CRISPR Handbook
CRISPR Handbook
CRISPR Handbook
www.GenScript.com
GenScript USA Inc.
860 Centennial Ave.
Piscataway, NJ 08854 USA
Phone: 1-732-885-9188
Toll-Free: 1-877-436-7274
Fax: 1-732-885-5878
Table of Contents
CRISPR Reagents and Services
from GenScript
gRNA sequence databases
Validated gRNA sequences for ecient,
specic targeting of WTCas9 or SAM
CRISPR Plasmids
Validated all-in-one, dual, non-viral and
viral vectors for Cas9 & gRNA constructs
2
4
7
8
10
11
12
13
14
16
17
21
22
24
25
25
Future of CRISPR
28
References
29
www.genscript.com/CRISPR-handbook.html
www.genscript.com
viral DNA
www.genscript.com
Cas1/Cas2
repeat + spacer
TracrRNA Cas complex
crRNA-tracrRNACas complex
+
immunity
immunization
viral DNA
cleavage
viral DNA
early 2000s, the signicance of the CRISPR as a defense strategy in bacteria was
coming to light.
By 2010, three CRISPR systems had been identied in bacteria: Type I, II and III.
Type II CRISPR interference, because of its relative simplicity, would eventually
become the system adapted for genome editing in mammalian cells (Sapranauskas et al., 2011) (Figure 1). CRISPR-based immunity is composed of two main
phases: immunization and immunity. In the immunization phase, Cas proteins
(Cas1/Cas2) form a complex that cleaves the foreign, viral DNA (Jiang et al.,
2015). This foreign DNA is then incorporated into the bacterial CRISPR loci as
repeat-spacer units. In the immunity phase, following re-infection, the repeat
spacer units are transcribed to form pre-CRISPR RNA (pre-crRNA). The Cas9
endonuclease and trans-activating crRNA (tracrRNA, which helps guide Cas9 to
crRNA) then bind to the pre-crRNA. A mature crRNA-Cas9-tracrRNA complex is
formed following cleavage by RNA polymerase. This crRNA-Cas9-tracrRNA
complex is essential to target and destroy the foreign DNA.
www.genscript.com
which recognizes 34-bp loci called loxP (Sauer et al., 1998). Recombination at
these sites leads to knock-out of desired genes, which has been particularly
useful for the development of transgenic mouse models. While easier to control
than HR, the Cre-lox system was less ecient as the genetic distance increased
between loxP sites (Zheng et al., 2000).
1989
1998
2009
Discovery of zinc-nger
proteins that can target
specic DNA sequences
(Beerli et al).
HR-mediated
targeting
Zinc-nger nucleases
(ZFNs)
1992
2000
Cre-lox
Bacterial CRISPR/Cas
Transcription-like eector
nucleases (TALENs)
CRISPR/Cas genome
editing
First demonstration that
the CRISPR/Cas system can
be used for mammalian
cell genome editing (Mali
et al, Cong et al).
As the need for relevant animal disease models rose, so did the need for
sophisticated and more ecient genome editing tools. The Cre-lox technology
became one of the most eective gene editing tools in the early 1990s, allowing
scientists to control gene expression both spatially and temporally (Utomo et al.,
1999, Orban et al., 1992). Cre-lox uses a site-specic DNA endonuclease Cre,
www.genscript.com
Donor DNA
Precise alteration/correction
Knock-out
Knock-in
2013
genes in mouse embryonic stem cells to generate knock-in (KI) and knock-out
(KO) cells (Capecchi et al., 1989) (Figure 2). Since HR occurs rather infrequently in
mammalian cells, the recombination frequency was low (1 in every 3104 cells);
however, this work provided new ideas for how genes can be targeted and
altered in specic ways.
Double-Strand Break
Since HR alone rarely results in gene integration in mammalian cells, the introduction
of double strand breaks (DSB) into the genome can increase recombination
signicantly (Choulika et al., 1995). DSB resolution occurs by either HDR or
error-prone nonhomologous end joining (NHEJ) (Figure 3). If there is no donor
DNA present, resolution will occur by NHEJ, resulting in insertion/deletions (indels)
that will ultimately knock-out gene function. Alternatively, if donor DNA
sequences are available, the DSBs will be repaired by HDR, resulting in gene
knock-in (Bibikova et al., 2002). Combined, these strategies represented new and
more eective approaches for modifying the eukaryotic genome (Hsu et al.,
2014).
www.genscript.com
SV40
Target
gRNA scaold
Cas 9
The adaptation of CRISPR for mammalian cells has revolutionized genome editing
not only for its accuracy but also for its ease of use in any lab regardless of
molecular biology expertise. Unlike ZF and TALE nucleases, CRISPR/Cas does not
require protein engineering for every gene being targeted. The CRISPR system
only requires a few simple DNA constructs to encode the gRNA and Cas9, and, if
knock-in is being performed, the donor template for HR. In addition, multiple
genes can be edited simultaneously. The table below summarizes the key
dierences and advantages between the most common DSB-mediated genome
editing technologies.
TK pA
+
U6
TTTTTT
TALEN
(transcription
activator-like eector
nucleases)
Protein: DNA
Protein: DNA
Construct
Proteins containing
DNA-binding domains
that recognize specic
DNA sequences down
to the base pair
www.genscript.com
(gRNA-Cas9): DNA
PAM
gRNA
The use of CRISPR/Cas as a gene editing tool began in 2013, with the observation
that type II CRISPR systems from S. Thermophilus and S. Pyogenes (SpCas) could
be engineered to edit mammalian genomes (Mali et al., 2013, Cong et al., 2013).
To further adapt the system for mammalian cells, a two-vector system was
optimized (Mali et al., 2013). The two major components include (1) a Cas9
endonuclease and (2) the crRNA-tracrRNA complex; when co-expressed, they
form a complex that is recruited to the target DNA sequence. The crRNA and
tracrRNA can be combined to form a chimeric guide RNA (gRNA) with the same
function to guide Cas9 to target gene sequences (Jinek et al., 2012). These
components can then be delivered to mammalian cells via transfection or
lentiviral transduction.
CRISPR/Cas
Target
Target DNA
Target Sequence
ZFN
(zinc nger
nucleases)
Design
feasibility
References
Easy:
- all-in-one
gRNA-Cas9 vector
system
- multigene editing
is feasible
Dicult:
-Need a customized protein for each gene
sequence
-Low delivery eciency
Moscou and
Bogdanove, 2009
Boch et al., 2009
Gaj et al., 2013
www.genscript.com
www.genscript.com
which can potentially decrease the frequency of unwanted indel mutations from
o-target DSBs.
Figure 5. Increasing specicity through paired guides: Nickase or RFN
Double-Nicking Cas9n D10A mutant
sgRNA 1
Cas9n
Target 2
5
3
3
5
Target 1
sgRNA 2
5 overhang
5
3
Fok 1
Fok 1
3
5
gRNA 2
Another strategy to improve specicity has focused on the gRNA itself. Although
20 bp regions were initially used, it was observed that mismatches were tolerated
most often in the 3 end of the gRNA, and some wondered if these nal nucleotides
were necessary. Researchers in the Joung lab found that gRNAs with 17 or 18
nucleotides of complementarity functioned as eciently as (or, in some cases,
more eciently than) 20 bp sequences to introduce mutations by means of NHEJ
or HDR at on-target sites, and they showed reduced mutagenic eects at closely
matched o-target sites (Fu et al., 2014). These truncated gRNAs (tru-gRNAs) can
be used with WT SpCas9 or in combination with the RNA-Fok1 nuclease described
above (Wyvekens et al., 2015).
O-target binding of Cas9 throughout the genome has been observed to be
concentration-dependent (Wu et al., 2014) This nding spurred investigations of
whether the frequency of o-target cleavage events could be reduced by delivering
a short-lived Cas9 protein rather than plasmid that would drive expression of Cas9
for a longer period of time than was strictly necessary. A puried Cas9 protein
can be complexed to its guide RNA in vitro to form a ribonucleoprotein (RNP),
which will cleave chromosomal DNA almost immediately after delivery and then
be degraded rapidly in cells, reducing o-target eects. RNPs can be eciently
delivered to hard-to-transfect cells such as human broblasts and pluripotent stem
cells. Another advantage is that RNP delivery may be less stressful for cells than
plasmid transfection (Kim et al., 2014).
www.genscript.com
Option 1: An all-in-one vector, pLentiCRISPRv2, enables CRISPR editing in any cell type of
interest without generating stable Cas9-expressing cell line rst.
AmpR
G(N)20 gRNA
gRNA scaffold
LTR
pLentiCRISPR v2
13kb
Pu
AmpR
O
s
Ca
P2A
G(N)20 gRNA
gRNA scaffold
HIV-1 cPPT
LTR
U6 promoter
HIV-1
EF1a
HIV-1 RRE
HIV-1 RRE
pro
mo
te
r
Bleo
R
HIV-1
LTR
roR
EFS promoter
Pu
HIV-1 cPPT
pLentiGuide-Puro
8.3kb
WPR
s
Ca
i
Or
10
P2A
LT
R
E
sd
R
DYK
W PR E
LTR
pLentiCas9-Blast
12.8kb
One limitation of the rst CRISPR genome editing protocol was the constraint on
genomic sequences that could be targeted. The SpCas9 enzyme requires the
presence of the PAM sequence "NGG" at the end of the ~20-mer. Guide RNA
expression was typically driven by the U6 human pol III promoter due to its
eciency at initiating transcription, which initiates transcription from a guanosine
(G) nucleotide. Therefore, U6-driven gRNAs used with SpCas9 needed to be
selected from genomic sequences that t the pattern GN19NGG which might
occur infrequently in a gene of interest.
ri
EFS promoter
E
WPR
ro
R
DYK
U6 promoter
Bleo
R
HIV-1
HIV-1 RRE
HIV-1 cPPT
LTR
ri
One strategy to expand the possibilities for CRISPR-mediated genome editing was
to drive gRNA expression from a dierent promoter. The H1 promoter can initiate
transcription from A or G; therefore, H1-driven gRNAs can also target sequences
of the form AN19NGG, which occur 15% more frequently than GN19NGG within
the human genome. This small change in the gRNA expression cassette more
than doubles the number of targetable sites within the genomes of humans and
other eukaryotes.
Another strategy has been to search for ways to relax the restriction on the PAM
sequence, as SpCas9s requirement for NGG presents a tight constraint. One
approach to this has been to use protein engineering techniques to create novel
engineered Cas mutants that recognize alternative PAM sequences (Kleinstiver et
Am p R
www.genscript.com
www.genscript.com
11
Designing gRNA for single DSB-induced gene KO: Designing gRNAs against early
exons tends to disrupt expression, reducing the chance of having truncated forms
of the protein expressed. Alternatively, targeting a functional site can generate a
loss-of-function mutant. For genes with multiple splice variants, care should be
taken to ensure that a constitutive exon is targeted if the goal is to knock out all
splice variants.
Designing guides for paired nickase: Guide RNA for use with Cas9n should be
designed to target opposite strands of the genomic DNA with an oset of 0-20 bp
from the 5 ends of the gRNA (i.e. a 40-60bp oset between PAM sequences).
Designing constructs for knock-in: As a general rule, WT Cas9 is more ecient at
mediating homologous recombination than Cas9 nickase; although using a paired
nickase strategy can reduce the risk for o-target activity, the eciency of HDR
mediated by Cas9 nickase is highly dependent on the cell type (Ran et al., 2013).
To introduce a specic change within the genome, for example a point mutation
that will cause a specic amino acid substitution in the protein product, it is
12
www.genscript.com
www.genscript.com
13
14
www.genscript.com
Delivery Method
Reference
Mammalian cells
- Lipofection-based transfection of
DNA plasmids
- Electroporation of DNA plasmids or
RNP
- Lentiviral transduction of DNA
plasmids
Microbial
organisms
Plants
- Agrobacterium mediated
transformation of sgRNA and Cas9
vector
Mouse:
heritable mutations
Mouse:
mutations to
adult somatic tissue
Yeast
www.genscript.com
15
Exon1
16
www.genscript.com
Exon3
Exon4
Exon5
Exon6
Exon7
Exon8
K-ras knock-out
How to ensure that o-target Cas9 activity wont confound your experiments:
Primers for
sequencing
Figure 8: Sanger sequencing (A) and western blot (B) results for HCT116 KRAS
-/B
HCT116
Kra
s-
/-
16
For each guide RNA you use, isolate multiple, independent clonal cell
populations or founder individuals. The likelihood o-target DSBs occur in the
same place in independent clones is very low.
Use at least two independent gRNA sequences in parallel to derive distinct
clones or founder individuals. Models created through genome editing with
distinct guideRNA that share an on-target locus but do not share o-target loci
are an excellent way to create independent replicates.
Although few labs have the resources to do statistically powerful whole genome
sequencing verication protocols such as gUIDEseq, it is relatively easy to select
the few predicted o-target sequences for each gRNA you use and then sequence
around those loci to ensure that o-target indels have not been introduced.
If you use most or all of these tips in combination, you can have condence that your
experiments will reveal true genotype/phenotype relationships.
Exon2
T1
Whole genome sequencing is often not practical for low frequency events. In
addition, targeted sequencing only of computationally predicted o-target sites
introduces a strong observational bias. Therefore, researchers in Keith Joungs lab
developed a technique called Genome-wide Unbiased Identication of DSBs
Enabled by sequencing (GUIDE-seq) to better quantify o-target activity of Cas9
throughout the genome (Tsai et al., 2015). GUIDE-seq introduces a tag any time a
DSB occurs, and then sequences around the tags to determine all o-target
cleavage locations. They found surprising results, including that the majority of
cleavage sites identied by GUIDE-seq were not of GUIDE-seq OT sites were not
predicted by any algorithm, because they contain up to 6 mismatched nucleotides
and in many cases include non-canonical PAMs.
To knock-out the K-Ras locus, gRNA and Cas9 vectors were encapsulated into a
virus. In this case, exon 4 was targeted by the gRNA-Cas9 complex to generate a
DSB. In the absence of donor DNA, the DSB was repaired by NHEJ to create an
indel. Sanger sequencing (Figure 8A) and a western blot (Figure 8B) were used to
conrm successful knock-out of the KRAS gene.
16
To determine o-target eects, you may sequence around regions that are
predicted to be likely sites for o-target cleavage based on sequence similarity to
the on-target site, particularly in the seed region. A more rigorous measure of
o-target cleavage can be performed using whole-genome sequencing.
HC
In some cases, such as in populations of primary cells, you may simply want to
show that you achieved high KO or KI eciency, without isolating clones for
conrmation. Genome editing eciency is typically determined via Surveyor assay
(T7E1 assay) or assayed with next-generation sequencing (NGS). Many unique
insertions and deletions will likely be observed.
T1
HC
K-ras
HCT116 KRAS -/-
beta actin
www.genscript.com
17
AAVS1 locus
Homologous
Gene edited
locus
Puro
GLP-1R
Homologous
Puro-GLP-1R
Primers for
sequencing
Anti-GLP-1R
Phase contrast
80 kD
60 kD
50 kD
40 kD
GLP-1R
www.genscript.com
Seq primer R
cadA
30 kD
20 kD
18
Seq primer F
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 M 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
(bp)
3000
2000
1500
1000
750
500
250
100
KO strain
www.genscript.com
19
Neuroscience
Cancer
Biology
Vaccines/
Virology
Plant Biology
Immunology
20
www.genscript.com
Genome-scale CRISPR knock-out libraries (GeCKO v2) libraries for mouse and
human genomes enable rapid screening for loss-of-function mutations, as described
by Sanjana et al (2014). GeCKO libraries are a mixed pool of CRISPR guide RNAs
that target every gene and miRNA in the genome. Each gRNA is cloned into a
lentiviral vector optimized to produce high-titer virus for ecient lentiviral transduction
of primary cells or cultured cell lines. Either a single-vector or dual-vector system may
be used (see Figure 6 on page 11). A cell population should be transduced with
the GeCKO library pool at a low MOI ensuring no more than one gRNA enters any
given cell. After transduction, deep sequencing with NGS should be performed to
assess gRNA representation in the cell pool before beginning a screening protocol.
At the end of the screen, after a second round of NGS, data analysis should be
performed to identify the guides that were lost or enriched over the course of the
screen. In order to identify true positive hits from a GeCKO library screen, you
should identify genes for which multiple guides were enriched. A detailed GeCKO
screening protocol may be found on the Genome Engineering website.
GeCKO libraries were designed to contain 6 single guide RNA (sgRNA) molecules
targeting each gene within the human or mouse genome, as well as 4 sgRNA
targeting each miRNA, and 1000 control (non-targeting) sgRNAs. The gRNA
sequences are distributed over three or four constitutively expressed exons for
each gene and were selected to minimize o-target genome modication.
www.genscript.com
21
Each library was divided into two sublibraries, A and B, containing 3 unique sgRNA
for each gene; only library A contains 4 sgRNA targeting each of 1,864 miRNAs;
both A and B contain the same 1,000 nontargeting control sgRNAs. The use of a
single sublibrary maintains comprehensive genome-scale coverage but reduces
the number of cells required to perform a screen, which is useful when cell
numbers are limiting (for example, with primary cells or in vivo screens);
alternatively, larger screens can be performed by combining both sublibraries.
The GeCKO library can be used in place of RNAi libraries for loss-of-function
screening for any phenotype of interest, for example, to identify genes whose
loss of function enables drug resistance in cancer cells (see box on page 23). As a
complimentary approach, a CRISPR-based gene activation library can be used in
place of a cDNA overexpression library for gain-of-function screening, as
described below.
22
www.genscript.com
genes at once in the same cell. They can also be used to interrogate the function of
long intergenic non-coding RNA (lincRNA) transcripts in addition to genes. Stable
expression of SAM components via lentiviral transduction generates cell lines show
stable and robust transcriptional activation, even of genes that are normally
transcriptionally silent. These cell lines can be ideal research tools to characterize the
function of specic candidate genes or groups of genes.
SAM can also be used for discovery research to identify the genes that drive phenotypes
of interest in any disease model or developmental/dierentiation process by using a
genome-wide SAM gRNA library for gain-of-function screening (Konermann et al.,
2015). The screening process is similar to the GeCKO library screening experimental
protocol described above, but the library is designed to activate transcription rather
than edit the genome. The human genome-wide SAM library contains 3 guide RNA
targeting within 200 bp upstream of each of 23,430 coding gene isoform with a
unique transcription start site in the human reference genome, for a total of 70,290
guides. This mixed pool of SAM guide RNAs is delivered along with the other SAM
components using lentiviral vectors.
www.genscript.com
23
Epigenetic Modications
Epigenetic modications to genomic DNA and to the histone proteins that help
organize chromosomes are increasingly shown to play critical roles in biological
processes. Epigenetic marks such as methylation or acetylation at specic
genomic loci or histone residues can be inherited or acquired, and can inuence
gene expression. The enzymes that regulate epigenetic state can be targeted via
CRISPR genome editing or order to generate genomewide perturbations in
epigenetic state. This was seen, for example, after CRISPR-mediated KO of all
three active DNA methyltransferases (DNMTs), individually or in combination, in
human embryonic stem cells (ESCs), allowing researchers to characterize viable,
pluripotent cell lines with distinct eects on the DNA methylation landscape (Liao
et al., 2015).
CRISPR technology can be used to guide stem cell dierentiation for both basic
research and therapeutics. Stem cell dierentiation typically requires the robust
activation of specic genes typically transcription factors that control broad
programs of downstream target gene expression in specic combinations and
sequences, over the course of several weeks or months. A catalytically inactive
Cas9 nuclease that is fused to transactivation domains can be used as a
programmable transcription activator to activate genes required for dierentiation.
For example, targeted activation of the endogenous Myod1 gene locus has been
shown to yield stable and sustained reprogramming of mouse embryonic
broblasts into skeletal myocytes (Chakraborty et al., 2014) for the repair of
skeletal muscle tissue.
Induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) have also become popular choices for stem
cell therapy since they can be derived from patient-specic cells, overcoming
ethical issues associated with embryonic stem cells. Similar to embryonic stem
cells, iPSCs must be pre-dierentiated prior to implantation to avoid teratoma
formation; however, dierentiation eciency continues to be a bottleneck.
Recent reports indicate that CRISPR may be an essential tool to improve
dierentiation, and has been used to derive a variety of cell types including
muscle cells for the treatment of muscular dystrophy (Loperdo et al., 2015) and
hematopoietic stem cells for the treatment of sickle cell anemia (Song et al.,
2015). Recently, there have been multiple studies investigating the use of CRISPR
to correct deleterious mutations associated with genetic diseases. For instance,
the inherited blood disease -Thalassemia is caused by deletions to the -globin
(HBB) gene, and by generating iPSCs with this mutation corrected could be a
potential treatment option (Xu et al., 2015). Together these results demonstrate
that CRISPR/Cas can improve the eciency of not only gene targeting, but also
directed dierentiation.
24
www.genscript.com
Therapeutics
Both well-established pharmaceutical companies and new start-up biotech
companies are racing to create CRISPR-based therapeutics. Compared to other
strategies for gene therapy, CRISPR genome editing is thought to be faster, less
expensive, and potentially far safer. CRISPR-based therapeutics are already in
development for treating blood cancers by modifying patients T cells; eliminating
disease-causing viruses in patients; and correcting single nucleotide mutations
that cause many inherited diseases such as sickle-cell anemia.
www.genscript.com
25
CRISPR genome editing is especially promising for diseases that can be tackled by
modifying cells that can easily be removed from a patient, genome-edited,
screened to ensure no o-target genome modications, and then infused back
into the same patient. Autologous cell therapies that use genome editing to
correct a mutation in the patients own cells could be far safer than current
therapies that use transplants from healthy donors. For example, combining
CRISPR-mediated genome engineering with autologous T-cell therapies holds
great promise for many diseases including cancer, HIV, primary immune
deciencies, and autoimmune diseases. It has already been demonstrated that
primary human CD4+ T cells can be genome-edited with high eciency and
specicity using Cas9 protein in complex with guide RNA (Cas9 RNPs) (Schumann
et al., 2015). Fusing GFP to Cas9 allows FACS-based enrichment of transfected
T-cells (Meissner et al., 2014), and other improvements to CRISPR-based T-cell
therapy protocols are doubtless underway. While there are many examples of in
vitro or animal studies in which CRISPR-mediated gene knockout corrects a
disease phenotype, signicant challenges nonetheless remain to translate these
into safe, ecacious therapies for human patients.
In order to address safety concerns prior to bringing CRISPR technology in to the
clinic, a great deal of attention has already been paid to developing nonviral
vectors such as lipid- or polymer-based nanocarriers, and several are already in
clinical trials (Li et al., 2015). Non-viral CRISPR-mediated gene therapy may bypass
some of the risks of prior viral-based gene therapy strategies, including the risk
that a viral vector might recombine in vivo and become replication-competent; the
risk that randomly integrating viruses will induce insertional mutagenesis, inaccurate
gene dosage; the risk that genetic modications could be made at unintended
genomic loci or in unintended tissues; or the chance that the gene therapy will
simply be ineective due to immune responses directed against the viral vector.
However, even non-viral Cas9 delivery may not completely avoid unwanted immune
responses; a study delivering SpCas9 in vivo in mouse liver detected Cas9-specic
humoral immune responses, highlighting the need for caution in future translational
studies, and reinforcing the idea that ex vivo genome modication of autologous
cells may be a safer route than in vivo delivery of Cas9 (Wang et al., 2015).
26
www.genscript.com
Cancer
Cardiovascular
Disease
HIV
Viral Diseases
Immunodeciences
Genetic
Diseases
www.genscript.com
27
Future of CRISPR
References
CRISPR/Cas has revolutionized genome editing for its ease of use and broad
applicability to mammalian cells, microbes, and animal models. Not only does
CRISPR have the potential to enhance our ability to analyze and understand gene
function, but this new tool can also reform the medical industry. Accessible
genome editing techniques can be used to correct genetic mutations that are
responsible for inherited disorders or diseases, and also for large-scale production
and screening of new drugs (Doudna et al., 2014). In addition, the ability of
CRISPR/Cas to both activate and repress gene function in both coding and
non-coding regions of the genome expands its potential even further.
Considering how recently the CRISPR system has been applied to mammalian and
microbial gene editing, there is still room for improvement. As the mechanism
for how Cas9 binds to DNA is revealed, more eective Cas9-gRNA constructs can
be designed (Sternberg and Doudna, 2015). Along the same vein, delivery of
Cas9 into mammalian cells continues to be a bottleneck for some cell types.
Designing smaller Cas9 variants that can be transfected into cells more easily will
expand its applications and uses.
Regardless of these improvements, the signicant role that CRISPR/Cas plays in
the biological sciences is apparent. CRISPR/Cas gene editing remains the easiest
and most exciting technology in genome engineering. There is no doubt that this
is just the beginning of a revolutionary technology that can be used by generations
of scientists to come.
28
www.genscript.com
www.genscript.com
29
30
www.genscript.com
www.genscript.com
31
32
www.genscript.com
www.genscript.com/CRISPR.html
CRISPR/Cas9 FAQs
CRISPR Webinars
CRISPR References
Experimental Protocols
Legal Statement of GenCRISPR Services and Products (Updated on July 28, 2015):
GenCRISPR services and products are covered under US 8,697,359, US 8,771,945, US 8,795,965, US
8,865,406, US 8,871,445, US 8,889,356, US 8,889,418, US 8,895,308, US 8,906,616 and foreign
equivalents and licensed from Broad Institute, Inc. Cambridge, Massachusetts.
The products and the reagents generated from these services shall be used as tools for research
purposes, and shall exclude (a) any human or clinical use, including, without limitation, any
administration into humans or any diagnostic or prognostic use, (b) any human germline modication,
including modifying the DNA of human embryos or human reproductive cells, (c) any in vivo
veterinary or livestock use, or (d) the manufacture, distribution, importation, exportation,
transportation, sale, oer for sale, marketing, promotion or other exploitation or use of, or as, a
testing service, therapeutic or diagnostic for humans or animals.
The purchase of the GenCRISPR Services and Products coveys to the purchaser the limited,
non-transferable right to use the products purchased and the reagents generated from GenCRISPR
services and any related material solely for Research Purposes only, not for any Commercial Purposes.