Karplus, M. & McCammon, J. A. Molecular dynamics simulations of biomolecules. Nat. Struct. Biol. 9, 646–652 (2002).
Google Scholar
van den Bedem, H. & Fraser, J. S. Integrative, dynamic structural biology at atomic resolution—it’s about time. Nat. Methods 12, 307–318 (2015).
Google Scholar
Jinek, M. et al. A programmable dual-RNA-guided DNA endonuclease in adaptive bacterial immunity. Science 337, 816–821 (2012).
Google Scholar
Wang, J. Y., Pausch, P. & Doudna, J. A. Structural biology of CRISPR–Cas immunity and genome editing enzymes. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 11, 641–656 (2022).
Google Scholar
Sinha, S., Pindi, C., Ahsan, M., Arantes, P. R. & Palermo, G. Machines on genes through the computational microscope. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 19, 1945–1964 (2023).
Google Scholar
Palermo, G., Miao, Y., Walker, R. C., Jinek, M. & McCammon, J. A. Striking plasticity of CRISPR–Cas9 and key role of non-target DNA, as revealed by molecular simulations. ACS Cent. Sci. 2, 756–763 (2016).
Google Scholar
Palermo, G., Miao, Y., Walker, R. C., Jinek, M. & McCammon, J. A. CRISPR–Cas9 conformational activation as elucidated from enhanced molecular simulations. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, 7260–7265 (2017).
Google Scholar
Saha, A. et al. An alpha-helical lid guides the target DNA toward catalysis in CRISPR–Cas12a. Nat. Commun. 15, 1473 (2024).
Google Scholar
Zuo, Z. et al. Structural and functional insights into the bona fide catalytic state of Streptococcus pyogenes Cas9 HNH nuclease domain. eLife 8, e46500 (2019).
Google Scholar
Nierzwicki et al. Principles of target DNA cleavage and the role of Mg2+ in the catalysis of CRISPR–Cas9. Nat. Catal. 5, 912–922 (2022).
Google Scholar
Casalino, L., Nierzwicki, Ł, Jinek, M. & Palermo, G. Catalytic mechanism of non-target DNA cleavage in CRISPR–Cas9 revealed by ab initio molecular dynamics. ACS Catal. 10, 13596–13605 (2020).
Google Scholar
Van, R. et al. Exploring CRISPR–Cas9 HNH-domain-catalyzed DNA cleavage using accelerated quantum mechanical molecular mechanical free energy simulation. Biochemistry 64, 289–299 (2024).
Google Scholar
Yoon, H., Zhao, L. N. & Warshel, A. Exploring the catalytic mechanism of Cas9 using information inferred from endonuclease VII. ACS Catal. 9, 1329–1336 (2019).
Google Scholar
Skeens, E. et al. High-fidelity, hyper-accurate, and evolved mutants rewire atomic level communication in CRISPR–Cas9. Sci. Adv. 10, eadl1045 (2024).
Google Scholar
Nierzwicki, L. et al. Enhanced specificity mutations perturb allosteric signaling in CRISPR–Cas9. eLife 10, e73601 (2021).
Google Scholar
Babu, K. et al. Bridge helix of Cas9 modulates target DNA cleavage and mismatch tolerance. Biochemistry 58, 1905–1917 (2019).
Google Scholar
Sinha, S. et al. Unveiling the RNA-mediated allosteric activation discloses functional hotspots in CRISPR–as13a. Nucleic Acids Res. 52, 906–920 (2024).
Google Scholar
Molina Vargas, A. M. et al. New design strategies for ultra-specific CRISPR–Cas13a-based RNA detection with single-nucleotide mismatch sensitivity. Nucleic Acids Res. 52, 921–939 (2024).
Google Scholar
Jumper, J. et al. Highly accurate protein structure prediction with AlphaFold. Nature 596, 583–589 (2021).
Google Scholar
Iturralde, A. B., Weller, C. A., Giovanetti, S. M. & Sadhu, M. J. Comprehensive deletion scan of anti-CRISPR AcrIIA4 reveals essential and dispensable domains for Cas9 inhibition. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 121, e2413743121 (2024).
Google Scholar
Kang, J. et al. Structural investigation of the anti-CRISPR protein AcrIE7. Proteins 93, 1645–1656 (2025).
Google Scholar
Belato, H. B. et al. Structural and dynamic insights into the HNH nuclease of divergent Cas9 species. J. Struct. Biol. 214, 107814 (2022).
Google Scholar
Halpin-Healy, T. S., Klompe, S. E., Sternberg, S. H. & Fernández, I. S. Structural basis of DNA targeting by a transposon-encoded CRISPR–Cas system. Nature 577, 271–274 (2020).
Google Scholar
Chaudhury, S., Lyskov, S. & Gray, J. J. PyRosetta: a script-based interface for implementing molecular modeling algorithms using Rosetta. Bioinformatics 26, 689–691 (2010).
Google Scholar
Patel, A. C., Sinha, S., Arantes, P. R. & Palermo, G. Unveiling Cas8 dynamics and regulation within a transposon-encoded Cascade–TniQ complex. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 122, e2422895122 (2025).
Google Scholar
Zhao, F. et al. A strategy for Cas13 miniaturization based on the structure and AlphaFold. Nat. Commun. 14, 5545 (2023).
Google Scholar
Yoon, P. H. et al. Structure-guided discovery of ancestral CRISPR–Cas13 ribonucleases. Science 385, 538–543 (2024).
Google Scholar
Varadi, M. et al. AlphaFold Protein Structure Database: massively expanding the structural coverage of protein-sequence space with high-accuracy models. Nucleic Acids Res. 50, 439–444 (2022).
Google Scholar
Holm, L. Benchmarking fold detection by DaliLite v.5. Bioinformatics 35, 5326–5327 (2019).
Google Scholar
Abramson, J. et al. Accurate structure prediction of biomolecular interactions with AlphaFold 3. Nature 630, 493–500 (2024).
Google Scholar
Pan, L. et al. Optimization of CRISPR/Cas12f1 guide RNAs using AlphaFold 3 for enhanced nucleic acid detection. Microchem. J. 212, 113194 (2025).
Google Scholar
Schneider, B. et al. When will RNA get its AlphaFold moment? Nucleic Acids Res. 51, 9522–9532 (2023).
Google Scholar
McDonnell, R. T., Henderson, A. N. & Elcock, A. H. Structure prediction of large RNAs with AlphaFold3 highlights its capabilities and limitations. J. Mol. Biol. 436, 168816 (2024).
Google Scholar
LeCun, Y., Bengio, Y. & Hinton, G. Deep learning. Nature 521, 436–444 (2015).
Google Scholar
Gallego, V. & Ríos Insua, D. Current advances in neural networks. Annu. Rev. Stat. Appl. 9, 197–222 (2022).
Google Scholar
Alzubaidi, L. et al. Review of deep learning: concepts, CNN architectures, challenges, applications, future directions. J. Big Data 8, 53 (2021).
Google Scholar
Jurtz, V. I. et al. An introduction to deep learning on biological sequence data: examples and solutions. Bioinformatics 33, 3685–3690 (2017).
Google Scholar
Doench, J. G. et al. Optimized sgRNA design to maximize activity and minimize off-target effects of CRISPR–Cas9. Nat. Biotechnol. 34, 184–191 (2016).
Google Scholar
Chuai, G. et al. DeepCRISPR: optimized CRISPR guide RNA design by deep learning. Genome Biol. 19, 80 (2018).
Google Scholar
Lin, J., Zhang, Z., Zhang, S., Chen, J. & Wong, K. CRISPR-Net: a recurrent convolutional network quantifies CRISPR off-target activities with mismatches and indels. Adv. Sci. 7, 1903562 (2020).
Google Scholar
Kim, H. K. et al. SpCas9 activity prediction by DeepSpCas9, a deep learning-based model with high generalization performance. Sci. Adv. 5, eaax9249 (2019).
Google Scholar
Xue, L., Tang, B., Chen, W. & Luo, J. Prediction of CRISPR sgRNA activity using a deep convolutional neural network. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 59, 615–624 (2019).
Google Scholar
Wang, D. et al. Optimized CRISPR guide RNA design for two high-fidelity Cas9 variants by deep learning. Nat. Commun. 10, 4284 (2019).
Google Scholar
Xiao, L.-M., Wan, Y.-Q. & Jiang, Z.-R. AttCRISPR: a spacetime interpretable model for prediction of sgRNA on-target activity. BMC Bioinformatics 22, 589 (2021).
Google Scholar
Li, C., Zou, Q., Li, J. & Feng, H. Prediction of CRISPR–Cas9 on-target activity based on a hybrid neural network. Comput. Struct. Biotechnol. J. 27, 2098–2106 (2025).
Google Scholar
Anthon, C., Corsi, G. I. & Gorodkin, J. CRISPRon/off: CRISPR/Cas9 on- and off-target gRNA design. Bioinformatics 38, 5437–5439 (2022).
Google Scholar
Sun, J., Guo, J. & Liu, J. CRISPR-M: predicting sgRNA off-target effect using a multi-view deep learning network. PLoS Comput. Biol. 20, e1011972 (2024).
Google Scholar
Zhang, Z., Lamson, A. R., Shelley, M. & Troyanskaya, O. Interpretable neural architecture search and transfer learning for understanding CRISPR–Cas9 off-target enzymatic reactions. Nat. Comput. Sci. 3, 1056–1066 (2023).
Google Scholar
Anzalone, A. V., Koblan, L. W. & Liu, D. R. Genome editing with CRISPR–Cas nucleases, base editors, transposases and prime editors. Nat. Biotechnol. 38, 824–844 (2020).
Google Scholar
Park, J. & Kim, H. K. Prediction of base editing efficiencies and outcomes using DeepABE and DeepCBE. Methods Mol. Biol. 2606, 23–32 (2023).
Google Scholar
Kim, N. et al. Deep learning models to predict the editing efficiencies and outcomes of diverse base editors. Nat. Biotechnol. 42, 484–497 (2024).
Google Scholar
Silverstein, R. A. et al. Custom CRISPR–Cas9 PAM variants via scalable engineering and machine learning. Nature 643, 539–550 (2025).
Google Scholar
Vieyra, F., Pindi, C., Lisi, G. P., Morzan, U. N., & Palermo, G. Design rules for expanding PAM compatibility in CRISPR-Cas9 from the VQR, VRER and EQR variants. J. Phys. Chem. B 129, 11949–11958 (2025).
Google Scholar
Kleinstiver, B. P. et al. Engineered CRISPR–Cas9 nucleases with altered PAM specificities. Nature 523, 481–485 (2015).
Google Scholar
Wang, Y., Li, Z. & Farimani, A. B. Graph neural networks for molecules. Preprint at arXiv https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2209.05582 (2022).
Veličković, P. Everything is connected: graph neural networks. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 79, 102538 (2023).
Google Scholar
Park, J.-U. et al. Structures of the holo CRISPR RNA-guided transposon integration complex. Nature 613, 775–782 (2023).
Google Scholar
Veličković, P. et al. Graph attention networks. Preprint at arXiv https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1710.10903 (2017).
Pindi, C., Ahsan, M., Sinha, S. & Palermo, G. Graph attention neural networks reveal TnsC filament assembly in a CRISPR-associated transposon. Preprint at bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2025.06.17.659969 (2025).
Patel, A. C., Sinha, S. & Palermo, G. Graph theory approaches for molecular dynamics simulations. Q. Rev. Biophys. 57, e15 (2024).
Google Scholar
Liu, H., Jian, Y., Zeng, C. & Zhao, Y. RNA–protein interaction prediction using network-guided deep learning. Commun. Biol. 8, 247 (2025).
Google Scholar
Jiang, Y., Li, B., Xiong, J. & Liu, X. Graph-CRISPR: a gene editing efficiency prediction model based on graph neural network with integrated sequence and secondary structure feature extraction. Brief. Bioinform. 26, bbaf410 (2025).
Google Scholar
Chen, G., Hou, L., Li, Z., Xie, B. & Liu, Y. A new strategy for Cas protein recognition based on graph neural networks and SMILES encoding. Sci. Rep. 15, 15236 (2025).
Google Scholar
Abudayyeh, O. O. et al. RNA targeting with CRISPR–Cas13. Nature 550, 280–284 (2017).
Google Scholar
East-Seletsky, A. et al. Two distinct RNase activities of CRISPR-C2c2 enable guide-RNA processing and RNA detection. Nature 538, 270–273 (2016).
Google Scholar
Knott, G. J. et al. Guide-bound structures of an RNA-targeting A-cleaving CRISPR–Cas13a enzyme. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 24, 825–833 (2017).
Google Scholar
Liu, L. et al. Two distant catalytic sites are responsible for C2c2 RNase activities. Cell 168, 121–134 (2017).
Google Scholar
Tambe, A., East-Seletsky, A., Knott, G. J., Doudna, J. A. & O’Connell, M. R. RNA binding and HEPN-nuclease activation are decoupled in CRISPR–Cas13a. Cell Rep. 24, 1025–1036 (2018).
Google Scholar
Fei, H. et al. Advancing protein evolution with inverse folding models integrating structural and evolutionary constraints. Cell 188, 4674–4692 (2025).
Google Scholar
Dauparas, J. et al. Robust deep learning-based protein sequence design using ProteinMPNN. Science 378, 49–56 (2022).
Google Scholar
Hsu, C. et al. Learning inverse folding from millions of predicted structures. In Proc. 39th International Conference on Machine Learning (eds Chaudhuri, K. et al.) 8946–8970 (PMLR, 2022).
Ruffolo, J. A. & Madani, A. Designing proteins with language models. Nat. Biotechnol. 42, 200–202 (2024).
Google Scholar
Watson, J. L. et al. De novo design of protein structure and function with RFdiffusion. Nature 620, 1089–1100 (2023).
Google Scholar
Ruffolo, J. A. et al. Design of highly functional genome editors by modelling CRISPR–Cas sequences. Nature 645, 518–525 (2025).
Google Scholar
Madani, A. et al. Large language models generate functional protein sequences across diverse families. Nat. Biotechnol. 41, 1099–1106 (2023).
Google Scholar
Qu, Y. et al. CRISPR-GPT for agentic automation of gene-editing experiments. Nat. Biomed. Eng. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41551-025-01463-z (2025).
Feng, Y. et al. Discovery of CRISPR–Cas12a clades using a large language model. Nat. Commun. 16, 7877 (2025).
Google Scholar
Jiang, K. et al. Rapid in silico directed evolution by a protein language model with EVOLVEpro. Science 387, eadr6006 (2025).
Google Scholar
Nguyen, E. et al. Sequence modeling and design from molecular to genome scale with Evo. Science 386, eado9336 (2024).
Google Scholar
Taveneau, C. et al. De novo design of potent CRISPR–Cas13 inhibitors. Nat. Chem. Biol. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41589-025-02136-3 (2026).
Park, J.-C. et al. AI-generated MLH1 small binder improves prime editing efficiency. Cell 188, 5831–5846 (2025).
Google Scholar
Pacesa, M. et al. One-shot design of functional protein binders with BindCraft. Nature 464, 483–492 (2025).
Google Scholar
Lauko, A. et al. Computational design of serine hydrolases. Science 388, eadu2454 (2025).
Google Scholar
O’Brien, A. R., Burgio, G. & Bauer, D. C. Domain-specific introduction to machine learning terminology, pitfalls and opportunities in CRISPR-based gene editing. Brief. Bioinform. 22, 308–314 (2021).
Google Scholar
Fong, J. H. C. & Wong, A. S. L. Advancing CRISPR/Cas gene editing with machine learning. Curr. Opin. Biomed. Eng. 28, 100477 (2023).
Google Scholar
Abbaszadeh, A. & Shahlai, A. Artificial intelligence for CRISPR guide RNA design: explainable models and off-target safety. Preprint at arXiv https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2508.20130 (2025).
Xiang, X. et al. Enhancing CRISPR–Cas9 gRNA efficiency prediction by data integration and deep learning. Nat. Commun. 12, 3238 (2021).
Google Scholar
Murdoch, W. J., Singh, C., Kumbier, K., Abbasi-Asl, R. & Yu, B. Definitions, methods, and applications in interpretable machine learning. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 116, 22071–22080 (2019).
Google Scholar
Rudin, C. Stop explaining black box machine learning models for high stakes decisions and use interpretable models instead. Nat. Mach. Intell. 1, 206–215 (2019).
Google Scholar
Kim, M., Go, M., Kang, S.-H., Jeong, S. & Lim, K. Revolutionizing CRISPR technology with artificial intelligence. Exp. Mol. Med. 57, 1419–1431 (2025).
Google Scholar
Dixit, S., Kumar, A., Srinivasan, K., Vincent, P. M. D. R. & Ramu Krishnan, N. Advancing genome editing with artificial intelligence: opportunities, challenges, and future directions. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 11, 1335901 (2024).
Google Scholar
Abbasi, A. F., Asim, M. N. & Dengel, A. Transitioning from wet lab to artificial intelligence: a systematic review of AI predictors in CRISPR. J. Transl. Med. 23, 153 (2025).
Google Scholar
Liu, L. et al. The molecular architecture for RNA-guided RNA cleavage by Cas13a. Cell 170, 714–726 (2017).
Google Scholar
Humphrey, W., Dalke, A. & Schulten, K. VMD: visual molecular dynamics. J. Mol. Graph. 14, 33–38 (1996).
Google Scholar
