Cited by 4CRISPR and Genetic EngineeringBacteriophages and microbial interactionsBacterial Genetics and Biotechnology

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

AcrIF11 is a potent CRISPR-specific ADP-ribosyltransferase encoded by phage and plasmid

Open access

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Phage-encoded anti-CRISPR (Acr) proteins inhibit CRISPR-Cas systems, allowing phage replication and lysogeny maintenance. Most of the Acrs characterized to date are stable stoichiometric inhibitors. While enzymatic Acrs have been characterized biochemically, little is known about their potency, specificity, and reversibility. Here, we examine AcrIF11, a widespread phage and plasmid-encoded ADP-ribosyltransferase (ART) that inhibits the Type I-F CRISPR-Cas system. We present a nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) structure of an AcrIF11 homolog that reveals chemical shift perturbations consistent with NAD (cofactor) binding. In experiments that model both lytic phage replication and MGE/lysogen stability under high targeting pressure, AcrIF11 is a highly potent CRISPR-Cas inhibitor and more robust to Cas protein-level fluctuations than stoichiometric inhibitors. Furthermore, we demonstrate that AcrIF11 is remarkably specific, predominantly ADP-ribosylating Csy1 when expressed in P. aeruginosa . Given the reversible nature of ADP-ribosylation, we hypothesized that ADPr eraser enzymes (macrodomains) could remove ADPr from Csy1, a potential limitation of PTM-based CRISPR inhibition. We demonstrate that a human macrodomain can indeed remove the modification from Csy1 in P. aeruginosa lysate. Together, these experiments connect the in vitro observations of AcrIF11’s enzymatic activity to its potent and specific effects in vivo , clarifying the advantages and drawbacks of enzymatic Acrs in the evolutionary arms race between phages and bacteria. IMPORTANCE: Bacteria have evolved diverse immune systems to prevent phage infection, and, consequently, phages have evolved diverse methods of evading bacterial immune systems. To evade the bacterial CRISPR-Cas immune system, phages encode anti-CRISPR proteins (Acrs). Acrs disable CRISPR-Cas by either stably binding to the CRISPR-Cas complex or by enzymatic modification. However, Acr enzymes have not been characterized in vivo during lytic infection or lysogenic maintenance. Here, we report the benefits and drawbacks of enzymatic inhibition with AcrIF11, an ADP-ribosyltransferase. Under “high pressure” scenarios such as high CRISPR targeting or CRISPR-Cas overexpression, AcrIF11 outperforms a strong, stable binding Acr by very specifically modifying the Cas8 protein, but nothing else in the cell. AcrIF11 additionally stabilizes lysogeny effectively, but the ADP-ribose modification can potentially be removed by macrodomains, which are ADP-ribose eraser enzymes. AcrIF11 is therefore a potent and widespread plasmid/phage-encoded inhibitor of Type I-F CRISPR-Cas systems with catalytic activity.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1128/mbio.01698-25

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 50

  1. 10.1146/annurev-micro-020518-120107 · DOI
  2. 10.1038/s41467-019-10577-3 · DOI
  3. 10.1038/s41586-024-07642-3 · DOI
  4. 10.1016/j.chom.2019.05.004 · DOI
  5. 10.1038/s41564-020-0692-2 · DOI
  6. 10.1093/nar/gkab1197 · DOI
  7. 10.1038/s41586-019-1909-5 · DOI
  8. 10.1038/s41594-019-0206-1 · DOI
  9. 10.1038/s41421-022-00396-0 · DOI
  10. 10.1016/j.molcel.2020.09.015 · DOI
  11. 10.1126/science.aau5174 · DOI
  12. 10.1038/s41586-020-1936-2 · DOI
  13. 10.1021/bi035907z · DOI
  14. 10.1038/embor.2008.90 · DOI
  15. 10.1074/jbc.M201844200 · DOI
  16. 10.1038/s41587-023-01953-y · DOI
  17. 10.1128/jb.00105-22 · DOI
  18. 10.1016/j.cell.2018.06.013 · DOI
  19. 10.1038/nature11723 · DOI
  20. 10.1016/j.cell.2018.05.058 · DOI
  21. 10.1016/j.chom.2020.04.002 · DOI
  22. 10.1016/j.celrep.2024.113849 · DOI
  23. 10.1038/s41564-020-0691-3 · DOI
  24. 10.1016/j.molcel.2016.11.014 · DOI
  25. 10.1038/s41564-022-01153-5 · DOI
  26. 10.1038/s41467-020-16703-w · DOI
  27. 10.1002/prot.20264 · DOI · Paper page
  28. Pinto AF, Schüler H. 2015. Edited by Endogenous ADP-Ribosylation. Comparative structural analysis of the putative mono-ADP-ribosyltransferases of the ARTD/PARP family. Springer International Publishing, Cham.
  29. 10.1038/nchembio.2568 · DOI
  30. 10.1038/s41467-024-45068-7 · DOI
  31. 10.3390/toxins16050208 · DOI
  32. 10.1016/j.cell.2017.03.012 · DOI
  33. 10.1128/JB.186.21.7262-7272.2004 · DOI
  34. Cavanagh J, Skelton NJ, Fairbrother WJ, Rance M, Palmer III AG. 2006. Protein NMR spectroscopy principles and practice. 2nd ed. Elsevier Academic Press.
  35. 10.1002/mrc.1941 · DOI
  36. 10.1007/BF00211777 · DOI
  37. 10.1002/prot.20449 · DOI
  38. 10.1016/j.jmr.2009.11.008 · DOI
  39. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btl589 · DOI
  40. 10.1107/s0907444998003254 · DOI
  41. 10.1023/a:1008276004875 · DOI
  42. 10.1093/nar/gkf436 · DOI · Paper page
  43. 10.1093/molbev/msp077 · DOI · Paper page
  44. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btl529 · DOI
  45. 10.1089/crispr.2018.0043 · DOI
  46. 10.1038/nbt.3988 · DOI · Paper page
  47. 10.1002/pro.4792 · DOI
  48. 10.1016/j.cell.2017.09.006 · DOI
  49. 10.26508/lsa.202201455 · DOI
  50. 10.1126/sciadv.abf8711 · DOI

Metadata

Authors
Chen, D. F., Roe, L. T., Yuping, L., Borges, A. L., Zhang, J. Y., Babbar, P., Maji, S., Stevens, M. G. V., Correy, G. J., Diolaiti, M. E., Smith, D. H., Ashworth, A., Stroud, R. M., Kelly, M. J. S., Bondy-Denomy, J., & Fraser, J. S.
Affiliations
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • University of California, Berkeley (US)
  • Department of Microbiology and Immunology, University of California San Francisco
Corresponding author
Fraser, James S.
Venue
mBio
Published
2025-09-10
Volume
16
Issue
9
Pages
e0169825-e0169825
ISSN
2150-7511 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4413139008
Cited by
4
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2
FWCI
1.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • mBio (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
National Institutes of Health (GM145238, U19AI171110)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › CRISPR and Genetic Engineering
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Virology › Bacteriophages and microbial interactions
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Bacterial Genetics and Biotechnology
Keywords
anti-CRISPR proteins, ADP-ribosyltransferase, type I-F CRISPR-Cas, ADP-ribosylation, macrodomain, phage-bacteria arms race, lysogeny, phage replication, NAD+ binding, Pseudomonas aeruginosa

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