The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Crass: identification and reconstruction of CRISPR from unassembled metagenomic data
Open accessAbstract
Clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR) constitute a bacterial and archaeal adaptive immune system that protect against bacteriophage (phage). Analysis of CRISPR loci reveals the history of phage infections and provides a direct link between phage and their hosts. All current tools for CRISPR identification have been developed to analyse completed genomes and are not well suited to the analysis of metagenomic data sets, where CRISPR loci are difficult to assemble owing to their repetitive structure and population heterogeneity. Here, we introduce a new algorithm, Crass, which is designed to identify and reconstruct CRISPR loci from raw metagenomic data without the need for assembly or prior knowledge of CRISPR in the data set. CRISPR in assembled data are often fragmented across many contigs/scaffolds and do not fully represent the population heterogeneity of CRISPR loci. Crass identified substantially more CRISPR in metagenomes previously analysed using assembly-based approaches. Using Crass, we were able to detect CRISPR that contained spacers with sequence homology to phage in the system, which would not have been identified using other approaches. The increased sensitivity, specificity and speed of Crass will facilitate comprehensive analysis of CRISPRs in metagenomic data sets, increasing our understanding of phage-host interactions and co-evolution within microbial communities.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
BLAST+: architecture and applications
Camacho, C., Coulouris, G., Avagyan, V., Ma, N., Papadopoulos, J., Bealer, K., & Madden, T. L. (2009) · BMC Bioinformatics · doi:10.1186/1471-2105-10-421 · Cited by 22,074
Cited by
Roux, S., Camargo, A. P., Coutinho, F. H., Dabdoub, S. M., Dutilh, B. E., Nayfach, S., & Tritt, A. (2023) · PLOS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3002083 · Cited by 466
Soil Viruses Are Underexplored Players in Ecosystem Carbon Processing
Trubl, G., Jang, H. B., Roux, S., Emerson, J. B., Solonenko, N., Vik, D. R., Solden, L., Ellenbogen, J., Runyon, A. T., Bolduc, B., et al. (2018) · mSystems · doi:10.1128/msystems.00076-18 · Cited by 355
Self-citationCRISPRDetect: A flexible algorithm to define CRISPR arrays
Biswas, A., Staals, R. H. J., Morales, S. E., Fineran, P. C., & Brown, C. M. (2016) · BMC Genomics · doi:10.1186/s12864-016-2627-0 · Cited by 329
Wildfire-dependent changes in soil microbiome diversity and function
Nelson, A. R., Narrowe, A. B., Rhoades, C. C., Fegel, T. S., Daly, R. A., Roth, H. K., Chu, R. K., Amundson, K. K., Young, R. B., Steindorff, A. S., et al. (2022) · Nature Microbiology · doi:10.1038/s41564-022-01203-y · Cited by 259
Meta-analysis of cheese microbiomes highlights contributions to multiple aspects of quality
Walsh, A. M., Macori, G., Kilcawley, K. N., & Cotter, P. D. (2020) · Nature Food · doi:10.1038/s43016-020-0129-3 · Cited by 133
Metadata
- Authors
- Skennerton, C. T., Imelfort, M., & Tyson, G. W.
- Venue
- Nucleic Acids Research
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2013-03-19
- Volume
- 41
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- e105-e105
- ISSN
- 0305-1048 (ISSN-L)
- 1362-4962
- OpenAlex
- W2163481728
- Cited by
- 179
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 3.36
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Crass: identification and reconstruction of CRISPR from unassembled metagenomic data. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/nar/gkt183
- The paper
- Skennerton, C. T., Imelfort, M., & Tyson, G. W. (2013). Crass: identification and reconstruction of CRISPR from unassembled metagenomic data. Nucleic Acids Research. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkt183
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.