Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

Type III CRISPR–Cas systems produce cyclic oligoadenylate second messengers

Nature volume 548, pages 543–548 (2017)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

In many prokaryotes, type III clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeat (CRISPR)–CRISPR-associated (Cas) systems detect and degrade invasive genetic elements by an RNA-guided, RNA-targeting multisubunit interference complex. The CRISPR-associated protein Csm6 additionally contributes to interference by functioning as a standalone RNase that degrades invader RNA transcripts, but the mechanism linking invader sensing to Csm6 activity is not understood. Here we show that Csm6 proteins are activated through a second messenger generated by the type III interference complex. Upon target RNA binding by the interference complex, its Cas10 subunit converts ATP into a cyclic oligoadenylate product, which allosterically activates Csm6 by binding to its CRISPR-associated Rossmann fold (CARF) domain. CARF domain mutations that abolish allosteric activation inhibit Csm6 activity in vivo, and mutations in the Cas10 Palm domain phenocopy loss of Csm6. Together, these results point to an unprecedented mechanism for regulation of CRISPR interference that bears striking conceptual similarity to oligoadenylate signalling in mammalian innate immunity.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Csm6 is allosterically activated by oligoA nucleotides.
Figure 2: The CARF domain mediates allosteric activation of Csm6.
Figure 3: The Cas10 complex activates Csm6 via a diffusible second messenger.
Figure 4: The Palm domain of Cas10 generates cyclic hexaadenylate in vitro.
Figure 5: In vivo activity of Csm6 is dependent on cyclic oligoA and Cas10.
Figure 6: Proposed model for the molecular mechanism of type III CRISPR–Cas systems.

Similar content being viewed by others

Accession codes

Accessions

Protein Data Bank

References

  1. Mohanraju, P. et al. Diverse evolutionary roots and mechanistic variations of the CRISPR-Cas systems. Science 353, aad5147 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Marraffini, L. A. CRISPR–Cas immunity in prokaryotes. Nature 526, 55–61 (2015)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Sorek, R., Lawrence, C. M. & Wiedenheft, B. CRISPR-mediated adaptive immune systems in bacteria and archaea. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 82, 237–266 (2013)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Koonin, E. V., Makarova, K. S. & Zhang, F. Diversity, classification and evolution of CRISPR-Cas systems. Curr. Opin. Microbiol. 37, 67–78 (2017)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Makarova, K. S. et al. An updated evolutionary classification of CRISPR–Cas systems. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 13, 722–736 (2015)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Samai, P. et al. Co-transcriptional DNA and RNA cleavage during Type III CRISPR-Cas immunity. Cell 161, 1164–1174 (2015)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Goldberg, G. W., Jiang, W., Bikard, D. & Marraffini, L. A. Conditional tolerance of temperate phages via transcription-dependent CRISPR–Cas targeting. Nature 514, 633–637 (2014)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Deng, L., Garrett, R. A., Shah, S. A., Peng, X. & She, Q. A novel interference mechanism by a type IIIB CRISPR-Cmr module in Sulfolobus. Mol. Microbiol. 87, 1088–1099 (2013)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Elmore, J. R. et al. Bipartite recognition of target RNAs activates DNA cleavage by the type III-B CRISPR-Cas system. Genes Dev. 30, 447–459 (2016)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Estrella, M. A., Kuo, F.-T. & Bailey, S. RNA-activated DNA cleavage by the type III-B CRISPR-Cas effector complex. Genes Dev. 30, 460–470 (2016)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Kazlauskiene, M., Tamulaitis, G., Kostiuk, G., Venclovas, Č. & Siksnys, V. Spatiotemporal control of type III-A CRISPR-Cas immunity: coupling DNA degradation with the target RNA recognition. Mol. Cell 62, 295–306 (2016)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Tamulaitis, G., Venclovas, Č. & Siksnys, V. Type III CRISPR-Cas immunity: major differences brushed aside. Trends Microbiol. 25, 49–61 (2017)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Makarova, K. S., Anantharaman, V., Grishin, N. V., Koonin, E. V. & Aravind, L. CARF and WYL domains: ligand-binding regulators of prokaryotic defense systems. Front. Genet. 5, 102 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Anantharaman, V., Makarova, K. S., Burroughs, A. M., Koonin, E. V. & Aravind, L. Comprehensive analysis of the HEPN superfamily: identification of novel roles in intra-genomic conflicts, defense, pathogenesis and RNA processing. Biol. Direct 8, 15 (2013)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Hatoum-Aslan, A., Maniv, I., Samai, P. & Marraffini, L. A. Genetic characterization of antiplasmid immunity through a type III-A CRISPR-Cas system. J. Bacteriol. 196, 310–317 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Jiang, W., Samai, P. & Marraffini, L. A. Degradation of phage transcripts by CRISPR-associated RNases enables type III CRISPR-Cas immunity. Cell 164, 710–721 (2016)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Niewoehner, O. & Jinek, M. Structural basis for the endoribonuclease activity of the type III-A CRISPR-associated protein Csm6. RNA 22, 318–329 (2016)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Sheppard, N. F., Glover, C. V. C., III, Terns, R. M. & Terns, M. P. The CRISPR-associated Csx1 protein of Pyrococcus furiosus is an adenosine-specific endoribonuclease. RNA 22, 216–224 (2016)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Staals, R. H. J. et al. RNA targeting by the type III-A CRISPR-Cas Csm complex of Thermus thermophilus. Mol. Cell 56, 518–530 (2014)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Tamulaitis, G. et al. Programmable RNA shredding by the type III-A CRISPR-Cas system of Streptococcus thermophilus. Mol. Cell 56, 506–517 (2014)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Hatoum-Aslan, A., Samai, P., Maniv, I., Jiang, W. & Marraffini, L. A. A ruler protein in a complex for antiviral defense determines the length of small interfering CRISPR RNAs. J. Biol. Chem. 288, 27888–27897 (2013)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Burroughs, A. M., Zhang, D., Schäffer, D. E., Iyer, L. M. & Aravind, L. Comparative genomic analyses reveal a vast, novel network of nucleotide-centric systems in biological conflicts, immunity and signaling. Nucleic Acids Res. 43, 10633–10654 (2015)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Yan, X., Guo, W. & Yuan, Y. A. Crystal structures of CRISPR-associated Csx3 reveal a manganese-dependent deadenylation exoribonuclease. RNA Biol. 12, 749–760 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Topuzlu, E. & Lawrence, C. M. Recognition of a pseudo-symmetric RNA tetranucleotide by Csx3, a new member of the CRISPR associated Rossmann fold superfamily. RNA Biol. 13, 254–257 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Carroll, S. S. et al. Activation of RNase L by 2′,5′-oligoadenylates. Kinetic characterization. J. Biol. Chem. 272, 19193–19198 (1997)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Prischi, F., Nowak, P. R., Carrara, M. & Ali, M. M. U. Phosphoregulation of Ire1 RNase splicing activity. Nat. Commun. 5, 3554 (2014)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  27. Staals, R. H. J. et al. Structure and activity of the RNA-targeting Type III-B CRISPR-Cas complex of Thermus thermophilus. Mol. Cell 52, 135–145 (2013)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Hale, C. R., Cocozaki, A., Li, H., Terns, R. M. & Terns, M. P. Target RNA capture and cleavage by the Cmr type III-B CRISPR-Cas effector complex. Genes Dev. 28, 2432–2443 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Makarova, K. S. et al. Evolution and classification of the CRISPR–Cas systems. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 9, 467–477 (2011)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Osawa, T., Inanaga, H. & Numata, T. Crystal structure of the Cmr2-Cmr3 subcomplex in the CRISPR-Cas RNA silencing effector complex. J. Mol. Biol. 425, 3811–3823 (2013)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Kalia, D. et al. Nucleotide, c-di-GMP, c-di-AMP, cGMP, cAMP, (p)ppGpp signaling in bacteria and implications in pathogenesis. Chem. Soc. Rev. 42, 305–341 (2013)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Hornung, V., Hartmann, R., Ablasser, A. & Hopfner, K.-P. OAS proteins and cGAS: unifying concepts in sensing and responding to cytosolic nucleic acids. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 14, 521–528 (2014)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. East-Seletsky, A. et al. Two distinct RNase activities of CRISPR-C2c2 enable guide-RNA processing and RNA detection. Nature 538, 270–273 (2016)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. He, F., Vestergaard, G., Peng, W., She, Q. & Peng, X. CRISPR-Cas type I-A Cascade complex couples viral infection surveillance to host transcriptional regulation in the dependence of Csa3b. Nucleic Acids Res. 45, 1902–1913 (2017)

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Lintner, N. G. et al. The structure of the CRISPR-associated protein Csa3 provides insight into the regulation of the CRISPR/Cas system. J. Mol. Biol. 405, 939–955 (2011)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Geertsma, E. R. FX cloning: a simple and robust high-throughput cloning method for protein expression. Methods Mol. Biol. 1116, 153–164 (2014)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Kreiswirth, B. N. et al. The toxic shock syndrome exotoxin structural gene is not detectably transmitted by a prophage. Nature 305, 709–712 (1983)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Krissinel, E. & Henrick, K. Secondary-structure matching (SSM), a new tool for fast protein structure alignment in three dimensions. Acta Crystallogr. D 60, 2256–2268 (2004)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Sievers, F. et al. Fast, scalable generation of high-quality protein multiple sequence alignments using Clustal Omega. Mol. Syst. Biol. 7, 539 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Gouet, P., Courcelle, E., Stuart, D. I. & Métoz, F. ESPript: analysis of multiple sequence alignments in PostScript. Bioinformatics 15, 305–308 (1999)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Kelley, L. A., Mezulis, S., Yates, C. M., Wass, M. N. & Sternberg, M. J. E. The Phyre2 web portal for protein modeling, prediction and analysis. Nat. Protocols 10, 845–858 (2015)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank members of the Jinek and Marraffini laboratories for discussions and comments on the manuscript. We thank D. Swarts and P. Sledz for technical assistance and sharing reagents. We thank U. Manzau for technical assistance during A4>P synthesis and purification. We thank the Service for Mass Spectrometry of ETH Zurich for support with MS analysis. This study was supported by a Swiss National Science Foundation project grant to M.J. (SNSF 31003A_149393) and by funding from the Swiss National Competence Center for Research (NCCR) ‘RNA & Disease’ (to M.J. and J.H.). M.J. is an International Research Scholar of the Howard Hughes Medical Institute and Vallee Scholar of the Bert L & N Kuggie Vallee Foundation. C.G.-D. was supported by a Long-Term Fellowship from the European Molecular Biology Organization. J.T.R. was supported by a Boehringer Ingelheim Fonds PhD fellowship. L.A.M. is supported by the Rita Allen Scholars Program, a Burroughs Wellcome Fund PATH award, a National Institutes of Health Director’s New Innovator Award (1DP2AI104556-01), and a Howard Hughes Medical Institute-Simons Faculty Scholar Award.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Ole Niewoehner and Carmela Garcia-Doval: These authors contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biochemistry, University of Zurich, Winterthurerstrasse 190, Zurich, CH-8057, Switzerland

    Ole Niewoehner, Carmela Garcia-Doval & Martin Jinek

  2. Laboratory of Bacteriology, The Rockefeller University, 1230 York Avenue, New York, 10065-6399, New York, USA

    Jakob T. Rostøl & Luciano A. Marraffini

  3. Department of Chemistry and Applied Biosciences, Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Vladimir-Prelog-Weg 1-5/10, Zurich, 8093, Switzerland

    Christian Berk & Jonathan Hall

  4. BIOLOG Life Science Institute GmbH, Flughafendamm 9a, Bremen, D-28199, Germany

    Frank Schwede

  5. Department of Chemistry, University of Zurich, Winterthurerstrasse 190, Zurich, CH-8057, Switzerland

    Laurent Bigler

Authors
  1. Ole Niewoehner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Carmela Garcia-Doval
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jakob T. Rostøl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Christian Berk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Frank Schwede
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Laurent Bigler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Jonathan Hall
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Luciano A. Marraffini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Martin Jinek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

O.N., C.G.-D., and M.J. conceived the study. O.N., C.G.-D., J.T.R., L.M., and M.J. designed experiments. O.N. expressed and purified recombinant Csm6 proteins, performed oligoA activation and ATPase assays, and performed enzymatic probing of the cyclic oligoA product. C.G.-D. expressed and purified recombinant EiCsm(1–5) complexes, performed oligoA activation assays, and assisted with LC–MS analysis. J.T.R. performed phage infection assays under supervision of L.M. C.B. synthesized 2′,3′-cyclic phosphate-terminated nucleotides and performed LC–MS analysis under supervision of J.H. F.S. synthesized 2′,3′-cyclic phosphate-terminated A4 nucleotide and advised on nucleotide chemistry. L.B. performed additional LC–MS analyses of Csm6 activators. O.N., C.G.-D., and M.J. wrote the manuscript, with input from the remaining authors.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Martin Jinek.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

F.S. is an employee of BIOLOG Life Science Institute GmbH, which markets synthetic nucleotides. The other authors declare no competing financial interests.

Additional information

Reviewer Information Nature thanks S. Bailey, P. Kranzusch and R. Staals for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

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

Extended data figures and tables

Extended Data Figure 1 AfCsx3 resembles the CARF domain of TtCsm6.

Left: structure of AfCsx3 (Protein Data Bank (PDB) accession number 3WZI) bound to a tetraribonucleotide. Centre: structure of the CARF domain dimer of TtCsm6 (PDB 5FSH). Right: superimposition of AfCsx3 (grey) and TtCsm6 (pink and blue). The structures were aligned using PDBeFold38.

Extended Data Figure 2 Activation of Csm6 ribonucleases by oligoadenylates.

a, TtCsm6 RNase activity assay in the presence of 3′-hydroxylated oligoadenylates ranging from A3 to A10. b, SDS–PAGE analysis of purified WT and mutant Csm6 proteins from T. thermophilus (TtCsm6), M. thermautotrophicus (MtCsm), and E. italicus (EiCsm6). c, d, MtCsm6 and EiCsm6 RNase activity assays in the presence of 3′-hydroxylated oligoadenylates ranging from A3 to A10. e, MtCsm6 RNase activity assay in the presence of oligoadenylates carrying 3′-hydroxyl (-OH) or 2′,3′-cyclic phosphate (>P) groups. f, TtCsm6 and EiCsm6 RNase activity assay in the presence of A4>P and A6>P. All data points represent the mean of three replicates ± s.e.m.

Extended Data Figure 3 Activation of EiCsm6 by A6>P.

a, EiCsm6 RNase assay in the presence of varying concentrations of A6>P. b, The log(dose)-versus-response curve and EC50 derived from assays in a. Errors are indicated as 95% confidence interval. All data points represent the mean of three replicates ± s.e.m.

Extended Data Figure 4 Conservation and structure of the CARF domain motif.

a, Multiple sequence alignment of the CARF domain motifs in Csm6. The polypeptide sequence of EiCsm6 (denoted with an arrow) was used for a BLAST search against the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) non-redundant protein sequences database and 19 best scoring hits with >95% query coverage were selected. The multiple sequence alignment was performed using Clustal Omega39 and visualized using ESPript 3 (ref. 40). Green asterisk denotes the conserved glutamine residue mutated to abrogate allosteric activation of EiCsm6. b, Zoom-in view of a structural model of the dimeric interface of the CARF domains in the EiCsm6 dimer. The model was generated using Phyre2 (ref. 41) on the basis of the TtCsm6 crystal structure (PDB 5FSH).

Extended Data Figure 5 Purification and crRNA-guided RNA cleavage by the EiCsm(1–5) complex.

a, E. italicus DSM15952 contains a CRISPR–Cas locus with nine cas genes followed by a repeat-spacer array. For heterologous expression of the EiCsm(1–5) complex, the genomic DNA fragment spanning genes csm1–csm6 and cas6 and the first two repeat-spacer units in the CRISPR array was cloned into the expression plasmid. b, SDS–PAGE analysis of purified wild-type and mutant EiCsm(1–5) complexes. c, Denaturing gel of the products of a target RNase cleavage assay performed using a fluorophore-labelled target ssRNA substrate in the presence of WT or mutant EiCsm(1–5) complexes.

Extended Data Figure 6 The EiCsm(1–5) complex generates cyclic hexaadenylate.

a, Denaturing 20% polyacrylamide gel indicating time-resolved [α-32P]ATP oligomerization by the EiCsm(1–5) complex. b, Mass spectra of LC–MS peaks from the analysis of the products generated by the EiCsm(1–5)–dCsm3D32A and EiCsm(1–5)–dCas10Palm/dCsm3D32A complexes shown in Fig. 4c. The mass spectrum of synthetic A6>P standard is shown for comparison.

Extended Data Figure 7 LC–MS analysis of purified EiCsm(1–5) product.

a, c, e, LC–MS analysis of the HPLC-purified activator product generated by the EiCsm(1–5) complex as well as an A6>P standard and purified product spiked with the A6>P standard. b, d, f, Mass spectra of the peaks indicated in a, c, e.

Extended Data Figure 8 The EiCsm(1–5) complex generates cyclic hexaadenylate.

a, Left: LC–MS analysis of the nuclease S1 digested activator. Right: mass spectrum profile of the peak obtained after S1 digest. b, EiCsm6 RNase assay in the presence of varying concentrations of c-A6. c, Overlay of EC50 values obtained for A6>P and c-A6. Errors are indicated as 95% confidence interval and data points represent mean of three replicates ± s.e.m.

Extended Data Figure 9 The EiCsm(1–5) complex selectively incorporates adenosines into the activator.

a, Stimulation of EiCsm6 RNase activity by products generated by the EiCsm(1–5) complex in the presence of various ribonucleotide triphosphate combinations. b, LC–MS analysis of indicated samples from a. The elution profile (left) and mass spectrum (right) of the product remain unaltered upon addition of all four ribonucleotide triphosphates, indicating ATP selectivity of the EiCsm(1–5) complex.

Extended Data Figure 10 Proposed mechanism of cyclic oligoadenylate formation.

The Cas10 Palm domain initially catalyses 5′–3′ phosphodiester bond formation by a nucleophilic attack of the 3′-hydroxyl group of one ATP substrate molecule onto the α-phosphate group of a second ATP molecule, yielding a 5′-triphosphorylated dinucleotide and inorganic pyrophosphate (PPi). The dinucleotide is extended by addition of successive AMP moieties to the 3′ end to generate a linear oligonucleotide. Final cyclization involves the 3′-hydroxyl group attacking the α-phosphate group of the 5′-triphosphate moiety in the linear oligoadenylate intermediate. Notably, all reaction steps use the same catalytic mechanism and thus could be performed by a single catalytic active site in the Palm domain of Cas10.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Figure

This file contains the uncropped gels. (PDF 941 kb)

Reporting Summary (PDF 67 kb)

Supplementary Data

This file contains Supplementary Table 1 (XLSX 11 kb)

Supplementary Data

This file contains Supplementary Table 2. (XLSX 11 kb)

PowerPoint slides

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Niewoehner, O., Garcia-Doval, C., Rostøl, J. et al. Type III CRISPR–Cas systems produce cyclic oligoadenylate second messengers. Nature 548, 543–548 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature23467

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature23467

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing Microbiology

Sign up for the Nature Briefing: Microbiology newsletter — what matters in microbiology research, free to your inbox weekly.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing: Microbiology