Solid-state nanopores have emerged as promising platforms for biosensing including diagnostics for disease detection. Here we show nanopore experiments that detect CRISPR-dCas9, a sequence-specific RNA-guided protein system that specifically binds to a target DNA sequence. While CRISPR-Cas9 is acclaimed for its gene editing potential, the CRISPR-dCas9 variant employed here does not cut DNA but instead remains tightly bound at a user-defined binding site, thus providing an excellent target for biosensing. In our nanopore experiments, we observe the CRISPR-dCas9 proteins as local spikes that appear on top of the ionic current blockade signal of DNA molecules that translocate through the nanopore. The proteins exhibit a pronounced blockade signal that allows for facile identification of the targeted sequence. Even at the high salt conditions (1 M LiCl) required for nanopore experiments, dCas9 proteins are found to remain stably bound. The binding position of the target sequence can be read from the spike position along the DNA signal. We anticipate applications of this nanopore-based CRISPR-dCas9 biosensing approach in DNA-typing based diagnostics such as quick disease-strain identification, antibiotic-resistance detection, and genome typing.
Solid-state nanopores have emerged as promising platforms for biosensing including diagnostics for disease detection. Here we show nanopore experiments that detect CRISPR-dCas9, a sequence-specific RNA-guided protein system that specifically binds to a target DNA sequence. While CRISPR-Cas9 is acclaimed for its gene editing potential, the CRISPR-dCas9 variant employed here does not cut DNA but instead remains tightly bound at a user-defined binding site, thus providing an excellent target for biosensing. In our nanopore experiments, we observe the CRISPR-dCas9 proteins as local spikes that appear on top of the ionic current blockade signal of DNA molecules that translocate through the nanopore. The proteins exhibit a pronounced blockade signal that allows for facile identification of the targeted sequence. Even at the high salt conditions (1 M LiCl) required for nanopore experiments, dCas9 proteins are found to remain stably bound. The binding position of the target sequence can be read from the spike position along the DNA signal. We anticipate applications of this nanopore-based CRISPR-dCas9 biosensing approach in DNA-typing based diagnostics such as quick disease-strain identification, antibiotic-resistance detection, and genome typing.
While nanopores
are most well-known
for their use in biophysics experiments and DNA sequencing,[1] they also hold great promise as diagnostic sensing
devices, due to their high sensitivity, simple readout, ease of device
fabrication, and their ability to detect individual disease-related
biomarkers. A solid-state nanopore is a nanometer-sized hole that
is etched in a thin membrane such as silicon nitride (SiN). Upon application
of a voltage across the nanopore in an electrolyte solution, biomolecules
such as DNA will translocate through the pore, thus temporarily blocking
the passage of ions that leads to a drop in the current, which constitutes
the basic sensing signal. This simple and elegant principle enables
an easy readout and interpretation of the nanopore signal. Solid-state
nanopores feature a number of additional advantages for developing
biosensors such as their robustness, sensitivity, versatility, and
compatibility with CMOS fabrication processes.[2] Indeed, in recent years, solid-state nanopores have been applied
to study protein–DNA interactions with proteins such as nucleosomes[3] or antibodies[4] and
for protein-sensing applications of medically relevant proteins such
as thrombin.[5] The larger hydrodynamic radius
of these protein–DNA complexes gives rise to a larger blockade
current signal as they transverse the pore. These studies have suggested
a genome-mapping type of approach through the monitoring of sequence-specific
proteins.[6] However, such an approach has
remained challenging because suitable strong-DNA-binding proteins
are rare due to the high salt concentrations that are required for
decent signals in nanopore experiments.Here we employ the CRISPR-dCas9
protein system for the detection
of DNA motifs. In recent years, Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short
Palindromic Repeats (CRISPR) and its CRISPR-associated (Cas) proteins
have gained enormous attention for its unprecedented potential as
a gene-editing tool. The Cas9 protein is able to bind to a target
DNA sequence through a guide RNA (gRNA).[7] This gRNA is easily programmable, allowing Cas9 to target any DNA
sequence, including DNA motifs that uniquely identify a variety of
disease-DNA.[8] The CRISPR-Cas9 protein has
been shown to be sensitive to even single nucleotide mismatches and
has a large hydrodynamic diameter (∼7 nm).[9,10] The
Cas9 protein can be modified to remove its endonuclease activity (i.e.,
cleaving activity) while keeping its programmable DNA-binding activity
intact.[11] This Cas9 variant, known as dCas9,
is favorable to be repurposed as a DNA detection tool in the nanopore
detection scheme proposed here.In this Letter, we demonstrate
a solid-state nanopore-based detection
scheme for probing DNA motifs using CRISPR-dCas9 (Figure ). Target RNA is preincubated
with dCas9 and then mixed with the DNA sample of interest (see Methods). Next, the DNA with bound CRISPR-dCas9
is driven through the solid-state nanopore where the dCas9 protein
gives rise to a pronounced feature on top of the DNA signal which
allows for facile identification of specific DNA motifs (Figure b,c). We demonstrate
stable binding of dCas9 to DNA, even in the high salt concentrations
of the nanopore buffer. The high salt concentration and the large
hydrodynamic radius of the dCas9 boost the nanopore signal and allow
for identification of the targeted sequence in easily fabricated large-diameter
solid-state nanopores. The binding position of dCas9 along the DNA
can be determined from the spike position along each nanopore event.
We anticipate applications of the CRISPR-dCas9 detection scheme in
DNA-typing diagnostics with solid-state nanopores such as quick disease
strain identification, antibiotic resistance detection, and genome
typing.
Figure 1
dCas9-DNA nanopore detection scheme. (a) gRNA is preincubated with
dCas9 (labeled in green; not to scale) and then incubated to form
a complex with target DNA prior to nanopore detection. (b) Voltage
applied across the membrane induces an ionic current through a 20
nm size nanopore aperture and drives dCas9-DNA complexes to translocate
through the nanopore. (c) The dCas9 signal appears as an additional
blockade event (the sharp spike in the red shaded region) on top of
the single-molecule DNA ionic-current signature which shows a constant
current blockade except for the start of the event (gray shaded area)
where DNA enters the pore in a folded manner.[12]
dCas9-DNA nanopore detection scheme. (a) gRNA is preincubated with
dCas9 (labeled in green; not to scale) and then incubated to form
a complex with target DNA prior to nanopore detection. (b) Voltage
applied across the membrane induces an ionic current through a 20
nm size nanopore aperture and drives dCas9-DNA complexes to translocate
through the nanopore. (c) The dCas9 signal appears as an additional
blockade event (the sharp spike in the red shaded region) on top of
the single-molecule DNA ionic-current signature which shows a constant
current blockade except for the start of the event (gray shaded area)
where DNA enters the pore in a folded manner.[12]CRISPR-dCas9 is found to stably
bind to DNA even at the high salt
concentrations that are favored for nanopore experiments. Figure a shows a clear shift
of the band of the dCas9-DNA complex with respect to the DNA control
bands in both the Cas9 reaction buffer and 1 M LiCl conditions. Notably
most of the DNA gets bound by dCas9, even in the 1 M LiCl condition.
The experiment also shows that dCas9 can remain bound over the ∼2.5
h course of the gel experiment. Note that the bands in the 1 M LiCl
condition did not run to the same position as the Cas9 reaction buffer
because of electrostatic screening in the high-salt conditions. Gel
experiments for the full range of salt concentrations from 0.5 M LiCl
to 4 M LiCl can be found in the Supporting Information (see SI.4, Figure S-1).
Figure 2
Stability of dCas9 on DNA at high salt and examples
of nanopore
current traces. (a) Gel shift assay showing binding of dCas9 in 1
M LiCl nanopore buffer. A clear shift in the DNA band at 1 M LiCl
indicates that the dCas9 remains bound on the DNA even at high salt
concentrations. The plus (+) sign indicates 1 kbp DNA samples that
were incubated with the dCas9 complex. (b) Examples of nanopore current
traces for a 20 kb long dsDNA-only control sample. The left trace
shows a type 1 event, where the DNA translocated in a linear head-to-tail
fashion, while the right trace shows a type 2–1 event, where
there is a fold at the start of the translocation. (c) Examples of
nanopore current traces for a sample where CRISPR-dCas9 was incubated
with DNA. Due to the CRISPR-dCas9 complex that is locally bound along
the DNA, additional spikes are seen on top of the DNA events. Left
and right traces show type 1 and type 2–1 events, respectively.
The dCas9 complex was mixed in a solution of 20 kb dsDNA and incubated
at 37 °C for 30 min prior to nanopore experiment. The sample
was then diluted to a final concentration of 1 M LiCl.
Stability of dCas9 on DNA at high salt and examples
of nanopore
current traces. (a) Gel shift assay showing binding of dCas9 in 1
M LiCl nanopore buffer. A clear shift in the DNA band at 1 M LiCl
indicates that the dCas9 remains bound on the DNA even at high salt
concentrations. The plus (+) sign indicates 1 kbp DNA samples that
were incubated with the dCas9 complex. (b) Examples of nanopore current
traces for a 20 kb long dsDNA-only control sample. The left trace
shows a type 1 event, where the DNA translocated in a linear head-to-tail
fashion, while the right trace shows a type 2–1 event, where
there is a fold at the start of the translocation. (c) Examples of
nanopore current traces for a sample where CRISPR-dCas9 was incubated
with DNA. Due to the CRISPR-dCas9 complex that is locally bound along
the DNA, additional spikes are seen on top of the DNA events. Left
and right traces show type 1 and type 2–1 events, respectively.
The dCas9 complex was mixed in a solution of 20 kb dsDNA and incubated
at 37 °C for 30 min prior to nanopore experiment. The sample
was then diluted to a final concentration of 1 M LiCl.DNA translocation events in nanopore experiments
clearly show the
signatures of CRISPR-dCas9 binding. Upon addition of a control sample
with bare DNA to the flow cell with a 20 nm SiN nanopore, we observe
the typical current trace signals (Figure b), namely, a ∼ 2 ms long partial
blockade of the ionic current with a blockade current of I0 = 0.12 nA, often
starting with a double-blockade current of 2I0 at the start of the current trace that can be attributed
to the capture and translocation of a folded ds-DNA at the start of
the event.[12] Notably, the nanopore events
for the CRISPR-dCas9-incubated sample look exactly the same except
for the fact that they contain a single sharp spikelike feature on
top of the DNA current signature; see Figure c. We attribute these spikes along the DNA
blockade to the presence of the locally bound dCas9 protein. The localized
spikes have a short duration (∼25–60 μs) and a
much deeper blockade level (up to 1.5 nA) than the bare dsDNA. Such
a large signal is also expected since the dCas9 protein will block
a sizable part of the pore volume upon translocating through the nanopore.
Though most spikes were sharp, some of them exhibited broadening or
more complex features due to sticking events (see SI.7 Figure S-4). The results reported here are mainly obtained
from one particular experiment on the same pore with N = 308 events recorded for the dCas9-DNA samples as well as N = 308 events for the DNA-only control sample. Similar
results were obtained for three independent other runs with different
pores (yielding 30%, 34%, and 33% of events with spikes higher than
3I0).The deep spikelike events
enable us to clearly separate two different
populations, i.e., those with and those without dCas9 bound to the
DNA. The two can best be discriminated based on the maximum current
blockade of each translocation event. Figure c,d displays a scatter plot of the maximum
current blockade versus dwell time of each translocation event. Both
for the dCas9-DNA sample and for the DNA-only control sample, two
clusters can be observed with maxima at ∼0.12 and ∼0.24
nA. These two clusters are due to, respectively, linear head-to-tail
translocations of dsDNA, known as type 1 events (cf. Figure b left) that show up as the
0.12 nA level, and type 2–1 events (cf. Figure b right) where DNA enters the pore in a folded
fashion, resulting in twice the blockade level.[12] While virtually all events for bare dsDNA have a maximum
current blockade level of less than 0.4 nA, the data for the dCas9-DNA
sample shows a population with a clearly larger maximum current blockade
level.
Figure 3
Statistics of nanopore measurements of CRISPR-dCas9 bound to DNA.
(a) Typical example of a dCas9-labeled DNA translocation event. The
dCas9-labeled DNA displays an additional spike in the current blockade
signal that is observed when the DNA-bound protein transverses the
pore (shaded in red). A deeper current blockade of DNA at the start
of the translocation (shaded in gray) is due to a fold in the DNA
as it first enters the pore. (b) Example translocation signal from
a typical DNA event. (c,d) Scatter diagrams of the maximum current
blockade versus dwell time of each translocation event for the dCas9-DNA
sample and the bare DNA-only control sample, respectively. Unlike
the bare DNA sample, the maximum current for dCas9-labeled DNA events
shows very large values of 0.4–1.5 nA that clearly exceed 3
times the blockade level I0 for bare DNA
(3I0 = 0.36 nA).
Statistics of nanopore measurements of CRISPR-dCas9 bound to DNA.
(a) Typical example of a dCas9-labeled DNA translocation event. The
dCas9-labeled DNA displays an additional spike in the current blockade
signal that is observed when the DNA-bound protein transverses the
pore (shaded in red). A deeper current blockade of DNA at the start
of the translocation (shaded in gray) is due to a fold in the DNA
as it first enters the pore. (b) Example translocation signal from
a typical DNA event. (c,d) Scatter diagrams of the maximum current
blockade versus dwell time of each translocation event for the dCas9-DNA
sample and the bare DNA-only control sample, respectively. Unlike
the bare DNA sample, the maximum current for dCas9-labeled DNA events
shows very large values of 0.4–1.5 nA that clearly exceed 3
times the blockade level I0 for bare DNA
(3I0 = 0.36 nA).We observed spikes on a large fraction of the events for
the dCas9-DNA
sample. Upon using a threshold of 3I0 =
0.36 nA, we largely select only the events that corresponded to dCas9-bound
DNA. In this way, we deduce that 35% of the events (108/308) for the
dCas9-DNA sample showed these spikes. In the bare DNA-only control
sample, this fraction was much lower, ∼5% (10/308). The fraction
of spiked events did not reduce during the typical duration of the
nanopore experiment of ∼2 h, indicating that the dCas9 remained
stably bound to the DNA for extended periods of time even in the high-salt
nanopore buffer.We demonstrate that the spikes were indeed
due to the bound dCas9
targeting our DNA region of interest by performing a number of different
controls (Figure a).
First, we investigated the translocation behavior of only the dCas9
protein by translocating a sample containing 150 nM of dCas9 (∼5×
excess of the concentration used in the dCas9-DNA experiments). This
yielded translocation events only in the opposite applied bias (see SI.5 Figure S-2). Also the dCas9-RNA complex
translocated in the opposite polarity to the dCas9-RNA-DNA (see SI.5 Figure S-2). Furthermore, we investigated
the effect of the gRNA sequence on the binding of dCas9 to the DNA.
For this, we incubated dCas9 with gRNA containing a sequence that
is not complementary to our 20 kbp DNA. We saw a sharp drop in the
percentage of spike events, as compared to the 35% observed when the
gRNA and target site on the 20 kbp DNA were complementary in their
sequences. We then performed two more experiments where we used a
mutated target gRNA sequence: (i) Mut1, where base pair 1 and 3 (as
counted from the NGG region) were mutated, and (ii) Mut2, where every
alternate base pair was mutated from the target sequence (see SI.2, changes highlighted in yellow). In both
cases, we again observed a sharp drop in the percentage of spike events,
as expected. Only when the entire target sequence is present, the
percentage of spike events was found to rise to a much larger value
of ∼35% (Figure a).
Figure 4
Percentage of spike events and dwell times histograms. (a) Percentage
of spike events, for various conditions. Left bar shows a much higher
number of events with spikes than in all controls where one of the
components was lacking or where the guide RNA was mutated or nonfitting
to the target DNA sequence. (b) Bar graph showing the percentage of
spikes larger than 3I0 for the dCas9-DNA
sample and the DNA-only control at three different voltages. At all
voltages, the percentage of spike events in the dCas9-DNA sample significantly
exceeds the presence of spike events of the DNA-only events (that
are due to knots and folds). (c) Histogram of the dwell times of the
dCas9-DNA at 100 mV (purple), 200 mV (blue), and 300 mV (red). At
300 and 200 mV, the distribution times are clustered near 0.5 and
1 ms, respectively, whereas a broadening of the dwell times is observed
at 100 mV due to interactions with the pore.
Percentage of spike events and dwell times histograms. (a) Percentage
of spike events, for various conditions. Left bar shows a much higher
number of events with spikes than in all controls where one of the
components was lacking or where the guide RNA was mutated or nonfitting
to the target DNA sequence. (b) Bar graph showing the percentage of
spikes larger than 3I0 for the dCas9-DNA
sample and the DNA-only control at three different voltages. At all
voltages, the percentage of spike events in the dCas9-DNA sample significantly
exceeds the presence of spike events of the DNA-only events (that
are due to knots and folds). (c) Histogram of the dwell times of the
dCas9-DNA at 100 mV (purple), 200 mV (blue), and 300 mV (red). At
300 and 200 mV, the distribution times are clustered near 0.5 and
1 ms, respectively, whereas a broadening of the dwell times is observed
at 100 mV due to interactions with the pore.The fraction of dCas9 events was measured as a function of
applied
voltage, see Figure b. The percentage of spikes in the dCas9-DNA sample is found to be
lower at the higher voltages. Although the current blockade signals
are more pronounced at the higher voltages (see SI.11 Figure S-8 for example traces), the translocation speed
of the dCas9-DNA molecules is also higher which causes dCas9 spikes
to be missed due to the limited bandwidth of the amplifier. Across
the entire voltage range, however, the percentage of spikes was always
5–7 times higher than that measured in the DNA-only control
sample. The 5% false positives can be attributed to DNA knots which
show up as deep blockade events.[13] From
the work reported by Plesa et al.,[13] we
expect about 2–5% events with knots at or beyond the 3I0 level for our linear 20 kb dsDNA. Figure c shows dwell time
histograms of dCas9-DNA events. At the higher applied voltages (cf.
the 200 and 300 mV data), we observe, as expected, a narrow dwell-time
distribution, indicating that the dCas9-DNA complex flows freely through
the pore. At lower voltage, however, a broadening of the distribution
is observed for the dCas9-DNA events (e.g., the 100 mV data in Figure c), which was not
seen for the DNA-only sample (see SI.10 Figure S-7). We attribute this to temporary sticking interactions
between the protein and the inner SiN surface of the nanopore, as
the dCas9 protein is positively charged in the pH 7.5 buffer (given
its isoelectric point of 9), whereas the SiN surface is negatively
charged.Interestingly, we can discern the location where the
dCas9 protein
binds along the DNA molecule as it translocates through the nanopore.
For estimating this location, we measure, for each event, the integral
of the current blockade up to the dCas9 spike, as well as the integral
of the full event. These values are a measure for, respectively, the
amount of DNA that has translocated until the dCas9 is encountered
and the total amount of DNA. Accordingly, the relative position of
the dCas9 along the DNA strand is given by the ratio of these two
integral current values. Figure shows a histogram of the dCas9 position obtained from
the method thus applied. We observe two peaks, corresponding to the
two orientations in which a translocating DNA molecule can enter the
nanopore, either first with the end close to the protein-labeled site
or, in the other case, leading with the end further away from that
site. We fit two Gaussian curves to the histogram and obtained two
peaks at 0.31 ± 0.04 and 0.75 ± 0.02 (errors are the standard
error of the mean). These peak values match remarkably well with the
targeted site of the dCas9 on the DNA at 0.28 (5872/20 678
kbp) or equivalently (counting from the other end) 0.72 (14 806/20 678
kbp). One might ask whether some error might arise from assuming a
constant average translocation velocity, as there will be some speed
up of DNA velocity toward the end of the translocation.[14] However, quantitatively this effect is very
small for long molecules. The significant width of the two Gaussian
peaks can be explained by residual nanopore-protein interactions occurring
during translocation as well as by stochastic fluctuations in the
velocity of the translocating molecule that broaden the distribution.[14] For the first peak, the folded 2–1 events
may furthermore introduce an ambiguity in the localization of the
dCas9 peak position in the, relatively rare, cases that the folded
region involves a large (>28% of the DNA length) fold at the start
of the event.
Figure 5
CRISPR-dCas9 binding position as detected in the translocation
events. (a) Two examples of events where a dCas9-induced spike is
located near the start or end of an event, which can be attributed
to the fact that a DNA molecule can enter the pore with either of
its two ends. In order to determine the relative binding position
of the dCas9 proteins along the DNA, the integral of the current blockade
up to the spike position was divided by the total integral of the
entire translocation event. (b) Histogram of this fraction, binned
into 20 bins. Two peaks are observed at 0.31 ± 0.04 and 0.75
± 0.02 (where the errors are the standard error of the mean).
The two peaks correlate well with the designed positions of the target
site of the dCas9 on the DNA which are at 0.28 (5872/20 678
kbp) or 0.72 (14 806/20 678 kbp) for the two orientations.
CRISPR-dCas9 binding position as detected in the translocation
events. (a) Two examples of events where a dCas9-induced spike is
located near the start or end of an event, which can be attributed
to the fact that a DNA molecule can enter the pore with either of
its two ends. In order to determine the relative binding position
of the dCas9 proteins along the DNA, the integral of the current blockade
up to the spike position was divided by the total integral of the
entire translocation event. (b) Histogram of this fraction, binned
into 20 bins. Two peaks are observed at 0.31 ± 0.04 and 0.75
± 0.02 (where the errors are the standard error of the mean).
The two peaks correlate well with the designed positions of the target
site of the dCas9 on the DNA which are at 0.28 (5872/20 678
kbp) or 0.72 (14 806/20 678 kbp) for the two orientations.In summary, we have demonstrated
identification of CRISPR-dCas9
bounded DNA sequences at the single-molecule level in a nanopore.
The binding of dCas9 to dsDNA is stable even in the high-salt conditions
(1 M LiCl) that enable a high signal-to-noise ratio, which is advantageous
for accurate nanopore detection. The large hydrodynamic size of the
dCas9 complex produces clear spikes that can be readily distinguished
from the current traces of bare DNA. We showed that the location of
the dCas9 binding site along the DNA can also be detected, enabling
identification of the DNA site that was used to bind the dCas9 complex
through the sequence-programmable gRNA. A significant population of
the protein remains bound to the DNA for the duration of the nanopore
experiment (as large as 35% in 2 h), allowing facile determination
of the possible presence of the targeted DNA sequences in the sample
that is probed.Looking ahead, the development of a nanopore-based
diagnostic tool
for direct DNA detection of disease-inducing agents presents key advantages
over traditional serological methods based on the detection of antibodies,
proteins, and biomarkers emanating from infectious agents. The presence
of such biomarkers can differ strongly depending on the progression
and stage of the disease,[15] while the DNA
of the causative agents remains present throughout. In the scheme
proposed here, the use of dCas9 opens new avenues for DNA-sequence-sensing
capabilities with large-diameter solid-state nanopores that can be
scaled up and mass-produced.[16] The resiliency
of the dCas9 protein to the high-salt concentrations (whereas most
DNA-binding proteins detach from DNA at high salinity) makes it a
particularly fitting candidate as a sequence-specific protein that
can be detected through the read-out capabilities of solid-state nanopores.In recent years, other nanopore-based DNA mapping techniques have
been proposed as alternatives to the more conventional PCR-based (polymerase
chain reaction amplification) DNA-detection method, which require
thermocycling. These proposed nanopore techniques rely on the use
of functionalized surfaces or complementary DNA labels.[17−21] Compared to these approaches, our detection scheme has multiple
advantages. First, the ease of programmability of the gRNA enables
versatile detection of a wide range of targets as well as multiplexing.
Other nanopore approaches require extensive preparation of either
the sample (design, folding, and attachment of DNA origami labels)
or the nanopore surface (cleaning and (re)functionalization of the
nanopore), and procedures will have to be repeated between each experimental
run for the detection of different analytes. Furthermore, the dCas9
protein can target and search dsDNA directly without any temperature
cycling step or additional enzyme for unzipping the DNA. This significantly
speeds up the sample processing time, and may be of sue for straightforward
point-of-care diagnostics. The ease of approach of our proposed dCas9
detection scheme over the other techniques makes nanopore sensing
of DNA targets using CRISPR-dCas9 a promising platform for disease
detection and diagnostics. Indeed, we envision the use of such nanopore
sensing with CRISPR-dCas9 for the fast detection and identification
of DNA motifs of medically relevant DNA targets.
Methods
gRNA-dCas9
Complex Assembly
We assembled gRNA, dCas9
and DNA in a 1× Cas9 Nuclease Reaction Buffer (New England Biolabs,
20 mM HEPES, 100 mM NaCl, 5 mM MgCl2, 0.1 mM EDTA (pH 6.5
@ 25 °C) in a molar ratio of 100:10:1 (RNA/dCas9/DNA). Excess
ratios of dCas9 were used to ensure maximum binding of the protein
to DNA. For the gel electrophoresis experiments, 1 kbp of DNA was
incubated with the dCas9-gRNA complex. Full details on the gRNA sequence,
DNA plasmids, and dCas9-gRNA complex assembly protocol can be found
in the Supporting Information.
dCas9 Binding
Assay
The binding affinity of the dCas9
protein to the DNA in 1 M LiCl was first verified using 6% retardationpolyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (PAGE). A volume of 10 μL
of sample was diluted with 5 μL of 5% glycerol to aid with the
loading of the sample into the gel. In all experiments, the sample
was first prepared in 1× Cas9 reaction buffer and then diluted
to the final salt concentration prior to the gel experiments. Two
samples of dCas9-DNA complex were prepared, one with 1 M LiCl (buffered
with 10 mM Tris-HCl, 1 mM EDTA, pH 8) and one in 1× Cas9 Nuclease
Reaction Buffer (Cas9 reaction buffer) which served as a positive
control. For the DNA-only control samples, DNA with the same concentration
(300 nM) was diluted in the same salt conditions and loaded into the
lane parallel to the respective dCas9-DNA complex lane. The gel was
run at 120 V for 2 h and stained with ethidium bromide for imaging.
Nanopore Experiment
We used TEM-drilled 20 nm diameter
SiN nanopores for the experiments. The SiN membrane containing the
nanopore was loaded in a PEEK (Polyether ether ketone) flow cell.
We used Ag/AgCl electrodes and an Axopatch 200B amplifier (Molecular
Devices) for current detection. The traces were recorded at 100 kHz
and further low pass filtered at 20 kHz for the data at 100 mV and
50 kHz for the data taken from 200 to 300 mV with the Transanalyzer
Matlab package.[22]For the nanopore
experiments, the dCas9-DNA complex, prepared in 1X reaction buffer,
was diluted to a final concentration of 1.5 ng/μL in 1 M LiCl
solution (buffered with 10 mM Tris-HCl, 1 mM EDTA, pH 8). Approximately
40 μL of the solution was pipetted to the negatively biased
cis compartment of the flow cell. The complex was electrophoretically
driven through the nanopore with a bias voltage of 100 mV (or otherwise,
as indicated in the text) and detected by measuring changes in the
current flowing through the pore. Following the experiment, the flow
cell and nanopore were repeatedly flushed with 1 M LiCl solution.
Blank traces were recorded to ensure that no residual sample remained
prior to the DNA-only control experiment that was carried out in the
same nanopore. The total measurement time was typically 1–2
h for each sample. During this time, we observed no discernible decrease
in the event rate.
Authors: Ulrich Rant; Kenji Arinaga; Simon Scherer; Erika Pringsheim; Shozo Fujita; Naoki Yokoyama; Marc Tornow; Gerhard Abstreiter Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2007-10-19 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Silvia Hernández-Ainsa; Nicholas A W Bell; Vivek V Thacker; Kerstin Göpfrich; Karolis Misiunas; Maria Eugenia Fuentes-Perez; Fernando Moreno-Herrero; Ulrich F Keyser Journal: ACS Nano Date: 2013-06-07 Impact factor: 15.881
Authors: Calin Plesa; Daniel Verschueren; Sergii Pud; Jaco van der Torre; Justus W Ruitenberg; Menno J Witteveen; Magnus P Jonsson; Alexander Y Grosberg; Yitzhak Rabin; Cees Dekker Journal: Nat Nanotechnol Date: 2016-08-15 Impact factor: 39.213
Authors: Mark J Osborn; Akshay Bhardwaj; Samuel P Bingea; Friederike Knipping; Colby J Feser; Christopher J Lees; Daniel P Collins; Clifford J Steer; Bruce R Blazar; Jakub Tolar Journal: Bioengineering (Basel) Date: 2021-02-12