ArticleCells2024
A Comparison of Two Versions of the CRISPR-Sirius System for the Live-Cell Visualization of the Borders of Topologically Associating Domains.
Article in Cells, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Differential regulation of mesoscale chromosome conformations in osteoblasts and osteosarcoma.Genome biology · 2025Article
- The Influence of Cohesin on the Short-Scale Dynamics of Intact and Damaged Chromatin in Different Phases of the Cell Cycle.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
In recent years, various technologies have emerged for the imaging of chromatin loci in living cells via catalytically inactive Cas9 (dCas9). These technologies facilitate a deeper understanding of the mechanisms behind the chromatin dynamics and provide valuable kinetic data that could not have previously been obtained via FISH applied to fixed cells. However, such technologies are relatively complicated, as they involve the expression of several chimeric proteins as well as sgRNAs targeting the visualized loci, a process that entails many technical subtleties. Therefore, the effectiveness in visualizing a specific target locus may be quite low. In this study, we directly compared two versions of a previously published CRISPR-Sirius method based on the use of sgRNAs containing eight MS2 or PP7 stem loops and the expression of MCP or PCP fused to fluorescent proteins. We assessed the visualization efficiency for several unique genomic loci by comparing the two approaches in delivering sgRNA genes (transient transfection and lentiviral transduction), as well as two CRISPR-Sirius versions (with PCP and with MCP). The efficiency of visualization varied among the loci, and not all loci could be visualized. However, the MCP-sfGFP version provided more efficient visualization in terms of the number of cells with signals than PCP-sfGFP for all tested loci. We also showed that lentiviral transduction was more efficient in locus imaging than transient transfection for both CRISPR-Sirius systems. Most of the target loci in our study were located at the borders of topologically associating domains, and we defined a set of TAD borders that could be effectively visualized using the MCP-sfGFP version of the CRISPR-Sirius system. Altogether, our study validates the use of the CRISPR-Sirius technology for live-cell visualization and highlights various technical details that should be considered when using this method.
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.