ArticleGenome biology and evolution2025
Acquisition of Spacers from Foreign Prokaryotic Genomes by CRISPR-Cas Systems in Natural Environments.
Article in Genome biology and evolution, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR) and CRISPR-associated (Cas) systems of bacteria and archaea provide immunities against mobile genetic elements, like viruses. In addition, protospacer analyses revealed a very specific acquisition of CRISPR spacers derived from genomes of related species or from closely interacting episymbiont genomes as recently shown for subsurface archaea. However, the origin of most of the spacers that can be found in CRISPR-Cas systems from natural environments has not been deciphered. Here, by analyzing CRISPR-Cas systems of metagenome-assembled genomes (MAGs) from two subsurface environments spanning more than 1 Tb of sequencing data, we show that a substantial proportion of CRISPR spacers are acquired from DNA of other prokaryotes inhabiting the same environment. As such, we found that the number of respective spacers can be up to three times higher than the number of self-targeting spacers. Statistical analyses demonstrated that the acquisition of CRISPR spacers from other prokaryotic genomes is partly explained by the relative abundance of the MAG containing the protospacer, as well as by other factors, such as the total number of CRISPR arrays present in a MAG with the respective spacers. Further, we found that spacer acquisition from foreign prokaryotic DNA occurs in almost all types of CRISPR-Cas systems, but shows preferences for subtypes of CRISPR-Cas systems that differ across the investigated ecosystems. Taken together, our results shed new light on the diversity of CRISPR spacers in natural microbial communities and provide an explanation for some of the many unmatched spacers in public databases.
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.