CHANGE-seq reveals genetic and epigenetic effects on CRISPR–Cas9 genome-wide activity (original) (raw)

Data availability

High-throughput sequencing data generated during the study (CHANGE-seq, GUIDE-seq, ATAC-seq, histone modification ChIP–seq) are available from the NCBI Sequence Read Archive and Gene Expression Omnibus under accession numbers PRJNA625995 and GSE149295, respectively.

Code availability

Open-source code for analyzing CHANGE-seq or CIRCLE-seq (https://github.com/tsailabSJ/changeseq) and GUIDE-seq (https://github.com/aryeelab/guideseq), and for performing related machine learning analysis (https://github.com/ma-compbio/ChangeLocator), are available through GitHub.

References

1. Jinek, M. et al. A programmable dual-RNA–guided DNA endonuclease in adaptive bacterial immunity. Science 337, 816–821 (2012).
   Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
2. Mali, P. et al. RNA-guided human genome engineering via Cas9. Science 339, 823–826 (2013).
   Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
3. Cong, L. et al. Multiplex genome engineering using CRISPR/Cas systems. Science 339, 819–823 (2013).
   Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
4. Eyquem, J. et al. Targeting a CAR to the TRAC locus with CRISPR/Cas9 enhances tumour rejection. Nature 543, 113–117 (2017).
   Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
5. Hacein-Bey-Abina, S. et al. _LMO2_-associated clonal T cell proliferation in two patients after gene therapy for SCID-X1. Science 302, 415–419 (2003).
   Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
6. Kleinstiver, B. P. et al. High-fidelity CRISPR–Cas9 nucleases with no detectable genome-wide off-target effects. Nature 529, 490–495 (2016).
   Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
7. Slaymaker, I. et al. Rationally engineered Cas9 nucleases with improved specificity. Science 351, 84–88 (2016).
   Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
8. Kocak, D. D. et al. Increasing the specificity of CRISPR systems with engineered RNA secondary structures. Nat. Biotechnol. 37, 657–666 (2019).
   Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
9. Vakulskas, C. A. et al. A high-fidelity Cas9 mutant delivered as a ribonucleoprotein complex enables efficient gene editing in human hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells. Nat. Med. 24, 1216–1224 (2018).
   Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
10. Chen, J. S. et al. Enhanced proofreading governs CRISPR–Cas9 targeting accuracy. Nature 550, 407–410 (2017).
    Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
11. Fu, Y. et al. High-frequency off-target mutagenesis induced by CRISPR–Cas nucleases in human cells. Nat. Biotechnol. 31, 822–826 (2013).
    Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
12. Tsai, S. Q. et al. GUIDE-seq enables genome-wide profiling of off-target cleavage by CRISPR–Cas nucleases. Nat. Biotechnol. 33, 187–197 (2015).
    Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
13. Anderson, K. R. et al. CRISPR off-target analysis in genetically engineered rats and mice. Nat. Methods 15, 512–514 (2018).
    Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
14. Cradick, T. J., Fine, E. J., Antico, C. J. & Bao, G. CRISPR/Cas9 systems targeting β-globin and CCR5 genes have substantial off-target activity. Nucleic Acids Res. 41, 9584–9592 (2013).
    Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
15. Hsu, P. D. et al. DNA targeting specificity of RNA-guided Cas9 nucleases. Nat. Biotechnol. 31, 827–832 (2013).
    Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
16. Xie, K. & Yang, Y. RNA-guided genome editing in plants using a CRISPR–Cas system. Mol. Plant. 6, 1975–1983 (2013).
    Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
17. Cho, S. et al. Analysis of off-target effects of CRISPR/Cas-derived RNA-guided endonucleases and nickases. Genome Res. 24, 132–141 (2014).
    Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
18. Crosetto, N. et al. Nucleotide-resolution DNA double-strand break mapping by next-generation sequencing. Nat. Methods 10, 361–365 (2013).
    Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
19. Yan, W. X. et al. BLISS is a versatile and quantitative method for genome-wide profiling of DNA double-strand breaks. Nat. Commun. 8, 15058 (2017).
    Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
20. Wang, X. et al. Unbiased detection of off-target cleavage by CRISPR–Cas9 and TALENs using integrase-defective lentiviral vectors. Nat. Biotechnol. 33, 175–178 (2015).
    Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
21. Frock, R. L. et al. Genome-wide detection of DNA double-stranded breaks induced by engineered nucleases. Nat. Biotechnol. 33, 179–186 (2015).
    Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
22. Hu, J. et al. Detecting DNA double-stranded breaks in mammalian genomes by linear amplification-mediated high-throughput genome-wide translocation sequencing. Nat. Protoc. 11, 853–871 (2016).
    Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
23. Wienert, B. et al. Unbiased detection of CRISPR off-targets in vivo using DISCOVER-Seq. Science 364, 286–289 (2019).
    Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
24. Kim, D. et al. Digenome-seq: genome-wide profiling of CRISPR–Cas9 off-target effects in human cells. Nat. Methods 12, 237–243 (2015).
    Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
25. Cameron, P. et al. Mapping the genomic landscape of CRISPR–Cas9 cleavage. Nat. Methods 14, 600–606 (2017).
    Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
26. Tsai, S. Q. et al. CIRCLE-seq: a highly sensitive in vitro screen for genome-wide CRISPR–Cas9 nuclease off-targets. Nat. Methods 14, 607–614 (2017).
    Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
27. Lazzarotto, C. R. et al. Defining CRISPR–Cas9 genome-wide nuclease activities with CIRCLE-seq. Nat. Protoc. 13, 2615–2642 (2018).
    Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
28. Berg, D. E., Davies, J., Allet, B. & Rochaix, J. D. Transposition of R factor genes to bacteriophage lambda. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 72, 3628–3632 (1975).
    Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
29. Reznikoff, W. S. Transposon Tn5. Annu. Rev. Genet. 42, 269–286 (2008).
    Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
30. Adey, A. et al. Rapid, low-input, low-bias construction of shotgun fragment libraries by high-density in vitro transposition. Genome Biol. 11, R119 (2010).
    Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
31. Friedman, J. H. Greedy function approximation: a gradient boosting machine. Ann. Stat. 29, 1189–1232 (2001).
    Article Google Scholar
32. Nishimasu, H. et al. Crystal structure of Cas9 in complex with guide RNA and target DNA. Cell 156, 935–949 (2014).
    Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
33. Horlbeck, M. A. et al. Nucleosomes impede Cas9 access to DNA in vivo and in vitro. eLife 5, e12677 (2016).
    Article PubMed PubMed Central CAS Google Scholar
34. Yarrington, R. M., Verma, S., Schwartz, S., Trautman, J. K. & Carroll, D. Nucleosomes inhibit target cleavage by CRISPR-Cas9 in vivo. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 115, 9351–9358 (2018).
    Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
35. Kim, D. & Kim, J.-S. DIG-seq: a genome-wide CRISPR off-target profiling method using chromatin DNA. Genome Res. 28, 1894–1900 (2018).
    Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
36. Scott, D. A. & Zhang, F. Implications of human genetic variation in CRISPR-based therapeutic genome editing. Nat. Med. 23, 1095–1101 (2017).
    Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
37. Lessard, S. et al. Human genetic variation alters CRISPR-Cas9 on- and off-targeting specificity at therapeutically implicated loci. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, E11257–E11266 (2017).
    Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
38. Zook, J. M. et al. An open resource for accurately benchmarking small variant and reference calls. Nat. Biotechnol. 37, 561–566 (2019).
    Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
39. Akcakaya, P. et al. In vivo CRISPR editing with no detectable genome-wide off-target mutations. Nature 561, 416–419 (2018).
    Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
40. Bae, S., Park, J. & Kim, J. S. Cas-OFFinder: a fast and versatile algorithm that searches for potential off-target sites of Cas9 RNA-guided endonucleases. Bioinformatics 30, 1473–1475 (2014).
    Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
41. Bolger, A. M., Lohse, M. & Usadel, B. Trimmomatic: a flexible trimmer for Illumina sequence data. Bioinformatics 30, 2114–2120 (2014).
    Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
42. Magoč, T. & Salzberg, S. L. FLASH: fast length adjustment of short reads to improve genome assemblies. Bioinformatics 27, 2957–63 (2011).
    Article PubMed PubMed Central CAS Google Scholar
43. Li, H. & Durbin, R. Fast and accurate short read alignment with Burrows–Wheeler transform. Bioinformatics 25, 1754–60 (2009).
    Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
44. Corces, R. M. et al. An improved ATAC-seq protocol reduces background and enables interrogation of frozen tissues. Nat. Methods 14, 959–962 (2017).
    Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
45. Jiang, H., Lei, R., Ding, S.-W. & Zhu, S. Skewer: a fast and accurate adapter trimmer for next-generation sequencing paired-end reads. BMC Bioinformatics 15, 182 (2014).
    Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
46. Zhang, Y. et al. Model-based Analysis of ChIP-Seq (MACS). Genome Biol. 9, R137 (2008).
    Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
47. Cheng, Y. et al. Principles of regulatory information conservation between mouse and human. Nature 515, 371–375 (2014).
    Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
48. Bray, N. L., Pimentel, H., Melsted, P. & Pachter, L. Near-optimal probabilistic RNA-seq quantification. Nat. Biotechnol. 34, 525–527 (2016).
    Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
49. Ramírez, F., Dündar, F., Diehl, S., Grüning, B. A. & Manke, T. deepTools: a flexible platform for exploring deep-sequencing data. Nucleic Acids Res. 42, W187–W191 (2014).
    Article PubMed PubMed Central CAS Google Scholar
50. Ernst, J. & Kellis, M. ChromHMM: automating chromatin-state discovery and characterization. Nat. Methods 9, 215–216 (2012).
    Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Y. Chao and R. Heath from the St. Jude Protein Production Core Facility for recombinant Tn5 production, G. Wu for variant calling, S. Olsen from the St. Jude Hartwell Center for whole-genome sequencing and RNA-seq, and J. Zook for discussions on Genome-in-a-Bottle data. Standard mapping and variant calling were performed by the Center for Applied Bioinformatics, a centralized shared resource, partly funded by NIH award no. P30CA021765. This work was supported by St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital and ALSAC, National Institutes of Health Common Fund Somatic Cell Genome Editing award no. U01EB029373 (to S.Q.T., Y.C., J.M., G.K. and S.M.), St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital Collaborative Research Consortium on Novel Gene Therapies for Sickle Cell Disease and the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation (grant no. 2017093), National Institute of General Medicine Science award no. R35GM133614 (to Y.C.) and National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute award no. P01HL053749 (to S.Q.T.). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. E.S. acknowledges support under the Cooperative Research Agreement between the University of Maryland and the National Institute of Standards and Technology Center for Nanoscale Science and Technology, award no. 70NANB14H209, through the University of Maryland. NIST disclaimer: selected commercial equipment, instruments or materials are identified to specify the adequacy of experimental conditions or reported results. Such identification does not imply recommendation or endorsement by the National Institute of Standards and Technology, nor does it imply that the equipment, instruments or materials identified are necessarily the best available for the purpose.

Author information

Author notes

1. Yanghua He
   Present address: Department of Human Nutrition, Food and Animal Sciences, College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Honolulu, HI, USA

Authors and Affiliations

1. Department of Hematology, St Jude Children’s Research Hospital, Memphis, TN, USA
   Cicera R. Lazzarotto, Nikolay L. Malinin, Yichao Li, GaHyun Lee, Yanghua He, Xin Lan, Kasey Jividen, Varun Katta, Qian Qi, Yong Cheng & Shengdar Q. Tsai
2. Computational Biology Department, School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
   Ruochi Zhang, Yang Yang & Jian Ma
3. Roche Sequencing & Life Science, Roche Diagnostics, Indianapolis, IN, USA
   Eleanor Cowley
4. National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD, USA
   Natalia G. Kolmakova & Samantha Maragh
5. Department of Bone Marrow Transplantation & Cellular Therapy, St Jude Children’s Research Hospital, Memphis, TN, USA
   Christopher T. Petersen & Giedre Krenciute
6. Physical Measurement Laboratory, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD, USA
   Evgheni Strelcov
7. Maryland NanoCenter, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA
   Evgheni Strelcov

Authors

1. Cicera R. Lazzarotto
   You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
2. Nikolay L. Malinin
   You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
3. Yichao Li
   You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
4. Ruochi Zhang
   You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
5. Yang Yang
   You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
6. GaHyun Lee
   You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
7. Eleanor Cowley
   You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
8. Yanghua He
   You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
9. Xin Lan
   You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
10. Kasey Jividen
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
11. Varun Katta
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
12. Natalia G. Kolmakova
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
13. Christopher T. Petersen
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
14. Qian Qi
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
15. Evgheni Strelcov
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
16. Samantha Maragh
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
17. Giedre Krenciute
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
18. Jian Ma
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
19. Yong Cheng
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
20. Shengdar Q. Tsai
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

C.R.L. and S.Q.T. conceived of and designed the study. C.R.L., N.L.M., G.L., E.C., Y.H., X.L., K.J., V.K., N.G.K., E.S. and C.T.P. performed experiments. Y.L., Y.Y., R.Z. and Y.H. performed computational analyses. S.M., G.K., J.M., Y.C. and S.Q.T. supervised the project. C.R.L. and S.Q.T. wrote the paper with input from all authors.

Corresponding author

Correspondence toShengdar Q. Tsai.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

C.R.L. and S.Q.T. have filed a patent application on CHANGE-seq. S.Q.T. is a co-inventor on patents covering CIRCLE-seq and GUIDE-seq. S.Q.T. is a member of the scientific advisory board of Kromatid.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Extended data

Extended Data Fig. 1 Detailed overview of CHANGE-seq method.

Genomic DNA is randomly tagmented to an average of ~400 bp with a custom Tn5-transposome with an uracil-containing adapter. 9-nt Tn5-generated gaps in the DNA are filled in with a high-fidelity uracil-tolerant U+ polymerase and sealed with Taq DNA ligase. 4 bp overhangs are released with a mixture of USER enzyme and T4 PNK. DNA molecules are circularized at low concentrations that favor intramolecular ligation. Unwanted linear DNA is degraded with an exonuclease cocktail (comprised of Exonuclease I, Lambda exonuclease and Plasmid-Safe ATP-dependent DNase). Purified circular DNA is treated with Cas9:sgRNA RNP and cleaved DNA ends at on- and off-target sites are released for NGS library preparation, PCR amplification, and pair-end high-throughput sequencing.

Extended Data Fig. 2 Schematic comparison of CIRCLE-seq and CHANGE-seq workflows.

CHANGE-seq eliminates the requirement for specialized equipment for physical DNA shearing along with 9 additional enzymatic or purification steps. The simplified workflow substantially streamlines the process, decreases the requirement of input genomic DNA for circularization by approximately 5-fold and reduces the number of reactions to process each sample by 10- to 20-fold to a single reaction per sample.

Extended Data Fig. 3 CHANGE-seq detects all or nearly all sites detected by GUIDE-seq.

Venn diagrams showing the number of overlapping off-target sites captured by CHANGE-seq (blue) and GUIDE-seq (clear). The top six comparisons are of standard targets; the bottom four comparisons are of repetitive targets commonly used to benchmark genome-wide off-target activity detection methods.

Extended Data Fig. 4 GUIDE-seq optimization for human primary CD4+/CD8+ T cells.

a, Viability of cell population assessed by FACS analysis with DAPI staining 3 days post nucleofection with dsODN with phosphorothioate modifications at 5’ end, 3’ end, both ends or without dsODN (n=3). b, Indel rates at the intended target sites 3 days post nucleofection with dsODN with phosphorothioate modifications modifications at 5’ end, 3’ end, both ends or without dsODN (n=3). c, Integration rates of dsODNs with phosphorothioate modifications at 5’ end, 3’ end, both ends or without dsODN (n=3). d, Viability of cell population assessed by FACS analysis with DAPI staining 3 days post nucleofection with different doses of dsODN with 3’ end modifications (n=3). e, Indels rates at the intended target sites 3 days post nucleofection with different doses of dsODN with 3’ end modifications (n=3). f, dsODN integration rates 3 days post nucleofection with different doses of dsODN with 3’ end modifications (n=3). g, Scatterplots of GUIDE-seq read counts (log scale) between two independently prepared GUIDE-seq libraries for 3 target sites, showing GUIDE-seq technical reproducibility. Correlation between two samples was calculated using Pearson’s correlation coefficient.

Extended Data Fig. 5 Detailed characterization of a specific and active sgRNA targeting the TRAC region.

a, Manhattan plot showing the genome-wide distribution of sites identified in vitro by CHANGE-seq (arrow indicates the on-target site). b, Visualization of sites detected by CHANGE-seq. The intended target sequence is shown in the top line. Cleaved sites (on- and off-target) are shown underneath and are ordered top to bottom by CHANGE-seq read count, with mismatches to the intended target sequence indicated by colored nucleotides. Note that output is truncated to top sites with a full listing in Supplementary Table 3. c, Manhattan plot showing the on-target site detected for TRAC site 3 by GUIDE-seq, with no off-target sites being identified (arrow indicates the on-target site). d, Visualization of sites detected by GUIDE-seq. e, Indels rates at the intended target site 3 days post nucleofection (n=3). f, Flow plot showing distribution of TCR αβ expression in control (red) versus cells edited with sgRNA targeting TRAC site 3 (light blue). These experiments were performed three times with similar results. g, Barplot showing the percentage of TCR disruption 14 days after nucleofection with sgRNA:Cas9 complex measured by flow cytometry analysis (n=3).

Extended Data Fig. 6 GUIDE-seq dsODN tag independent indel frequencies are strongly correlated with tag integration frequencies.

Comparison of standard targeted sequencing and rhAMPSeq, a multiplex targeted sequencing method used in our study to validate on- and off-target site mutations. Scatterplots of indel mutation frequencies (top) and tag integration frequencies (bottom), between standard amplicon sequencing and rhAMPSeq, for sgRNAs targeted against CTLA4 site 9 and TRAC site 2 (See Methods). b, Scatterplots showing correlation between indel frequencies (in cells edited with Cas9 RNPs and no dsODN tag) and tag integration frequencies (in cells edited with Cas9 RNP and dsODN tag) at on- and off-target sites measured by targeted amplicon sequencing. (a-b) Correlation between two samples was calculated using Pearson’s correlation coefficient.

Extended Data Fig. 7 Targeted tag sequencing validation of CHANGE-seq detected off-target sites.

Targeted tag integration frequencies evaluated by standard targeted sequencing (triangle shape) and or rhAMPSeq (circle shape) (See Methods) at on- and off-target sites detected by both GUIDE-seq and CHANGE-seq, or detected by CHANGE-seq only (classes A-D), for sgRNAs targeted to TRAC site 2 and CTLA4 site 9. Panels for sites identified by both GUIDE-seq and CHANGE-seq and classes A and B for TRAC site 2 duplicated from main Fig. 4f for completeness.

Extended Data Fig. 8 GUIDE-seq read counts are strongly correlated with indel and tag integration frequencies in human primary T cells.

a, Scatterplots showing correlation between indel frequencies and GUIDE-seq read counts at on- and off-target sites, and b, tag integration and GUIDE-seq read counts at on- and off-target sites. (a-b) Correlation between two samples was calculated using Pearson’s correlation coefficient.

Extended Data Fig. 9 Influence of chromatin state on CRISPR-Cas9 genome-wide off-target activity.

a, Barplots showing the enrichment of individual epigenetic feature in GUIDE-seq (n=1,196), CHANGE-seq (n=11,000) and Cas-OFFinder (n=11,000). Statistical significance was calculated using two-tailed Welch’s t-test. Error bars indicate 95% confidence interval, estimated from 1000 bootstrap samples. b, Heatmap showing fold enrichment for various genomic annotations computed by ChromHMM for validation of chromatin state annotations. Darker colors represent higher fold enrichment.

Extended Data Fig. 10 CHANGE-seq enables detection of effects of individual genetic variation on genome-wide activity of genome editors.

a, Scatterplots of CHANGE-seq read counts (log scale) between two CHANGE-seq libraries independently prepared from the same source of genomic DNA, evaluating 6 target sites in 7 different genomes, showing that CHANGE-seq is highly reproducible. Correlation between two samples was calculated using Pearson’s correlation coefficient. b, Pairwise M/A plots for visualizing read count differences. The ratio (M) versus the average (A) of CHANGE-seq read counts (log scale) performed on the indicated GIAB or human T-cell sample versus a GM12878 GIAB reference sample. Each point represents an off-target site, and off-target sites that contain a non-reference single-nucleotide variant (SNV) are labelled in red.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Protocol, Supplementary Note, Supplementary Table 1, Supplementary Figures 1–3.

Reporting Summary

Supplementary Tables 2–8

This file contains Supplementary Tables 2–8. Supplementary Table 2 contains sgRNA target sites and NGS primers list; Supplementary Table 3 contains complete list of CHANGE-seq-detected sites; Supplementary Table 4 contains a list of CHANGE-seq target site specificity ratios; Supplementary Table 5 contains a list of on-target site targeted sequencing counts; Supplementary Table 6 contains a complete list of GUIDE-seq-detected sites; Supplementary Table 7 contains a list of off-target site targeted sequencing counts (standard targeted sequencing); Supplementary Table 8 contains a list of off-target site targeted sequencing counts (rhAmpSeq).

Rights and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lazzarotto, C.R., Malinin, N.L., Li, Y. et al. CHANGE-seq reveals genetic and epigenetic effects on CRISPR–Cas9 genome-wide activity.Nat Biotechnol 38, 1317–1327 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41587-020-0555-7

Download citation

• Received: 09 July 2019
• Accepted: 06 May 2020
• Published: 15 June 2020
• Issue Date: November 2020
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41587-020-0555-7