Toolkit/CRISPR-dCas9
CRISPR-dCas9
Taxonomy: Mechanism Branch / Architecture. Workflows sit above the mechanism and technique branches rather than replacing them.
Summary
CRISPR-dCas9 was used in an optogenetic LITE configuration to control endogenous PIM1 transcription in U87 glioblastoma cells in vitro. In this study, the system mediated light-inducible, reversible transcriptional induction or repression rather than genome editing.
Usefulness & Problems
Why this is useful
This implementation is useful for temporally controlling endogenous gene expression with light in cultured glioblastoma cells. The study specifically demonstrates rapid and reversible regulation of PIM1 transcription, enabling perturbation of transcriptional state without describing DNA cleavage.
Source:
Here we manipulate PIM1 through an optogenetic system using a combination of CRISPR-dCas9 technology and light-inducible heterodimerizing proteins CRY2 and CIB1.
Problem solved
The tool addresses the problem of manipulating endogenous PIM1 transcription in a light-dependent manner in U87 cells. It also addresses guide selection by testing guide RNA efficiency with a NanoLuc luciferase reporter assay before downstream cell-based experiments.
Taxonomy & Function
Primary hierarchy
Mechanism Branch
Architecture: A composed arrangement of multiple parts that instantiates one or more mechanisms.
Mechanisms
HeterodimerizationTechniques
No technique tags yet.
Target processes
editingtranscriptionInput: Light
Implementation Constraints
The reported implementation used an optogenetic CRISPR-dCas9 LITE system in U87 glioblastoma cells in vitro to manipulate endogenous PIM1 transcription. Guide RNAs were pre-screened for efficiency using a NanoLuc luciferase reporter assay, but the evidence does not provide additional construct, delivery, or cofactor details.
The evidence is limited to a single reported in vitro application in U87 glioblastoma cells targeting PIM1. The provided evidence does not specify construct architecture, light wavelength, repression reversibility, quantitative effect sizes, or any genome-editing activity.
Validation
Observations
Inferred from claim c2 during normalization. In U87 cells, induction or repression of endogenous PIM1 transcription occurred within minutes of light exposure, could theoretically be graded with light dose, and induction was fully reversible after light retraction. Derived from claim c2. Section: abstract. Quoted text: Induction or repression of PIM1 endogenous transcription in U87 cells occurred within minutes of light exposure and the response could be theoretically graded with light dose, with the induction being fully reversible after light retraction.
Source:
Inferred from claim c2 during normalization. In U87 cells, induction or repression of endogenous PIM1 transcription occurred within minutes of light exposure, could theoretically be graded with light dose, and induction was fully reversible after light retraction. Derived from claim c2. Section: abstract. Quoted text: Induction or repression of PIM1 endogenous transcription in U87 cells occurred within minutes of light exposure and the response could be theoretically graded with light dose, with the induction being fully reversible after light retraction.
Source:
Inferred from claim c2 during normalization. In U87 cells, induction or repression of endogenous PIM1 transcription occurred within minutes of light exposure, could theoretically be graded with light dose, and induction was fully reversible after light retraction. Derived from claim c2. Section: abstract. Quoted text: Induction or repression of PIM1 endogenous transcription in U87 cells occurred within minutes of light exposure and the response could be theoretically graded with light dose, with the induction being fully reversible after light retraction.
Source:
Inferred from claim c2 during normalization. In U87 cells, induction or repression of endogenous PIM1 transcription occurred within minutes of light exposure, could theoretically be graded with light dose, and induction was fully reversible after light retraction. Derived from claim c2. Section: abstract. Quoted text: Induction or repression of PIM1 endogenous transcription in U87 cells occurred within minutes of light exposure and the response could be theoretically graded with light dose, with the induction being fully reversible after light retraction.
Source:
Inferred from claim c2 during normalization. In U87 cells, induction or repression of endogenous PIM1 transcription occurred within minutes of light exposure, could theoretically be graded with light dose, and induction was fully reversible after light retraction. Derived from claim c2. Section: abstract. Quoted text: Induction or repression of PIM1 endogenous transcription in U87 cells occurred within minutes of light exposure and the response could be theoretically graded with light dose, with the induction being fully reversible after light retraction.
Source:
Inferred from claim c2 during normalization. In U87 cells, induction or repression of endogenous PIM1 transcription occurred within minutes of light exposure, could theoretically be graded with light dose, and induction was fully reversible after light retraction. Derived from claim c2. Section: abstract. Quoted text: Induction or repression of PIM1 endogenous transcription in U87 cells occurred within minutes of light exposure and the response could be theoretically graded with light dose, with the induction being fully reversible after light retraction.
Source:
Inferred from claim c2 during normalization. In U87 cells, induction or repression of endogenous PIM1 transcription occurred within minutes of light exposure, could theoretically be graded with light dose, and induction was fully reversible after light retraction. Derived from claim c2. Section: abstract. Quoted text: Induction or repression of PIM1 endogenous transcription in U87 cells occurred within minutes of light exposure and the response could be theoretically graded with light dose, with the induction being fully reversible after light retraction.
Source:
Supporting Sources
Ranked Claims
Guide RNAs were tested for efficiency using a NanoLuc luciferase reporter assay before downstream cell-based experiments.
Guide RNAs were tested for optimal efficiencies using the NanoLuc® luciferase reporter assay.
Guide RNAs were tested for efficiency using a NanoLuc luciferase reporter assay before downstream cell-based experiments.
Guide RNAs were tested for optimal efficiencies using the NanoLuc® luciferase reporter assay.
Guide RNAs were tested for efficiency using a NanoLuc luciferase reporter assay before downstream cell-based experiments.
Guide RNAs were tested for optimal efficiencies using the NanoLuc® luciferase reporter assay.
Guide RNAs were tested for efficiency using a NanoLuc luciferase reporter assay before downstream cell-based experiments.
Guide RNAs were tested for optimal efficiencies using the NanoLuc® luciferase reporter assay.
Guide RNAs were tested for efficiency using a NanoLuc luciferase reporter assay before downstream cell-based experiments.
Guide RNAs were tested for optimal efficiencies using the NanoLuc® luciferase reporter assay.
Guide RNAs were tested for efficiency using a NanoLuc luciferase reporter assay before downstream cell-based experiments.
Guide RNAs were tested for optimal efficiencies using the NanoLuc® luciferase reporter assay.
Guide RNAs were tested for efficiency using a NanoLuc luciferase reporter assay before downstream cell-based experiments.
Guide RNAs were tested for optimal efficiencies using the NanoLuc® luciferase reporter assay.
In U87 cells, induction or repression of endogenous PIM1 transcription occurred within minutes of light exposure, could theoretically be graded with light dose, and induction was fully reversible after light retraction.
Induction or repression of PIM1 endogenous transcription in U87 cells occurred within minutes of light exposure and the response could be theoretically graded with light dose, with the induction being fully reversible after light retraction.
In U87 cells, induction or repression of endogenous PIM1 transcription occurred within minutes of light exposure, could theoretically be graded with light dose, and induction was fully reversible after light retraction.
Induction or repression of PIM1 endogenous transcription in U87 cells occurred within minutes of light exposure and the response could be theoretically graded with light dose, with the induction being fully reversible after light retraction.
In U87 cells, induction or repression of endogenous PIM1 transcription occurred within minutes of light exposure, could theoretically be graded with light dose, and induction was fully reversible after light retraction.
Induction or repression of PIM1 endogenous transcription in U87 cells occurred within minutes of light exposure and the response could be theoretically graded with light dose, with the induction being fully reversible after light retraction.
In U87 cells, induction or repression of endogenous PIM1 transcription occurred within minutes of light exposure, could theoretically be graded with light dose, and induction was fully reversible after light retraction.
Induction or repression of PIM1 endogenous transcription in U87 cells occurred within minutes of light exposure and the response could be theoretically graded with light dose, with the induction being fully reversible after light retraction.
In U87 cells, induction or repression of endogenous PIM1 transcription occurred within minutes of light exposure, could theoretically be graded with light dose, and induction was fully reversible after light retraction.
Induction or repression of PIM1 endogenous transcription in U87 cells occurred within minutes of light exposure and the response could be theoretically graded with light dose, with the induction being fully reversible after light retraction.
In U87 cells, induction or repression of endogenous PIM1 transcription occurred within minutes of light exposure, could theoretically be graded with light dose, and induction was fully reversible after light retraction.
Induction or repression of PIM1 endogenous transcription in U87 cells occurred within minutes of light exposure and the response could be theoretically graded with light dose, with the induction being fully reversible after light retraction.
In U87 cells, induction or repression of endogenous PIM1 transcription occurred within minutes of light exposure, could theoretically be graded with light dose, and induction was fully reversible after light retraction.
Induction or repression of PIM1 endogenous transcription in U87 cells occurred within minutes of light exposure and the response could be theoretically graded with light dose, with the induction being fully reversible after light retraction.
The study used an optogenetic CRISPR-dCas9 LITE system to manipulate PIM1 transcription in U87 glioblastoma cells in vitro.
Here we manipulate PIM1 through an optogenetic system using a combination of CRISPR-dCas9 technology and light-inducible heterodimerizing proteins CRY2 and CIB1.
The study used an optogenetic CRISPR-dCas9 LITE system to manipulate PIM1 transcription in U87 glioblastoma cells in vitro.
Here we manipulate PIM1 through an optogenetic system using a combination of CRISPR-dCas9 technology and light-inducible heterodimerizing proteins CRY2 and CIB1.
The study used an optogenetic CRISPR-dCas9 LITE system to manipulate PIM1 transcription in U87 glioblastoma cells in vitro.
Here we manipulate PIM1 through an optogenetic system using a combination of CRISPR-dCas9 technology and light-inducible heterodimerizing proteins CRY2 and CIB1.
The study used an optogenetic CRISPR-dCas9 LITE system to manipulate PIM1 transcription in U87 glioblastoma cells in vitro.
Here we manipulate PIM1 through an optogenetic system using a combination of CRISPR-dCas9 technology and light-inducible heterodimerizing proteins CRY2 and CIB1.
The study used an optogenetic CRISPR-dCas9 LITE system to manipulate PIM1 transcription in U87 glioblastoma cells in vitro.
Here we manipulate PIM1 through an optogenetic system using a combination of CRISPR-dCas9 technology and light-inducible heterodimerizing proteins CRY2 and CIB1.
The study used an optogenetic CRISPR-dCas9 LITE system to manipulate PIM1 transcription in U87 glioblastoma cells in vitro.
Here we manipulate PIM1 through an optogenetic system using a combination of CRISPR-dCas9 technology and light-inducible heterodimerizing proteins CRY2 and CIB1.
The study used an optogenetic CRISPR-dCas9 LITE system to manipulate PIM1 transcription in U87 glioblastoma cells in vitro.
Here we manipulate PIM1 through an optogenetic system using a combination of CRISPR-dCas9 technology and light-inducible heterodimerizing proteins CRY2 and CIB1.
Approval Evidence
Here we manipulate PIM1 through an optogenetic system using a combination of CRISPR-dCas9 technology
Source:
In U87 cells, induction or repression of endogenous PIM1 transcription occurred within minutes of light exposure, could theoretically be graded with light dose, and induction was fully reversible after light retraction.
Induction or repression of PIM1 endogenous transcription in U87 cells occurred within minutes of light exposure and the response could be theoretically graded with light dose, with the induction being fully reversible after light retraction.
Source:
The study used an optogenetic CRISPR-dCas9 LITE system to manipulate PIM1 transcription in U87 glioblastoma cells in vitro.
Here we manipulate PIM1 through an optogenetic system using a combination of CRISPR-dCas9 technology and light-inducible heterodimerizing proteins CRY2 and CIB1.
Source:
Comparisons
Source-backed strengths
In U87 cells, endogenous PIM1 induction or repression occurred within minutes of light exposure and induction was reported to be fully reversible after light retraction. The study also states that the response could theoretically be graded with light dose, supporting tunable transcriptional control.
Ranked Citations
- 1.