In the battle between CRISPR-Cas* prokaryotic immune systems and the elements that they target, a diverse array of ''anti-CRISPR'' proteins have evolved.These proteins appear to have arisen independently multiple times in evolution and function through diverse mechanisms to inhibit CRISPR-Cas immunity.For comprehensive reviews on anti-CRISPRs, we direct readers to recent publications.1,2 Due to the increasing interest in anti-CRISPRs, many new families of these proteins have been discovered in the past year or so.There are now 36 distinct families of anti-CRISPRs described in the literature that block seven subtypes of CRISPR-Cas systems.[3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12] In 2015, a naming system for anti-CRISPR genes and proteins was introduced.6,13 To date, this system has been followed in all subsequent publications describing newly discovered anti-CRISPRs.However, as the rate of anti-CRISPR discovery will likely accelerate in the coming years, we feel that it would be advantageous to establish a database for the registration and tracking of anti-CRISPR names.The primary goal of this database will be to prevent redundant names being used in publications, thus avoiding confusion in the literature.Anti-CRISPR proteins are named according to the subtype they inhibit and the order in which they were discovered-for example, AcrIF1 was the first anti-CRISPR protein identified to inhibit the type I-F system.The database (a Google document) can be found here: https://tinyurl.com/anti-CRISPRWe propose that this document be updated when researchers have had a manuscript accepted for publication in which new anti-CRISPRs are described.We suggest that the authors upload relevant data to the spreadsheet, including the name, CRISPR-Cas subtype inhibited, reference, and amino-acid sequence of the anti-CRISPR (Table 1).This spreadsheet may also be utilized by those preparing a manuscript for submission to ensure that they use anti-CRISPR names that are still available.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bondy‐Denomy et al. (2018) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: