Bainton, R. J., Kubo, K. M., Feng, J. & Craig, N. L. Tn7 transposition: target DNA recognition is mediated by multiple Tn7-encoded proteins in a purified in vitro system. Cell 72, 931–943 (1993).
Google Scholar
Klompe, S. E., Vo, P. L. H., Halpin-Healy, T. S. & Sternberg, S. H. Transposon-encoded CRISPR–Cas systems direct RNA-guided DNA integration. Nature 571, 219–225 (2019).
Google Scholar
Strecker, J. et al. RNA-guided DNA insertion with CRISPR-associated transposases. Science 365, 48–53 (2019).
Google Scholar
Peters, J. E. Tn7. Microbiol. Spectr. 2, MDNA3-0010-2014 (2014).
Koonin, E. V. Viruses and mobile elements as drivers of evolutionary transitions. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 371, 20150442 (2016).
Google Scholar
Hickman, A. B. & Dyda, F. Mechanisms of DNA Transposition. Microbiol. Spectr. 3, MDNA3-0034-2014 (2015).
Google Scholar
Peters, J. E. Targeted transposition with Tn7 elements: safe sites, mobile plasmids, CRISPR/Cas and beyond. Mol. Microbiol. 112, 1635–1644 (2019).
Google Scholar
Sarnovsky, R. J., May, E. W. & Craig, N. L. The Tn7 transposase is a heteromeric complex in which DNA breakage and joining activities are distributed between different gene products. EMBO J. 15, 6348–6361 (1996).
Google Scholar
Choi, K. Y., Spencer, J. M. & Craig, N. L. The Tn7 transposition regulator TnsC interacts with the transposase subunit TnsB and target selector TnsD. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, E2858–E2865 (2014).
Google Scholar
Peters, J. E. & Craig, N. L. Tn7 recognizes transposition target structures associated with DNA replication using the DNA-binding protein TnsE. Gene Dev. 15, 737–747 (2001).
Google Scholar
Stellwagen, A. E. & Craig, N. L. Gain-of-function mutations in TnsC, an ATP-dependent transposition protein that activates the bacterial transposon Tn7. Genetics 145, 573–585 (1997).
Google Scholar
Kuduvalli, P. N., Rao, J. E. & Craig, N. L. Target DNA structure plays a critical role in Tn7 transposition. EMBO J. 20, 924–932 (2001).
Google Scholar
Stellwagen, A. E. & Craig, N. L. Analysis of gain-of-function mutants of an ATP-dependent regulator of Tn7 transposition. J. Mol. Biol. 305, 633–642 (2001).
Google Scholar
Peters, J. E., Makarova, K. S., Shmakov, S. & Koonin, E. V. Recruitment of CRISPR-Cas systems by Tn7-like transposons. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, E7358–E7366 (2017).
Google Scholar
Faure, G. et al. CRISPR–Cas in mobile genetic elements: counter-defence and beyond. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 17, 513–525 (2019).
Google Scholar
Saito, M. et al. Dual modes of CRISPR-associated transposon homing. Cell 184, 2441–2453 (2021).
Google Scholar
Vo, P. L. H. et al. CRISPR RNA-guided integrases for high-efficiency, multiplexed bacterial genome engineering. Nat. Biotechnol. 39, 480–489 (2021).
Google Scholar
Halpin-Healy, T. S., Klompe, S. E., Sternberg, S. H. & Fernández, I. S. Structural basis of DNA targeting by a transposon-encoded CRISPR–Cas system. Nature 577, 271–274 (2020).
Google Scholar
Snider, J., Thibault, G. & Houry, W. A. The AAA+ superfamily of functionally diverse proteins. Genome Biol. 9, 216 (2008).
Google Scholar
Puchades, C., Sandate, C. R. & Lander, G. C. The molecular principles governing the activity and functional diversity of AAA+ proteins. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 21, 43–58 (2020).
Google Scholar
Holder, J. W. & Craig, N. L. Architecture of the Tn7 posttransposition complex: an elaborate nucleoprotein structure. J. Mol. Biol. 401, 167–181 (2010).
Google Scholar
Shen, Y. et al. Structural basis for DNA targeting by the Tn7 transposon. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 29, 143–151 (2022).
Google Scholar
Park, J.-U. et al. Structural basis for target site selection in RNA-guided DNA transposition systems. Science 373, 768–774 (2021).
Google Scholar
Querques, I., Schmitz, M., Oberli, S., Chanez, C. & Jinek, M. Target site selection and remodelling by type V CRISPR-transposon systems. Nature 599, 497–502 (2021).
Google Scholar
Vo, P. L. H., Acree, C., Smith, M. L. & Sternberg, S. H. Unbiased profiling of CRISPR RNA-guided transposition products by long-read sequencing. Mob. DNA 12, 13 (2021).
Google Scholar
Ronning, D. R. et al. The carboxy‐terminal portion of TnsC activates the Tn7 transposase through a specific interaction with TnsA. EMBO J. 23, 2972–2981 (2004).
Google Scholar
Leenay, R. T. & Beisel, C. L. Deciphering, communicating, and engineering the CRISPR PAM. J. Mol. Biol. 429, 177–191 (2017).
Google Scholar
Kuscu, C., Arslan, S., Singh, R., Thorpe, J. & Adli, M. Genome-wide analysis reveals characteristics of off-target sites bound by the Cas9 endonuclease. Nat. Biotechnol. 32, 677–683 (2014).
Google Scholar
Wu, X. et al. Genome-wide binding of the CRISPR endonuclease Cas9 in mammalian cells. Nat. Biotechnol. 32, 670–676 (2014).
Google Scholar
Cooper, L. A., Stringer, A. M. & Wade, J. T. Determining the specificity of cascade binding, interference, and primed adaptation in vivo in the Escherichia coli type I-E CRISPR-Cas system. mBio 9, e02100-17 (2018).
Google Scholar
Thakore, P. I. et al. Highly specific epigenome editing by CRISPR-Cas9 repressors for silencing of distal regulatory elements. Nat. Methods 12, 1143–1149 (2015).
Google Scholar
O’Geen, H., Henry, I. M., Bhakta, M. S., Meckler, J. F. & Segal, D. J. A genome-wide analysis of Cas9 binding specificity using ChIP-seq and targeted sequence capture. Nucleic Acids Res. 43, 3389–3404 (2015).
Google Scholar
Zhang, Y. et al. Model-based analysis of ChIP-Seq (MACS). Genome Biol. 9, R137 (2008).
Google Scholar
Bailey, T. L. et al. MEME suite: tools for motif discovery and searching. Nucleic Acids Res. 37, W202–W208 (2009).
Google Scholar
Klompe, S. E. et al. Evolutionary and mechanistic diversity of type I-F CRISPR-associated transposons. Mol. Cell 82, 616–628 (2022).
Google Scholar
Xiao, Y. et al. Structure basis for directional R-loop formation and substrate handover mechanisms in type I CRISPR-Cas system. Cell 170, 48–60 (2017).
Google Scholar
Semenova, E. et al. The Cas6e ribonuclease is not required for interference and adaptation by the E. coli type I-E CRISPR-Cas system. Nucleic Acids Res. 43, 6049–6061 (2015).
Google Scholar
Jung, C. et al. Massively parallel biophysical analysis of CRISPR-Cas complexes on next generation sequencing chips. Cell 170, 35–47 (2017).
Google Scholar
Chen, C.-H. et al. Improved design and analysis of CRISPR knockout screens. Bioinformatics 34, 4095–4101 (2018).
Google Scholar
Rutkauskas, M. et al. Directional R-loop formation by the CRISPR-Cas surveillance complex cascade provides efficient off-target site rejection. Cell Rep. 10, 1534–1543 (2015).
Google Scholar
Qi, L. S. et al. Repurposing CRISPR as an RNA-guided platform for sequence-specific control of gene expression. Cell 152, 1173–1183 (2013).
Google Scholar
Young, G. et al. Quantitative mass imaging of single biological macromolecules. Science 360, 423–427 (2018).
Google Scholar
Zivanov, J. et al. New tools for automated high-resolution cryo-EM structure determination in RELION-3. eLife 7, e42166 (2018).
Google Scholar
Mizuno, N. et al. MuB is an AAA+ ATPase that forms helical filaments to control target selection for DNA transposition. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, E2441–E2450 (2013).
Google Scholar
Davey, M. J. & O’Donnell, M. Replicative helicase loaders: ring breakers and ring makers. Curr. Biol. 13, R594–R596 (2003).
Google Scholar
Jia, N., Xie, W., de la Cruz, M. J., Eng, E. T. & Patel, D. J. Structure–function insights into the initial step of DNA integration by a CRISPR–Cas–transposon complex. Cell Res. 30, 182–184 (2020).
Google Scholar
Arinkin, V., Smyshlyaev, G. & Barabas, O. Jump ahead with a twist: DNA acrobatics drive transposition forward. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 59, 168–177 (2019).
Google Scholar
Walker, D. M., Freddolino, P. L. & Harshey, R. M. A well-mixed E. coli Genome: widespread contacts revealed by tracking Mu transposition. Cell 180, 703–716 (2020).
Google Scholar
Jackson, R. N., van Erp, P. B., Sternberg, S. H. & Wiedenheft, B. Conformational regulation of CRISPR-associated nucleases. Curr. Opin. Microbiol. 37, 110–119 (2017).
Google Scholar
Schmiedeberg, L., Skene, P., Deaton, A. & Bird, A. A temporal threshold for formaldehyde crosslinking and fixation. PLoS ONE 4, e4636 (2009).
Google Scholar
Anzalone, A. V., Koblan, L. W. & Liu, D. R. Genome editing with CRISPR–Cas nucleases, base editors, transposases and prime editors. Nat. Biotechnol. 38, 824–844 (2020).
Google Scholar
Bonocora, R. P. & Wade, J. T. Bacterial transcriptional control, methods and protocols. Methods Mol. Biol. 1276, 327–340 (2015).
Google Scholar
Chen, S., Zhou, Y., Chen, Y. & Gu, J. fastp: an ultra-fast all-in-one FASTQ preprocessor. Bioinformatics 34, i884–i890 (2018).
Google Scholar
Langmead, B. & Salzberg, S. L. Fast gapped-read alignment with Bowtie 2. Nat. Methods 9, 357–359 (2012).
Google Scholar
Li, H. et al. The Sequence Alignment/Map format and SAMtools. Bioinformatics 25, 2078–2079 (2009).
Google Scholar
Ramírez, F. et al. deepTools2: a next generation web server for deep-sequencing data analysis. Nucleic Acids Res. 44, W160–W165 (2016).
Google Scholar
Robinson, J. T. et al. Integrative genomics viewer. Nat. Biotechnol. 29, 24–26 (2011).
Google Scholar
Quinlan, A. R. & Hall, I. M. BEDTools: a flexible suite of utilities for comparing genomic features. Bioinformatics 26, 841–842 (2010).
Google Scholar
Russo, C. J. & Passmore, L. A. Ultrastable gold substrates for electron cryomicroscopy. Science 346, 1377–1380 (2014).
Google Scholar
Suloway, C. et al. Automated molecular microscopy: the new Leginon system. J. Struct. Biol. 151, 41–60 (2005).
Google Scholar
Rohou, A. & Grigorieff, N. CTFFIND4: fast and accurate defocus estimation from electron micrographs. J. Struct. Biol. 192, 216–221 (2015).
Google Scholar
Zivanov, J., Nakane, T. & Scheres, S. H. W. Estimation of high-order aberrations and anisotropic magnification from cryo-EM data sets in RELION-3.1. IUCrJ 7, 253–267 (2020).
Google Scholar
Zivanov, J., Nakane, T. & Scheres, S. H. W. A Bayesian approach to beam-induced motion correction in cryo-EM single-particle analysis. IUCrJ 6, 5–17 (2019).
Google Scholar
Abrishami, V. et al. Localized reconstruction in Scipion expedites the analysis of symmetry mismatches in cryo-EM data. Prog. Biophys. Mol. Biol. 160, 43–52 (2021).
Google Scholar
Casañal, A., Lohkamp, B. & Emsley, P. Current developments in Coot for macromolecular model building of electron Cryo‐microscopy and crystallographic data. Protein Sci. 29, 1055–1064 (2020).
Google Scholar
Afonine, P. V. et al. Real-space refinement in PHENIX for cryo-EM and crystallography. Acta Crystallogr. D 74, 531–544 (2018).
Google Scholar
Murshudov, G. N., Vagin, A. A. & Dodson, E. J. Refinement of macromolecular structures by the maximum-likelihood method. Acta Crystallogr. D 53, 240–255 (1997).
Google Scholar
Brown, A. et al. Tools for macromolecular model building and refinement into electron cryo-microscopy reconstructions. Acta Crystallogr. D 71, 136–153 (2015).
Google Scholar
Prisant, M. G., Williams, C. J., Chen, V. B., Richardson, J. S. & Richardson, D. C. New tools in MolProbity validation: CaBLAM for CryoEM backbone, UnDowser to rethink “waters,” and NGL Viewer to recapture online 3D graphics. Protein Sci. 29, 315–329 (2020).
Google Scholar
Baker, N. A., Sept, D., Joseph, S., Holst, M. J. & McCammon, J. A. Electrostatics of nanosystems: application to microtubules and the ribosome. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 98, 10037–10041 (2001).
Google Scholar