System for Molecular Biology and Biotechnology.Biomolecules · 2023Review
- Application of the endogenous CRISPR-Cas type I-D system for genetic engineering in the thermoacidophilic archaeonFrontiers in microbiology · 2023Article
- The cell biology of archaea.Nature microbiology · 2022Review
- Molecular basis of cyclic tetra-oligoadenylate processing by small standalone CRISPR-Cas ring nucleases.Nucleic acids research · 2022Article
- Inactivation of Target RNA Cleavage of a III-B CRISPR-Cas System Induces Robust Autoimmunity inInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
- Structural basis of cyclic oligoadenylate binding to the transcription factor Csa3 outlines cross talk between type III and type I CRISPR systems.The Journal of biological chemistry · 2022Article
- Cyclic Tetra-Adenylate (cABiomolecules · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Prokaryotes are constantly coping with attacks by viruses in their natural environments and therefore have evolved an impressive array of defense systems. Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats (CRISPR) is an adaptive immune system found in the majority of archaea and about half of bacteria which stores pieces of infecting viral DNA as spacers in genomic CRISPR arrays to reuse them for specific virus destruction upon a second wave of infection. In detail, small CRISPR RNAs (crRNAs) are transcribed from CRISPR arrays and incorporated into type-specific CRISPR effector complexes which further degrade foreign nucleic acids complementary to the crRNA. This review gives an overview of CRISPR immunity to newcomers in the field and an update on CRISPR literature in archaea by comparing the functional mechanisms and abundances of the diverse CRISPR types. A bigger fraction is dedicated to the versatile and prevalent CRISPR type III systems, as tremendous progress has been made recently using archaeal models in discerning the controlled molecular mechanisms of their unique tripartite mode of action including RNA interference, DNA interference and the unique cyclic-oligoadenylate signaling that induces promiscuous RNA shredding by CARF-domain ribonucleases. The second half of the review spotlights CRISPR in archaea outlining seminal in vivo and in vitro studies in model organisms of the euryarchaeal and crenarchaeal phyla, including the application of CRISPR-Cas for genome editing and gene silencing. In the last section, a special focus is laid on members of the crenarchaeal hyperthermophilic order Sulfolobales by presenting a thorough comparative analysis about the distribution and abundance of CRISPR-Cas systems, including arrays and spacers as well as CRISPR-accessory proteins in all 53 genomes available to date. Interestingly, we find that CRISPR type III and the DNA-degrading CRISPR type I complexes co-exist in more than two thirds of these genomes. Furthermore, we identified ring nuclease candidates in all but two genomes and found that they generally co-exist with the above-mentioned CARF domain ribonucleases Csx1/Csm6. These observations, together with published literature allowed us to draft a working model of how CRISPR-Cas systems and accessory proteins cross talk to establish native CRISPR anti-virus immunity in a Sulfolobales cell.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.