↓ Skip to main content

A Programmable Dual-RNA–Guided DNA Endonuclease in Adaptive Bacterial Immunity

Overview of attention for article published in Science, August 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
9913 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
14008 Mendeley
citeulike
10 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A Programmable Dual-RNA–Guided DNA Endonuclease in Adaptive Bacterial Immunity
Published in
Science, August 2012
DOI 10.1126/science.1225829
Pubmed ID
Authors

Martin Jinek, Krzysztof Chylinski, Ines Fonfara, Michael Hauer, Jennifer A. Doudna, Emmanuelle Charpentier

Abstract

Clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR)/CRISPR-associated (Cas) systems provide bacteria and archaea with adaptive immunity against viruses and plasmids by using CRISPR RNAs (crRNAs) to guide the silencing of invading nucleic acids. We show here that in a subset of these systems, the mature crRNA that is base-paired to trans-activating crRNA (tracrRNA) forms a two-RNA structure that directs the CRISPR-associated protein Cas9 to introduce double-stranded (ds) breaks in target DNA. At sites complementary to the crRNA-guide sequence, the Cas9 HNH nuclease domain cleaves the complementary strand, whereas the Cas9 RuvC-like domain cleaves the noncomplementary strand. The dual-tracrRNA:crRNA, when engineered as a single RNA chimera, also directs sequence-specific Cas9 dsDNA cleavage. Our study reveals a family of endonucleases that use dual-RNAs for site-specific DNA cleavage and highlights the potential to exploit the system for RNA-programmable genome editing.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 1,082 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14,008 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 85 <1%
United Kingdom 40 <1%
Germany 35 <1%
Spain 12 <1%
Canada 12 <1%
France 11 <1%
Japan 11 <1%
Brazil 9 <1%
Denmark 9 <1%
Other 94 <1%
Unknown 13690 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 2918 21%
Student > Bachelor 2773 20%
Student > Master 2126 15%
Researcher 1672 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 609 4%
Other 1519 11%
Unknown 2391 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4512 32%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4076 29%
Medicine and Dentistry 601 4%
Chemistry 361 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 358 3%
Other 1422 10%
Unknown 2678 19%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3414. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 July 2022.
All research outputs
#1,358
of 21,759,476 outputs
Outputs from Science
#85
of 76,868 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2
of 143,078 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science
#1
of 842 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,759,476 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 76,868 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 60.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 143,078 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 842 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.