MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3147518691

Anti-CRISPRs and CRISPR-Cas: Characterization and Biotechnology

2019· dissertation· en· W3147518691 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace (University of Toronto) · 2019
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCRISPR and Genetic Engineering
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCRISPRBiotechnologyBiologyComputational biologyGeneticsGene
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Bacteria and phages (bacterial specific viruses) have been undergoing an evolutionary arms race for billions of years, whereby bacteria evolve mechanisms to inhibit phage infection and phages evolve mechanisms to evade bacterial defenses. Consequently, there are several mechanisms used by bacteria to inhibit phage infection. These include inhibiting phage adsorption, restriction modification systems, and the more recently discovered CRISPR-Cas immune systems. Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeat (CRISPR) loci together with their accompanying CRISPR-associated (Cas) genes form the only known bacterial adaptive defense mechanism that effectively protects against the transfer of mobile genetic elements (MGEs) such as bacteriophages. CRISPR-Cas systems use an RNA-guided nuclease to bind and cleave foreign DNA, presenting a powerful barrier to phage infection. This strong evolutionary barrier led phages to evolve small protein inhibitors of CRISPR-Cas called anti-CRISPRs. In the first section of my work, I characterize the structure, function, and mechanism of action for an anti-CRISPR that inhibits the type I-E CRISPR-Cas system of Pseudomonas aeruginosa strain 4386. I show that beyond simply inhibiting the CRISPR-Cas system, anti-CRISPR AcrIE2 converts the CRISPR-Cas system from a DNA degradation complex to a transcriptional regulator. This modification suggests that anti-CRISPR proteins may function to do more than simply inhibit CRISPR-Cas targeting. Although CRISPR-Cas systems are a manifestation of the evolutionary arms race between bacteria and phages, CRISPR-Cas systems have also been used for genome editing in various organisms for research purposes. Considering this previous work, I developed a type I-E and type II-A CRISPR-Cas genome editing system to manipulate the genome of different P. aeruginosa strains for research. In the second section of my work, I discuss the methods I developed to efficiently edit the genome of P. aeruginosa. My work on genome editing in P. aeruginosa has and will allow for the development of new P. aeruginosa mutants for research purposes. Collectively, my work provides insight into the evolutionary interactions between phages and bacteria in the context of CRISPR-Cas and anti-CRISPRs. Moreover, it provides a genome editing tool for future P. aeruginosa studies.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.242 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace (University of Toronto)→Same topicCRISPR and Genetic Engineering→French-language works237,207→