PAM Sequences in Crop Genome Editing: A Comprehensive Guide for Researchers

Abstract

This article provides a systematic analysis of the protospacer adjacent motif (PAM) and its critical role in CRISPR-based genome editing for crop improvement. Aimed at researchers, scientists, and biotechnology professionals, it covers the foundational biology of PAM sequences, explores diverse CRISPR-Cas systems and their application methodologies in major crops, details strategies to overcome efficiency bottlenecks, and establishes frameworks for experimental validation and comparative analysis. By synthesizing current research and optimization techniques, this guide serves as a vital resource for designing more efficient and precise genome editing experiments in plants, ultimately accelerating the development of improved crop varieties.

What is a PAM? Unlocking the Fundamental Gateway to CRISPR-Cas Editing in Plants

The Protospacer Adjacent Motif (PAM) is a short, specific DNA sequence that is a critical determinant for the function of CRISPR-Cas systems. Typically 2–6 base pairs in length, the PAM is an essential targeting component located immediately adjacent to the DNA sequence targeted by the Cas nuclease [1] [2]. Its primary biological role is to distinguish between self and non-self DNA, thereby preventing the CRISPR-Cas system from targeting and destroying the bacterium's own genome [1] [2]. In the adaptive immune system of bacteria, when a virus invades, a fragment of the viral DNA (a protospacer) is integrated into the bacterial CRISPR locus as a spacer. The Cas nuclease later uses this spacer to recognize and cleave the same viral sequence upon re-infection. Crucially, the viral DNA (protospacer) is always flanked by a PAM sequence, whereas the bacterial CRISPR locus, where the spacer is stored, lacks this PAM. This distinction ensures that Cas9 cleaves only the invading viral DNA and not the bacterial CRISPR array [1] [2]. In genome editing applications, this natural mechanism is co-opted. The PAM sequence is an absolute requirement for Cas9 activity; without it, the nuclease will not bind to or cleave the target DNA [1] [3] [4]. For the most commonly used Cas9 from Streptococcus pyogenes (SpCas9), the canonical PAM is the sequence 5'-NGG-3', where "N" can be any nucleobase [1] [4] [5]. Understanding the PAM is therefore foundational to designing successful CRISPR experiments, particularly in complex eukaryotic genomes like those of crops, where targeting specificity is paramount.

PAM Recognition: An Allosteric Mechanism for Nuclease Activation

The necessity of the PAM for DNA cleavage is not merely for initial binding but is linked to a sophisticated allosteric mechanism that activates the Cas9 enzyme. Structural and biophysical studies, including molecular dynamics simulations, have revealed that PAM binding induces a conformational change in the Cas9 protein, shifting it from an inactive "open" state to an active "closed" state [3].

This PAM-induced allosteric control works as follows: The PAM sequence is recognized and bound by the C-terminal domain of the Cas9 protein [3] [4]. This binding event triggers a cascade of structural rearrangements throughout the protein. Key among these is the enhancement of correlated motions between the two catalytic domains of Cas9, HNH and RuvC, which are responsible for cleaving the target and non-target DNA strands, respectively [3]. The PAM acts as an allosteric effector, strengthening the communication pathway between these spatially distant catalytic domains. Specific loops within the Cas9 structure, notably the L1 and L2 loops, function as "allosteric transducers," relaying the signal from the PAM-binding site to the HNH and RuvC domains [3]. This interdependent dynamics ensures that the two catalytic domains become activated in a coordinated manner, leading to the concerted cleavage of both DNA strands [3] [4]. Without PAM binding, the HNH and RuvC domains remain largely uncorrelated, and the enzyme is not activated for DNA cleavage, thus providing a crucial safety switch that prevents untargeted genomic damage.

The following diagram illustrates this allosteric activation mechanism:

A Spectrum of PAM Sequences for Diverse CRISPR Nucleases

While SpCas9 and its NGG PAM are widely used, the CRISPR toolkit has expanded to include a variety of Cas nucleases, each isolated from different bacterial species and recognizing distinct PAM sequences. This diversity is critical for expanding the range of genomic sites that can be targeted, especially in organisms with AT-rich genomes where NGG sites may be less frequent. The table below summarizes the PAM specificities of several key CRISPR nucleases.

Table 1: PAM Sequences for Different CRISPR-Cas Nucleases

CRISPR Nucleases	Organism Isolated From	PAM Sequence (5' to 3')
SpCas9	Streptococcus pyogenes	NGG [2] [4]
SaCas9	Staphylococcus aureus	NNGRRT or NNGRRN [2]
NmeCas9	Neisseria meningitidis	NNNNGATT [2]
St1Cas9	Streptococcus thermophilus	NNAGAAW [2]
CjCas9	Campylobacter jejuni	NNNNRYAC [2]
Cas12a (Cpf1)	Lachnospiraceae bacterium	TTTV [1] [2]
AacCas12b	Alicyclobacillus acidiphilus	TTN [2]
Blat Cas9	Brevibacillus laterosporus	Determined empirically [6]

Furthermore, protein engineering approaches, such as directed evolution, have been successfully employed to create Cas9 variants with altered PAM specificities, thereby dramatically increasing the number of targetable sites in the genome. Notable engineered SpCas9 variants include:

• VQR variant (D1135V/R1335Q/T1337R): Prefers NGAN PAMs [7].
• EQR variant (D1135E/R1335Q/T1337R): Prefers NGAG PAMs [7].
• VRER variant (D1135V/G1218R/R1335E/T1337R): Prefers NGCG PAMs [7].

These variants have been proven to function robustly in human cells and model organisms like zebrafish, effectively doubling the targeting range of wild-type SpCas9 [7].

Experimental Characterization of Novel PAM Sequences

For novel Cas9 proteins, empirical determination of PAM specificity is essential. A powerful in vitro method for this involves digesting a plasmid library containing a randomized PAM sequence with the Cas9 nuclease of interest complexed with a guide RNA.

The experimental workflow for characterizing a novel PAM is as follows:

Detailed Protocol:

• Library Construction: A plasmid library is generated where a DNA sequence perfectly complementary to a chosen guide RNA spacer (the protospacer) is followed by a stretch of fully randomized nucleotides (e.g., 5-7 bp). This creates a library encompassing all possible PAM sequences [6].
• In Vitro Digestion: The plasmid library is incubated with purified recombinant Cas9 protein pre-loaded with its guide RNA to form a ribonucleoprotein (RNP) complex. The digestion is performed at varying RNP concentrations to assess cleavage efficiency in a dose-dependent manner [6].
• Capture and Ligation: After cleavage, the linearized plasmid DNA molecules (which contain PAM sequences that supported Cas9 cleavage) are captured by ligating adapters to their free ends. To facilitate this, the blunt ends generated by Cas9 are often modified to have a 3' dA overhang, and the adapters are given a complementary 3' dT overhang [6].
• PCR Enrichment and Sequencing: The adapter-ligated fragments are PCR-amplified using a primer binding to the adapter and another primer adjacent to the PAM region. The resulting amplicons are deep sequenced [6].
• Data Analysis: The sequenced data is analyzed to identify PAM sequences that were enriched in the cleaved pool compared to the starting library. A position frequency matrix (PFM) is typically used to calculate the PAM consensus motif, visually representing the probability of each nucleotide at each position [6].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Reagents for PAM Research

Table 2: Key Research Reagents and Resources

Reagent / Resource	Function and Description
Cas9 Nuclease Variants	Engineered proteins (e.g., VQR, VRER) with altered PAM specificities to expand targeting range [7].
PAM Library Plasmids	Plasmid vectors with a fixed protospacer and a randomized PAM region for empirical PAM characterization [6].
Guide RNA (sgRNA)	Synthetic single-guide RNA that directs Cas9 to the specific genomic locus adjacent to a PAM [1] [4].
CasBLASTR	A web-based tool to identify and design target sites for wild-type and engineered Cas9 variants [7].
GUIDE-Seq	A molecular method to profile genome-wide off-target cleavage events produced by Cas9 nucleases, crucial for assessing specificity [1] [7].

PAM Engineering for Enhanced Specificity in Crop Research

The PAM sequence is not just a targeting constraint but also a lever for improving editing specificity. Research in pineapple has demonstrated that selecting target sequences with multiple flanking PAM sites can significantly reduce off-target effects [8]. The hypothesis is that a Cas9 protein will linger longer on a DNA fragment with multiple PAM sites, increasing the probability of finding the correct on-target sequence and reducing the chance of promiscuous binding at off-target sites [8].

Experimental Evidence from Pineapple:

• Target sequences with a single PAM site had off-target rates of 70-72%.
• Target sequences with one additional flanking PAM site showed reduced off-target rates of 46-48%.
• This strategy provides a practical method to enhance editing fidelity in crops without the need for protein engineering [8].

Furthermore, the PAM requirement is exploited in advanced applications like base editing. Cytosine Base Editors (CBEs) and Adenine Base Editors (ABEs), which are fusions of a catalytically impaired Cas nuclease (nickase) and a deaminase enzyme, allow for precise nucleotide conversions without creating double-strand breaks. These tools generally produce fewer indels than standard CRISPR-Cas9 and are being actively deployed in plants to develop climate-resilient crops by editing genes responsible for drought, heat, and salinity tolerance [9] [5]. The PAM specificity of the underlying Cas protein directly determines the targeting window of these base editors.

The Protospacer Adjacent Motif is a cornerstone of CRISPR biology and technology. Its fundamental roles in self/non-self discrimination, allosteric enzyme activation, and defining targetable genomic space make it an indispensable concept for researchers. The continued discovery of novel Cas proteins with diverse PAM preferences, coupled with sophisticated protein engineering to alter PAM recognition, is rapidly expanding the frontiers of genome editing. In crop research, understanding and leveraging PAM biology—from selecting optimal target sequences with multiple PAMs to reduce off-target effects, to employing PAM-specific base editors for precise trait enhancement—is critical for developing new, resilient crop varieties to meet the challenges of global food security. As the CRISPR toolbox grows, the PAM will remain a central consideration in the design and application of precise genome editing technologies.

The CRISPR-Cas system serves as an adaptive immune system in bacteria and archaea, providing defense against invading viral DNA. A critical component of this system is the protospacer adjacent motif (PAM), a short DNA sequence that enables the distinction between self and non-self genetic material. This mechanism prevents autoimmunity by ensuring that the CRISPR-Cas machinery only targets foreign DNA while sparing the host bacterium's own genome. Understanding PAM sequences has profound implications for advancing CRISPR technologies in crop improvement, where precision editing is paramount for developing disease-resistant and stress-tolerant plant varieties. This whitepaper explores the biological origin and function of PAM sequences, detailing the molecular mechanisms of self/non-self discrimination and its significance for agricultural biotechnology.

CRISPR-Cas is an adaptive immune system in prokaryotes that recognizes and cleaves foreign genetic elements from viruses and plasmids. The system incorporates short sequences from invading pathogens into the host's CRISPR array as "spacers," which then guide Cas proteins to cleave matching sequences during future infections [2] [10]. The protospacer adjacent motif (PAM) is a short, specific DNA sequence (typically 2-6 base pairs) adjacent to the target DNA sequence (protospacer) that is essential for Cas nuclease recognition and cleavage [2]. This PAM sequence is not present in the host bacterium's own CRISPR array, thereby enabling the CRISPR system to distinguish between self-DNA (which lacks PAM) and non-self DNA (which contains PAM) [2] [10].

In the context of crop research, understanding PAM specificity is crucial for designing efficient genome editing strategies. The PAM requirement often limits targetable sites in plant genomes, driving the discovery and engineering of Cas nucleases with diverse PAM specificities to expand the targeting scope for agricultural applications [11] [12].

Molecular Mechanisms of Self/Non-Self Discrimination

The PAM-Dependent Recognition Model

The CRISPR-Cas system employs a sophisticated mechanism to differentiate between self and non-self DNA through PAM recognition. When Cas surveillance complexes scan DNA, they first check for the presence of a PAM sequence adjacent to potential target sites [10]. The presence of a correct PAM triggers local DNA unwinding, allowing the crRNA to hybridize with the target DNA strand. If complementarity is sufficient, especially in the "seed sequence" near the PAM, the Cas nuclease becomes activated and cleaves the foreign DNA [2] [10].

Table 1: Key Steps in PAM-Dependent Self/Non-Self Discrimination

Step	Process	Outcome
1. PAM Scanning	Cas effector complexes scan foreign DNA for specific PAM sequences	Identifies potential target sites as "non-self"
2. DNA Unwinding	Cas proteins bind PAM and unwind adjacent DNA duplex	Creates R-loop structure for crRNA hybridization
3. Complementarity Check	crRNA checks complementarity with target DNA, especially in seed sequence	Confirms target identity and triggers nuclease activity
4. Self-Avoidance	Host CRISPR loci lack PAM sequences adjacent to spacers	Prevents Cas cleavage of bacterial own genome

This PAM-dependent mechanism provides a reliable solution to the fundamental challenge of self/non-self discrimination in adaptive immunity. Without PAM recognition, the CRISPR system would target its own memory stores in the CRISPR array, leading to fatal autoimmunity [2]. The molecular basis of this discrimination varies among different CRISPR-Cas types, with Class 2 systems (including the well-characterized Cas9) utilizing a single Cas protein for PAM recognition and target cleavage [10].

Structural Basis of PAM Recognition

Structural studies have revealed that Cas proteins contain specific PAM-interaction domains that mediate sequence-specific DNA recognition. For example, in the Type II-A CRISPR-Cas system of Streptococcus pyogenes, Cas9 recognizes a 5'-NGG-3' PAM through a phosphate lock loop mechanism that interacts with the major groove of DNA [10]. Similar structural adaptations exist across different Cas protein families, with varying domain architectures enabling recognition of diverse PAM sequences while maintaining the core function of self/non-self discrimination [10].

The stringency of PAM recognition creates an evolutionary trade-off: highly specific PAMs reduce off-target effects but limit the range of targetable sequences, while promiscuous PAM recognition expands targeting potential but may increase autoimmunity risks. This balance has significant implications for engineering CRISPR systems for crop improvement, where both specificity and targeting flexibility are desirable traits [11] [12].

Experimental Analysis of PAM Function

Methodologies for PAM Identification

Several experimental approaches have been developed to characterize PAM requirements for different Cas nucleases:

• In Silico Analysis: Computational identification of conserved sequences adjacent to protospacers in viral genomes [10].
• Plasmid Depletion Assays: Transformation of plasmid libraries with randomized PAM regions into bacteria with active CRISPR-Cas systems, followed by sequencing of depleted sequences [10].
• PAM-SCANR (PAM Screen Achieved by NOT-gate Repression): Uses catalytically dead Cas9 (dCas9) to repress GFP expression when binding to functional PAMs, enabling identification through fluorescence-activated cell sorting [10].
• In Vitro Cleavage Assays: Incubation of purified Cas effector complexes with DNA libraries containing randomized PAM regions, followed by sequencing of cleaved products [10].
• GenomePAM: A mammalian cell-based method that leverages highly repetitive genomic sequences flanked by diverse nucleotides as natural PAM libraries, enabling PAM characterization in relevant cellular contexts [12].

Table 2: Comparison of PAM Identification Methods

Method	Principle	Advantages	Limitations
In Silico Analysis	Bioinformatics identification of conserved motifs adjacent to spacers	Fast, inexpensive	Limited to available sequences, cannot distinguish SAMs vs TIMs
Plasmid Depletion	Plasmid survival in bacterial hosts with active CRISPR-Cas	Works in native cellular context	Limited library coverage, bacterial-specific
PAM-SCANR	dCas9-mediated repression of reporter gene	High-throughput, quantitative	Requires bacterial system
In Vitro Cleavage	Sequencing of cleaved DNA products from purified Cas proteins	Controlled conditions, large libraries	May not reflect cellular environment
GenomePAM	Uses endogenous genomic repeats as natural PAM library	Mammalian cell context, no protein purification needed	Limited to available repetitive elements

Key Experimental Evidence for Self/Non-Self Discrimination

Research on Enterococcus faecalis CRISPR1-Cas system provides direct experimental evidence for PAM-mediated immunity. Studies demonstrated that the CRISPR-Cas system efficiently blocks transformation of plasmids containing matching protospacer sequences with correct PAM sites [13]. Single-base mutations within the PAM sequence (e.g., replacing guanine residues with cytosine in the 5'-GGTG-3' PAM) allowed plasmids to escape CRISPR-encoded immunity, confirming the essential role of intact PAM sequences for foreign DNA recognition [13].

Further investigation revealed that mismatches in the protospacer region have position-dependent effects on immunity. Single-base mutations at positions distal to the PAM (positions 2, 10, 18, 23) did not affect interference capability, whereas mutations near or within the PAM region (positions 25, 28) eliminated CRISPR defense function [13]. This spatial pattern highlights the critical importance of the PAM-proximal region for initial target recognition and self/non-self discrimination.

Diagram 1: PAM-Mediated Self/Non-Self Discrimination

PAM Sequences in Crop Improvement Applications

Expanding CRISPR Targeting Scope in Plants

The PAM requirement represents a significant constraint for applying CRISPR technologies in crop improvement. Different Cas nucleases recognize distinct PAM sequences, limiting the genomic sites available for targeting. To address this limitation, researchers have explored multiple strategies:

• Natural Cas Variants: Isolating Cas nucleases from diverse bacterial species with different PAM specificities [2]
• Protein Engineering: Directed evolution of Cas proteins to recognize novel PAM sequences [2] [12]
• PAM-Relaxed Mutants: Developing engineered variants like SpRY (near-PAMless SpCas9) with reduced PAM stringency [12]

Table 3: PAM Sequences of Selected CRISPR Nucleases with Agricultural Applications

CRISPR Nuclease	Source Organism	PAM Sequence (5' to 3')	Applications in Crop Research
SpCas9	Streptococcus pyogenes	NGG	Most widely used nuclease in plants; broad applicability
SaCas9	Staphylococcus aureus	NNGRRT	Smaller size beneficial for viral vector delivery
Cas12a (Cpf1)	Lachnospiraceae bacterium	TTTV	Creates staggered cuts; useful for gene insertion
Cas12b	Alicyclobacillus acidiphilus	TTN	Thermostable variant for challenging applications
xCas9	Engineered SpCas9 variant	NG, GAA, GAT	Broad PAM recognition expands targeting range
SpRY	Engineered SpCas9 variant	NRN > NYN	Near-PAMless editing maximizes targetable sites

Advanced Editing Technologies and PAM Requirements

Recent advances in genome editing have introduced more precise tools with specific PAM considerations:

• Base Editing: Enables direct chemical conversion of one base to another without double-strand breaks, but still requires specific PAM sequences adjacent to target bases [11]
• Prime Editing: Uses a reverse transcriptase fused to Cas9 nickase (nCas9) to directly write new genetic information into a target DNA site, offering greater targeting flexibility but still constrained by PAM availability [11]

In crop improvement, these technologies have been applied to develop disease-resistant varieties by targeting susceptibility (S) genes, enhance abiotic stress tolerance by editing regulatory genes, and improve nutritional quality by modifying metabolic pathways [11] [14] [15]. The expanding toolkit of Cas nucleases with diverse PAM specificities enables researchers to target previously inaccessible genomic sites for comprehensive crop optimization.

Research Reagent Solutions for PAM Studies

Table 4: Essential Research Reagents for PAM Characterization

Reagent / Tool	Function	Application Examples
PAM Library Plasmids	Contains randomized nucleotide sequences adjacent to fixed protospacer	Plasmid depletion assays for PAM identification [10]
dCas9 Variants	Catalytically dead Cas9 for binding without cleavage	PAM-SCANR, imaging, and transcriptional regulation [10]
Reporter Cell Lines	Engineered cells with fluorescent or selectable markers	PAM-SCANR, high-throughput screening [10]
GenomePAM System	Utilizes endogenous genomic repeats as natural PAM library	PAM characterization in mammalian cells [12]
HT-PAMDA	High-throughput PAM determination assay	In vitro characterization of novel Cas nucleases [12]
Cas Nuclease Variants	Engineered or natural Cas proteins with different PAM specificities	Expanding targeting scope for crop engineering [2] [11]

Diagram 2: Experimental Workflow for PAM Characterization

The PAM sequence represents a fundamental mechanism for self/non-self discrimination in bacterial adaptive immunity, ensuring precise targeting of foreign genetic elements while preventing autoimmunity. Understanding the molecular basis of PAM recognition has been instrumental in harnessing CRISPR systems for crop improvement, where expanding the targeting scope through novel Cas nucleases and engineered variants enables precise genome editing for trait enhancement. As CRISPR technologies continue to evolve, overcoming PAM limitations will remain a central focus in developing next-generation editing tools for sustainable agriculture and food security. The ongoing discovery of natural CRISPR systems and continuous protein engineering promises to further advance our capabilities in crop genetic improvement, ultimately contributing to global food security in the face of climate change and population growth.

The CRISPR-Cas system, an adaptive immune mechanism in bacteria and archaea, has been co-opted as a revolutionary genome-editing tool across diverse organisms, including plants. A critical component of this system is the protospacer adjacent motif (PAM), a short DNA sequence flanking the target site that enables the Cas nuclease to recognize and bind foreign DNA [5]. In natural bacterial immunity, the PAM serves an essential function in self versus non-self discrimination, preventing the CRISPR system from targeting the bacterium's own genetic material stored within CRISPR arrays [16]. From a practical biotechnology perspective, the PAM requirement represents both the key to programmable targeting and the primary constraint on targetable genomic locations. The PAM interacts directly with specific amino acids in the Cas protein, initiating a conformational change that activates DNA cleavage machinery [17] [5]. The sequence, length, and position of the PAM vary significantly among different Cas nucleases, influencing their targeting scope and application potential. For crop researchers, understanding PAM requirements is fundamental to designing effective genome editing strategies for trait improvement, particularly as they work with complex genomes where ideal target sites may be limited.

PAM Requirements for Major Cas Nucleases

The PAM requirements for CRISPR nucleases are not merely simple consensus sequences but represent a landscape of recognition with optimal and sub-optimal sequences. The following sections detail the canonical and engineered PAM preferences for the most widely used Cas nucleases.

Cas9 Nucleases

Streptococcus pyogenes Cas9 (SpCas9) is the most extensively characterized and utilized CRISPR nuclease. Its canonical PAM is the 3'-NGG-5' sequence, where "N" can be any nucleotide base [5] [16]. Structural analyses reveal that this recognition is mediated by an arginine dyad (R1333 and R1335) within the PAM-interacting domain, which forms specific contacts with the guanine bases [17]. Notably, SpCas9 also demonstrates weaker recognition of 3'-NAG-5' and 3'-NGA-5' PAMs under certain conditions, though with reduced efficiency [16].

Protein engineering efforts have yielded SpCas9 variants with relaxed PAM requirements, significantly expanding their targeting scope. The SpG variant (NGN PAM) and the nearly PAMless SpRY variant (NNN PAM) represent major breakthroughs in this area [12] [18]. Another notable engineered variant, xCas9, recognizes a broader range of PAM sequences including NG, GAA, and GAT [17]. The molecular mechanism behind xCas9's expanded recognition involves increased flexibility in the R1335 residue, enabling selective recognition of alternative PAM sequences while maintaining affinity for the canonical TGG PAM [17].

Other naturally occurring Cas9 orthologs offer alternative PAM specificities. Staphylococcus aureus Cas9 (SaCas9), with a smaller size beneficial for viral delivery, recognizes a longer 3'-NNGRRT-5' PAM (where R is A or G) [12] [16]. Streptococcus canis Cas9 (ScCas9) recognizes the relatively relaxed 3'-NNG-5' PAM, providing broader targeting capability [16].

Cas12a Nucleases

Cas12a (formerly known as Cpf1) represents a distinct Class 2 Type V CRISPR system with several functional differences from Cas9. Unlike Cas9, Cas12a recognizes a 5'-TTTV-5' PAM (where V is A, C, or G) located upstream of the protospacer [19] [20] [21]. This T-rich PAM makes Cas12a particularly useful for targeting AT-rich genomic regions that may be inaccessible to Cas9. Additionally, Cas12a processes its own CRISPR RNA (crRNA) without requiring a tracrRNA and creates staggered DNA ends with 5' overhangs rather than blunt cuts [21].

Commonly used Cas12a orthologs include:

• LbCas12a from Lachnospiraceae bacterium: Canonical PAM = 5'-TTTV-3' [19] [22]
• AsCas12a from Acidaminococcus sp.: Canonical PAM = 5'-TTTV-3' [21]
• FnCas12a from Francisella novicida: Canonical PAM = 5'-YYN-5' (where Y is T or C) [12]

Engineering efforts have produced Cas12a variants with expanded PAM compatibility. The Flex-Cas12a variant, incorporating six mutations (G146R, R182V, D535G, S551F, D665N, and E795Q), recognizes 5'-NYHV-5' PAMs (where H is A, C, or T), expanding potential target sites to approximately 25% of the human genome compared to just ~1% with wild-type LbCas12a [19].

Conversely, engineering has also produced more stringent Cas12a variants with reduced off-target effects. The Lb-K538R and Lb2-K518R variants exhibit more restricted PAM recognition (changing from YYN to TYN), resulting in lower genome-wide off-target activity while maintaining robust on-target editing [22]. The naturally occurring CeCas12a from Coprococcus eutactus also demonstrates inherently stringent PAM recognition followed by very low off-target editing rates [21].

Table 1: Summary of PAM Requirements for Common Cas Nucleases

Nuclease	Type	Canonical PAM	Position	Notes
SpCas9	Cas9	3'-NGG-5'	3'	Canonical nuclease; also weakly recognizes NAG
SpG	Engineered Cas9	3'-NGN-5'	3'	Relaxed PAM variant [18]
SpRY	Engineered Cas9	3'-NNN-5'	3'	Near-PAMless variant [12] [18]
xCas9	Engineered Cas9	NG, GAA, GAT	3'	Broad PAM recognition [17]
SaCas9	Cas9	3'-NNGRRT-5'	3'	Smaller size for delivery [12]
LbCas12a	Cas12a	5'-TTTV-5'	5'	Common Cas12a ortholog
AsCas12a	Cas12a	5'-TTTV-5'	5'	Common Cas12a ortholog [21]
FnCas12a	Cas12a	5'-YYN-5'	5'	Y = T or C [12]
Flex-Cas12a	Engineered Cas12a	5'-NYHV-5'	5'	Expands targeting to ~25% of genome [19]
CeCas12a	Cas12a	5'-TTTV-5'	5'	Stringent PAM recognition, low off-target [21]

Table 2: PAM Recognition and Genome Targeting Scope

Nuclease	Canonical PAM	Targeting Scope (% of genome)	Key Applications
SpCas9	NGG	~6% [19]	General genome editing
SpRY	NNN	Near-universal	Maximum targeting flexibility
LbCas12a	TTTV	~1% [19]	AT-rich regions, multiplexing
Flex-Cas12a	NYHV	~25% [19]	Expanded targeting with Cas12a

Experimental Methods for PAM Characterization

Accurately determining PAM preferences is crucial for developing and optimizing CRISPR tools. Several methods have been established for PAM characterization, ranging from in vitro biochemical assays to in vivo cellular approaches.

In Vitro PAM Determination Assays

In vitro cleavage assays involve incubating purified Cas nuclease with guide RNA and a library of DNA substrates containing randomized PAM sequences [12] [21]. After cleavage, the uncleaved DNA fragments are amplified and sequenced to identify enriched PAM sequences that supported cleavage. This approach allows for controlled biochemical characterization without cellular complications but may not fully recapitulate intracellular conditions.

A common implementation is the PAM depletion assay, where a plasmid library containing a randomized PAM region is subjected to cleavage by the Cas nuclease-guide RNA complex. Cleaved plasmids are depleted from the population, and the resulting PAM distribution is analyzed by high-throughput sequencing [16]. This method was used to characterize CeCas12a, revealing its stringent recognition of TTTV PAMs with minimal activity on C-containing PAMs [21].

In Vivo PAM Determination Assays

Bacterial-based selection systems leverage the toxicity of Cas nuclease activity when directed against essential genes. In these assays, survival of bacteria expressing Cas nuclease and guide RNAs targeting essential genes depends on the presence of non-functional PAMs, allowing for negative selection of functional PAM sequences [19]. This approach was utilized in the directed evolution of Flex-Cas12a, where bacterial survival indicated successful cleavage of a lethal gene with alternative PAMs [19].

The GenomePAM method represents a recent innovation that enables direct PAM characterization in mammalian cells by leveraging highly repetitive genomic sequences as natural target libraries [12]. This approach identifies genomic repeats flanked by diverse sequences where the constant sequence serves as the protospacer. When cells are transfected with Cas nuclease and guide RNA targeting these repeats, only sites with functional PAMs are cleaved. These cleavage events are captured using methods like GUIDE-seq, and subsequent sequencing reveals the PAM sequences that supported editing in their native chromosomal context [12]. GenomePAM has been successfully applied to characterize PAM requirements for type II and type V nucleases, including the minimal PAM requirement of the near-PAMless SpRY [12].

Diagram 1: Experimental Workflow for PAM Characterization. This flowchart illustrates the major steps in determining PAM preferences through both in vitro and in vivo methods.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Research Reagent Solutions

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents for PAM Studies and CRISPR Experimentation

Reagent/Tool	Function	Example Application
GenomePAM Platform	Direct PAM characterization in mammalian cells using genomic repeats	Determining PAM requirements in native chromosomal context [12]
GUIDE-seq	Genome-wide unbiased identification of DSBs enabled by sequencing	Mapping cleavage sites in cells for PAM analysis [12]
Bacterial Negative Selection System	Enrichment of functional PAM sequences through survival selection	Directed evolution of PAM-relaxed variants [19]
T5 Exonuclease	5' to 3' exonuclease activity for generating large deletions	Expanding deletion spectrum in CRISPR editing [20]
TREX2 Exonuclease	3' to 5' exonuclease activity for mismatch repair	Enhancing small to moderate deletions in editing [20]
Error-Prone PCR	Introducing random mutations for protein engineering	Creating variant libraries for directed evolution [19]
Cas12a Expression Vectors	Mammalian codon-optimized Cas12a with nuclear localization signals	Genome editing in eukaryotic cells [19] [21]

Implications for Crop Research and Biotechnology

The expanding repertoire of Cas nucleases with diverse PAM requirements has profound implications for crop genome engineering. The development of PAM-flexible editors like SpG and SpRY enables researchers to target previously inaccessible genomic regions in key crops [18]. This is particularly valuable for editing specific regulatory elements, promoter regions, and AT-rich sequences that may lack canonical PAM sites.

Multiplex genome editing using Cas12a's inherent crRNA processing capability allows simultaneous targeting of multiple genes, a powerful approach for engineering complex traits like climate resilience [18] [5]. The application of PAM-flexible multiplex genome editors to modify WRKY transcription factors in indica rice has demonstrated comprehensive improvement in cold tolerance, showcasing the practical agricultural benefits of expanded PAM compatibility [18].

The fusion of exonucleases with CRISPR systems represents another advancement with particular relevance for crop improvement. Exonuclease-fused Cas9 and Cas12a systems can generate larger, more precise deletions (up to 50+ bp), enabling more effective disruption of regulatory elements and non-coding sequences that control agronomic traits [20]. This addresses a significant limitation of conventional CRISPR systems that predominantly produce small indels.

For crop researchers, selecting the appropriate nuclease with compatible PAM requirements is essential for successful editing outcomes. The choice depends on multiple factors, including target sequence context, desired editing pattern, and the need for multiplexing. The continued development of novel Cas nucleases and engineered variants with expanded PAM compatibility promises to further enhance the precision and scope of crop genome engineering in the future.

Diagram 2: PAM Recognition and CRISPR Activation Mechanism. This diagram illustrates the molecular events triggered by PAM recognition, leading to DNA cleavage, and how protein engineering can alter PAM specificity.

The application of CRISPR-Cas systems has revolutionized biotechnology, creating diverse new opportunities for biomedical research and therapeutic genome editing [23]. However, the targeting scope of these powerful tools is constrained by a fundamental requirement: the presence of a short DNA sequence known as the protospacer adjacent motif (PAM) flanking the guide RNA-programmed target site [24] [25]. This PAM requirement allows the CRISPR system to distinguish between self and non-self DNA, serving as a vital security mechanism in bacterial adaptive immunity [26]. In applied genome editing, the PAM functions as a critical recognition signal that must be present for the Cas nuclease to bind to and cleave its target DNA.

In the context of crop improvement, the constraint imposed by PAM sequences presents a significant bottleneck. If a desired edit falls in a genomic region lacking the required PAM nearby, researchers cannot target it precisely with standard CRISPR systems [11]. This limitation is particularly problematic for prime editing applications in plants, where the challenge of low and variable editing efficiency is already a major concern [11]. The exploration of PAM diversity across bacterial species and Cas protein orthologs thus represents a crucial frontier in expanding the toolbox available to plant biologists and breeders. By characterizing natural PAM variations and engineering novel PAM specificities, scientists are steadily overcoming these limitations, opening new possibilities for precise genetic improvement in a wide range of crop species.

PAM Recognition Mechanisms in CRISPR-Cas Systems

In CRISPR-Cas systems, PAM recognition is mediated primarily by the PAM-interacting domain (PID) of the Cas protein [24]. The specific mechanisms vary between different Cas enzymes:

• In Streptococcus pyogenes Cas9 (SpCas9), the widely used type II effector, key residues in the PID (particularly Arg1333 and Arg1335) form hydrogen bonds with the major groove of the PAM duplex, specifically recognizing the guanine bases in the canonical NGG PAM [24].
• For Cas12a (formerly Cpf1), another popular genome editing tool, PAM recognition occurs through a distinct mechanism involving a short π-helix in the PID that contacts the minor groove of the PAM duplex, leading to recognition of a T-rich PAM (TTTN) [24].

These recognition mechanisms explain why different Cas orthologs have distinct PAM requirements—variations in the PID amino acid sequences and structural features directly influence which PAM sequences can be bound effectively. The PAM binding triggers DNA strand separation, enabling base pairing between the guide RNA and the target DNA strand for subsequent nucleolytic cleavage and editing events [25].

Natural Diversity of PAM Specificities Across Cas Orthologs

Systematic Discovery of Cas Orthologs with Diverse PAMs

The competitive coevolution of CRISPR-Cas systems with bacteriophages has driven the natural diversification of PAM specificities across bacterial species [26]. Researchers have employed bioinformatic approaches to mine bacterial genomes for uncharacterized type II CRISPR-Cas systems, focusing on genera that are genetically diverse and often non-pathogenic [23]. One such study characterized 29 type II-C Cas9 orthologs closely related to Nme1Cas9 (Neisseria meningitidis), finding that 25 were active in human cells and recognized diverse PAMs with variable length and nucleotide preference [26]. These orthologs were selected from the UniProt database with amino acid identities to Nme1Cas9 ranging from 59.6% to 70.4% [26].

Table 1: PAM Specificities of Selected Naturally Occurring Cas Orthologs

Cas Protein	Bacterial Source	PAM Specificity	PAM Length	Key Features
SpCas9	Streptococcus pyogenes	NGG	3 bp	Most widely used; strong preference for G-rich PAM
SaCas9	Staphylococcus aureus	NNGRRT	6 bp	Compact size; recognizes longer but specific PAM
CjCas9	Campylobacter jejuni	N4RYAC	6 bp	Extended recognition with mixed bases
Nme1Cas9	Neisseria meningitidis	N4GATT	6 bp	Compact, high-fidelity enzyme
Nme2Cas9	Neisseria meningitidis	N4CC	4 bp	Simplified PAM from close ortholog
St1Cas9	Streptococcus thermophilus	NNRGAA	6 bp	A-rich PAM preference
BlatCas9	Brevibacillus laterosporus	N4CNAA	6 bp	C-rich PAM recognition
AtCas9	Alicyclobacillus tengchongensis	N4CNNN / N4RNNA	Flexible	Naturally flexible PAM at high temperature

Insights from Closely Related Orthologs

Even phylogenetically closely related Cas9 orthologs can recognize distinct PAMs, defined as orthologs with >50% sequence identity that can exchange guide RNA components [26]. For instance:

• ScCas9 (Streptococcus canis) has 83.3% sequence identity with SpCas9 but recognizes an NNG PAM rather than NGG [26].
• SmacCas9 (Streptococcus macacae) has 58.4% sequence identity with SpCas9 and recognizes an NAA PAM [26].
• Among Nme1Cas9 orthologs, variations in just four key residues in the PAM-interacting domain (Q981, H1024, T1027, and N1029 in Nme1Cas9) are sufficient to alter PAM specificity significantly [26].

This natural diversity among closely related orthologs provides a rich resource for developing CRISPR tools with complementary targeting ranges, which is particularly valuable for multiplexed editing applications in crops where targeting flexibility is essential.

Engineering PAM-Flexible Cas Variants

Rational Engineering Approaches

Protein engineering has produced Cas variants with dramatically relaxed PAM requirements through several strategic approaches:

• Structure-guided mutagenesis: Analyzing ribonucleoprotein:DNA complex structures to identify key amino acid residues for mutation [24]. For SpCas9, mutating Arg1335 disrupted base-specific interactions with the third guanine of the NGG PAM, leading to variants with relaxed specificity [24].
• Domain grafting: Recombining PAM-interacting domains between orthologs to create chimeric enzymes. The engineered SpRYc variant combines the N-terminus of Sc++ Cas9 (which contains a positive-charged loop enabling NNG preference) with the PID of SpRY (a near-PAMless Cas9 with NRN>NYN preference) [25].
• Loop engineering: Introducing flexible loops from other Cas orthologs, as seen in Sc++ Cas9, which employs a positive-charged loop structure that relaxes the base requirement at the second PAM position [25].

Table 2: Engineered PAM-Flexible Cas Variants and Their Properties

Engineered Variant	Parental Cas	PAM Specificity	Editing Efficiency	Key Features
SpG	SpCas9	NGN	High	Relaxed second position
SpRY	SpCas9	NRN > NYN (near-PAMless)	Moderate	Broadest targeting scope
SpRYc	SpRY + Sc++	NNN (highly flexible)	Moderate	Chimeric enzyme with integrated properties
xCas9	SpCas9	NG, GAA, GAT	High	Multiple PAM recognition
Sc++	ScCas9	NNG	High	Positive-charged loop enables flexibility

Trade-offs in PAM Engineering

Relaxing PAM specificity often comes with functional trade-offs that must be considered for crop applications:

• Reduced editing efficiency: Many PAM-flexible variants exhibit lower on-target activity compared to their wild-type counterparts [24] [25].
• Increased off-target effects: Weakened PAM stringency can result in higher tolerance for mismatches between guide RNA and target DNA [24].
• Context-dependent performance: Efficiency varies significantly across genomic loci and cell types, as observed in plant systems where editing efficiency is highly variable across species, targets, and edit types [11].

The chimeric SpRYc variant demonstrates an interesting balance of these properties, showing nearly four-fold lower off-target activity than SpRY at some sites while maintaining broad PAM compatibility [25].

Experimental Methods for PAM Characterization

Several experimental methods have been developed to characterize the PAM requirements of Cas nucleases:

• PAM-SCANR: A bacterial positive selection screen based on GFP expression conditioned on PAM binding [25] [24].
• HT-PAMDA: A high-throughput PAM determination assay that measures cleavage rates of Cas enzymes on library substrates with different PAMs [25].
• Cell-free transcription–translation systems: In vitro approaches that avoid protein purification requirements [12].
• Bacterial depletion assays: Methods that leverage bacterial selection against functional PAM recognition [12].
• Fluorescence-based assays: Including PAM definition by observable sequence excision (PAM-DOSE) [12].

GenomePAM: A Novel Method for Direct PAM Characterization in Mammalian Cells

The GenomePAM method represents a significant advance by leveraging naturally occurring repetitive sequences in mammalian genomes for PAM characterization [12]. This approach uses highly repetitive genomic sequences (such as the Alu element sequence GTGAGCCACTGTGCCTGGCC, occurring ~16,942 times in a human diploid cell) as built-in protospacer libraries [12]. These repeats are flanked by nearly random sequences, providing a diverse set of potential PAMs distributed across the genome.

The experimental workflow for GenomePAM involves:

• Repeat identification: Bioinformatics analysis to identify highly repetitive sequences with diverse flanking regions in the target genome.
• gRNA design: Construction of guide RNAs targeting the identified repetitive sequences.
• Cell transfection: Delivery of Cas nuclease and gRNA expression constructs into mammalian cells (e.g., HEK293T).
• Cleavage site capture: Adaptation of the GUIDE-seq method to identify genomic double-strand breaks.
• Sequencing and analysis: High-throughput sequencing of captured sites followed by computational analysis to determine PAM preferences.

The key advantage of GenomePAM is that it characterizes PAM requirements in the native chromatin environment of living cells, potentially providing more physiologically relevant data compared to in vitro methods [12]. Additionally, it simultaneously assesses thousands of on-target sites and potential off-target sites across the genome, facilitating comprehensive comparison of different Cas nucleases [12].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Reagents for PAM Research

Table 3: Key Research Reagent Solutions for PAM Characterization Studies

Reagent / Method	Function	Application Context	Key Features
GenomePAM Platform	PAM characterization in mammalian cells	Identifies PAM requirements in native chromatin environment	Uses genomic repeats as built-in library; no synthetic oligos needed
GUIDE-seq Reagents	Genome-wide capture of nuclease cleavage sites	Maps on-target and off-target editing events	dsODN integration with AMP-seq enrichment
PAM-SCANR System	Bacterial PAM screening	Rapid initial PAM assessment in bacterial cells	GFP-based positive selection
HT-PAMDA Kit	High-throughput PAM determination	Quantitative measurement of cleavage kinetics	In vitro cleavage assays with purified proteins
Cas Ortholog Libraries	Collection of diverse Cas genes	Screening for novel PAM specificities	Bioinformatically selected from bacterial genomes

Applications in Crop Improvement and Future Perspectives

The expansion of PAM diversity has profound implications for crop improvement, particularly in overcoming current limitations in prime editing and other precision genome editing applications. The development of PAM-flexible Cas enzymes enables researchers to:

• Target previously inaccessible genomic sites for trait engineering, including promoter regions, regulatory elements, and specific disease-resistant alleles [24].
• Implement advanced editing applications such as base editing, prime editing, and gene regulation in precise genomic positions once deemed inaccessible [24] [11].
• Address therapeutically relevant mutations in human disease models, with parallel applications for precise modification of crop genes [25].

For crop improvement specifically, PAM-flexible systems could help overcome the challenge of low and variable editing efficiency that has hampered prime editing applications in plants [11]. By providing more target site options within genes of interest, researchers can select optimal editing contexts that maximize efficiency. Furthermore, the ability to target multiple sites with different PAM requirements enables sophisticated gene stacking strategies—simultaneously introducing multiple beneficial traits into elite crop varieties.

Future directions in PAM research will likely focus on optimizing the balance between targeting flexibility and editing precision, developing orthogonal Cas systems for multiplexed editing, and tailoring PAM specificities for particular crop genomes. As the CRISPR toolbox continues to expand with novel Cas proteins exhibiting diverse PAM specificities, plant biologists and breeders will gain unprecedented capability to perform precise genetic surgery on crop genomes, accelerating the development of improved varieties to meet global food security challenges.

The Critical Role of PAM in Target Site Selection and Its Impact on Editing Flexibility in Crop Genomes

The Protospacer Adjacent Motif (PAM) is a critical short DNA sequence immediately adjacent to the target DNA region that must be recognized by CRISPR-associated (Cas) nucleases to initiate genome editing. This sequence serves as a molecular "gatekeeper" that enables Cas enzymes to distinguish between self and non-self DNA in bacterial adaptive immunity, a function that has profound implications for CRISPR-based applications in crop genomes. In agricultural biotechnology, the PAM requirement simultaneously ensures targeting specificity while imposing significant constraints on editable target space, creating a fundamental challenge for crop researchers seeking to manipulate specific genetic loci. The widely used Streptococcus pyogenes Cas9 (SpCas9), for instance, requires a 5'-NGG-3' PAM sequence flanking its target site, severely limiting accessible genomic regions for editing applications requiring precise positioning, such as base editing and homology-directed repair [25].

The constraint imposed by PAM sequences is particularly significant in crop genomes, which often contain complex gene families with high sequence similarity and functional redundancy. As crop improvement programs increasingly rely on precise genome editing to enhance traits like yield, stress tolerance, and nutritional quality, overcoming PAM limitations has become a central focus in plant biotechnology research. This technical guide examines the critical role of PAM sequences in target site selection and explores emerging strategies to enhance editing flexibility in crop genomes, providing researchers with both theoretical foundations and practical experimental approaches.

PAM Fundamentals: Mechanism and Constraints

The Molecular Basis of PAM Recognition

From a mechanistic perspective, PAM binding triggers DNA strand separation, enabling base pairing between the guide RNA and the target DNA strand for subsequent nucleolytic cleavage and editing events [25]. The PAM is typically located 3-4 nucleotides downstream from the Cas nuclease cut site and serves as a binding signal that precedes the DNA unwinding necessary for guide RNA hybridization [2]. This sequence-specific recognition mechanism explains why CRISPR systems cannot target sequences lacking the appropriate PAM context.

The PAM requirement serves an essential biological function in native CRISPR-Cas systems: it prevents autoimmunity by ensuring that Cas nucleases do not target the bacterial cell's own CRISPR arrays, which contain sequences identical to previously encountered viruses but lack the flanking PAM sequences [2]. This self/non-self discrimination mechanism has been co-opted for genome engineering but comes with the inherent limitation of restricting targetable sites to those followed by the appropriate PAM sequence.

PAM Diversity Across CRISPR Systems

Different Cas nucleases recognize distinct PAM sequences, creating both challenges and opportunities for crop genome editing. The table below summarizes PAM requirements for commonly used CRISPR nucleases in plant systems:

Table 1: PAM Sequences for CRISPR Nucleases Used in Crop Genome Editing

CRISPR Nuclease	Source Organism	PAM Sequence (5' to 3')	Targeting Flexibility
SpCas9	Streptococcus pyogenes	NGG	Limited (∼1 in 8 bp)
ScCas9	Streptococcus canis	NNG	Moderate (∼1 in 4 bp)
SpRY	Engineered SpCas9	NRN > NYN*	High (∼1 in 1 bp)
SpG	Engineered SpCas9	NGN	Moderate (∼1 in 4 bp)
Cas12a (Cpf1)	Lachnospiraceae bacterium	TTTV	Limited by T-rich regions
Cas12b	Alicyclobacillus acidiphilus	TTN	Limited by T-rich regions
SaCas9	Staphylococcus aureus	NNGRRT	Limited (long PAM)
CjCas9	Campylobacter jejuni	NNNNRYAC	Limited (long PAM)

*R = A/G; Y = C/T; V = A/C/G [25] [18] [27]

This diversity in PAM requirements means that researchers can select different Cas nucleases based on the specific genomic context of their target genes in crops. For instance, T-rich PAM sequences (such as those recognized by Cas12a/b variants) may be preferable for targeting AT-rich genomic regions, while NG-rich PAMs (recognized by SpCas9 and its derivatives) are more suitable for GC-rich regions.

Engineering PAM Flexibility: Expanding the Crop Editing Toolbox

Rational Design of PAM-Flexible Cas Variants

Protein engineering approaches have yielded novel Cas variants with dramatically altered PAM specificities, significantly expanding the targetable space in crop genomes. Two primary strategies have emerged: (1) directed evolution of existing Cas nucleases to select variants with altered PAM preferences, and (2) rational design of chimeric enzymes that combine functional domains from different Cas proteins.

A notable example of rational design is the engineering of SpRYc, a chimeric Cas9 that combines the PAM-interacting domain (PID) of SpRY (an engineered near-PAMless Cas9) with the N-terminus of Sc++ (a Cas9 with broad NNG editing capabilities) [25]. SpRYc leverages properties of both enzymes to specifically edit diverse PAMs, exhibiting highly flexible PAM preference that enables targeting of previously inaccessible genomic sites [25]. The engineering process involved:

• Identifying key residues in the PID of SpRY (L1111R, D1135L, S1136W, G1218K, E1219Q, A1322R, R1333P, R1335Q, and T1337R) responsible for its relaxed PAM specificity
• Grafting this domain onto the N-terminus of Sc++ (residues 1-1119), which contains a positive-charged, flexible loop structure that relaxes the base requirement at the second PAM position
• Validating the chimeric enzyme's structure and function through computational modeling and experimental testing [25]

This integrative protein design approach demonstrates how understanding protein-DNA interactions at the molecular level can facilitate the creation of custom editors with tailored PAM preferences for specific crop editing applications.

Experimental Workflow for Engineering PAM-Flexible Editors

Figure 1: Experimental workflow for developing and validating PAM-flexible CRISPR editors for crop genomes.

Validation of PAM Flexibility

The PAM specificity of engineered Cas variants is typically validated using specialized assays such as:

• PAM-SCANR: A positive selection bacterial screen based on green fluorescent protein (GFP) expression conditioned on PAM binding [25]. This endpoint assay involves transformation of a PAM-SCANR plasmid harboring a PAM library, a single guide RNA plasmid targeting a fixed protospacer, and a nuclease-deficient dCas9 plasmid, followed by fluorescence-activated cell sorting to isolate GFP-positive cells for sequencing.

• HT-PAMDA: A high-throughput method that calculates cleavage rates of Cas9 enzymes on a library of substrates harboring different PAMs [25]. Unlike PAM-SCANR, this assay measures cleavage kinetics rather than binding alone, providing more functional data on editing efficiency across PAM sequences.

Experimental results with SpRYc demonstrated that it generates modifications at diverse genomic loci with various PAM sequences, performing comparably to SpRY and more optimally on select 5'-NYN-3' loci [25]. When fused to base editors like ABE8e, SpRYc exhibited particularly strong performance on 5'-NTN-3' and 5'-NNT-3' PAMs, where it greatly outperformed SpRY-ABE8e [25].

PAM Considerations for Reducing Off-Target Effects in Crops

Strategic PAM Selection for Enhanced Specificity

While PAM-flexible editors expand targeting range, they must maintain specificity to avoid undesirable off-target effects. Research in pineapple has demonstrated that selecting target sequences with multiple flanking PAM sites significantly reduces off-target rates compared to targets with only a single PAM site [28]. This approach leverages the natural mechanism of Cas9 interaction with DNA: when Cas9 binds to a PAM sequence, it detects whether the upstream sequence matches the guide RNA, and if not, it moves along the DNA strand to search for the next PAM site [28].

Experimental data from pineapple transformation studies revealed:

• Target sequences with two 5'-NGG PAM sites at the 3' end exhibited greater specificity and higher probability of binding with the Cas9 protein than those with only one PAM site
• Sequences with adjacent 5'-NAG PAM sites showed lower off-target rates than those with single NGG PAM sites
• The presence of multiple PAM sites increases Cas9 dwell time in the target fragment, raising the likelihood of on-target editing while reducing off-target mutations [28]

Table 2: Off-Target Rates in Pineapple Based on PAM Configuration

PAM Configuration	Example Sequence	Relative Off-Target Rate	Editing Efficiency
Single NGG PAM	5'-GATTACGTCGG-3'	High	High
Dual NGG PAMs	5'-GATTACGTGGGG-3'	Low	High
NAG + NGG PAMs	5'-GATTACGTAGGG-3'	Moderate	Moderate
Dual NAG PAMs	5'-GATTACGTAGAG-3'	Lowest	Moderate-Low

Multi-PAM Target Selection Strategy

Figure 2: Strategic selection of target sequences with multiple flanking PAM sites to reduce off-target effects while maintaining editing efficiency.

Application in Crop Improvement: Case Studies

Overcoming Cold Sensitivity in Indica Rice

The development of cold-tolerant indica rice exemplifies the application of PAM-flexible editing for crop improvement. Rice, particularly indica varieties, is sensitive to low temperature, which impacts yield and restricts geographic distribution. Researchers developed PAM-flexible multiplex genome editing tools based on SpG (recognizing NGN PAMs) and SpRY (recognizing NNN PAMs) variants to simultaneously edit WRKY transcription factors OsWRKY53 and OsWRKY63, generating high cold-resistant indica rice lines [18].

This approach involved:

• Designing guide RNAs targeting conserved regions of both WRKY genes
• Utilizing a sweet potato leaf curl virus (SPLCV) replicon-based expression vector to enhance editing efficiency
• Incorporating single-stranded DNA-binding domain (DBD) to improve the editing efficiency of PAM-flexible editors
• Regenerating edited plants with comprehensive improvement in cold tolerance [18]

The successful application of PAM-flexible editors in this context demonstrates their power for addressing complex agronomic traits controlled by multiple genes with limited PAM accessibility.

Large-Scale Functional Genomics in Tomato

The creation of genome-wide multi-targeted CRISPR libraries in tomato further illustrates how PAM flexibility enables functional genomics at scale. Researchers designed 15,804 unique sgRNAs, each targeting multiple genes within the same gene families to overcome functional redundancy [29]. This library was classified into 10 sub-libraries based on gene function, targeting transcription factors, transporters, and enzymes important for tomato improvement.

Key design considerations included:

• Confining sgRNA targets to the first two-thirds of the coding sequence to maximize knockout likelihood
• Calculating "on-target" scores using the cutting frequency determination (CFD) scoring function
• Applying strict thresholds for off-target effects (20% of on-target score for exons, 50% for other genomic regions)
• Approximately 95% of the sgRNAs target groups of 2-3 genes, with the remainder targeting 4-8 genes [29]

This library has successfully generated mutants with distinct phenotypes related to fruit development, flavor, nutrient uptake, and pathogen response, demonstrating the practical utility of PAM-informed library design for crop functional genomics.

Research Reagent Solutions for PAM-Flexible Editing

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents for PAM-Flexible Genome Editing in Crops

Reagent Category	Specific Examples	Function in PAM-Flexible Editing
Engineered Nucleases	SpRY, SpG, SpRYc, Cas12a Ultra	Recognize non-canonical PAM sequences (NGN, NYN, NNN) to expand targetable sites
Validation Assays	PAM-SCANR, HT-PAMDA	Characterize PAM specificity and cleavage efficiency of novel editors
Delivery Vectors	SPLCV replicon vectors, Golden Gate T-DNA vectors	Enhance expression and delivery of editing components to plant cells
Specificity Enhancers	HiFi Cas9, Cas12a V3	Reduce off-target effects while maintaining on-target activity with relaxed PAMs
Library Design Tools	CRISPys algorithm, CFD scoring	Design optimal sgRNAs with maximal on-target and minimal off-target activity

The critical role of PAM sequences in target site selection represents both a constraint and opportunity for crop genome editing. While native PAM requirements limit accessible genomic space, continued engineering of PAM-flexible Cas variants is rapidly overcoming these limitations. The development of editors like SpRY and SpRYc, coupled with strategic approaches to PAM selection and library design, is expanding the frontiers of what's possible in crop improvement.

Future directions in PAM research will likely focus on:

• Complete PAM elimination through more extensive protein engineering
• Tissue-specific PAM-flexible editors for spatial control of gene editing
• Machine learning approaches to predict optimal PAM-editor combinations for specific crop genomes
• Integration of PAM-flexible editing with emerging technologies like prime editing and gene drives for crop improvement

As these technologies mature, PAM-flexible genome editing will increasingly become a standard component of the crop improvement toolkit, enabling researchers to precisely modify previously inaccessible genetic elements and accelerate the development of crops with enhanced productivity, resilience, and nutritional quality.

From Theory to Field: Practical Application of PAM-Based Editing Systems in Crops

The precision of CRISPR-based genome editing systems is fundamentally governed by a short genetic sequence known as protospacer adjacent motif (PAM). For any CRISPR nuclease to recognize and cleave a DNA target, the target site must be adjacent to a specific PAM sequence, which varies depending on the Cas nuclease used. This requirement presents a significant constraint in crop engineering, as the distribution and frequency of these PAM sequences vary considerably across different plant genomes due to their distinct genomic architectures, GC content, and sequence compositions. The challenge is particularly pronounced when targeting specific agronomic traits where editing flexibility is limited by PAM availability. Consequently, strategic selection of Cas nucleases with complementary PAM requirements is essential for successful genome editing in crops. This guide provides a comprehensive technical framework for matching Cas nucleases to crop-specific PAM contexts, enabling researchers to optimize editing efficiency and expand targetable genomic space for crop improvement.

Understanding PAM Requirements of Major Cas Nucleases

The expanding repertoire of CRISPR-Cas systems and their engineered derivatives offers researchers a diverse toolkit with varying PAM requirements. Understanding these specificities is the foundational step in selecting the appropriate nuclease for a given crop genome.

Natural Cas Nuclease Variants

Naturally occurring Cas nucleases from different bacterial species recognize distinct PAM sequences, providing initial options for targeting different genomic regions:

• SpCas9: Derived from Streptococcus pyogenes, this widely used nuclease requires a 5'-NGG-3' PAM sequence, where "N" represents any nucleotide. This PAM is relatively common in GC-rich genomes but may be limiting in AT-rich genomic regions [30] [31].
• SaCas9: Originating from Staphylococcus aureus, this compact nuclease recognizes 5'-NNGRRT-3' or 5'-NNGRR(N)-3' PAM sequences, where R represents A or G. Its smaller size makes it advantageous for viral vector delivery systems [32].
• Cas12a (Cpf1): Unlike Cas9, Cas12a enzymes (such as LbCas12a and AsCas12a) recognize T-rich PAM sequences (5'-TTTV-3', where V is A, C, or G) and generate staggered DNA ends rather than blunt cuts, making them particularly valuable for targeting AT-rich genomic regions [32] [31].
• CasΦ: This recently discovered nuclease, found in huge phages, has a compact size and recognizes a 5'-TBN-3' PAM sequence, expanding options for targeting T-rich regions [30].

Engineered Cas Variants with Expanded PAM Compatibility

Protein engineering approaches have significantly expanded the PAM compatibility of natural nucleases, creating variants with relaxed PAM requirements:

• xCas9: This engineered SpCas9 variant recognizes a broader range of PAM sequences including NG, GAA, and GAT, while simultaneously exhibiting increased specificity and reduced off-target effects [32] [33].
• SpCas9-NG: Engineered to recognize 5'-NG-3' PAMs, this variant substantially increases the number of targetable sites in plant genomes, particularly in AT-rich contexts where NGG PAMs are less frequent [32].
• SpG: A SpCas9 derivative that recognizes 5'-NGN-3' PAM sequences, effectively doubling the targeting range compared to wild-type SpCas9 [18] [31].
• SpRY: Considered nearly "PAM-less," SpRY recognizes 5'-NRN-3' and 5'-NYN-3' PAM sequences (where R is A/G and Y is C/T), achieving the broadest PAM compatibility among current SpCas9 derivatives and enabling targeting of most genomic sites [18] [31] [33].

Table 1: PAM Requirements and Targeting Scope of Major Cas Nucleases

Nuclease	PAM Sequence	Targeting Flexibility	Best Suited For
SpCas9	NGG	Moderate	GC-rich crop genomes
SaCas9	NNGRRT	Moderate	Applications requiring compact nuclease
Cas12a	TTTV	High	AT-rich genomic regions
xCas9	NG, GAA, GAT	High	Diverse PAM contexts with high fidelity
SpCas9-NG	NG	High	Expanding NGG-limited targets
SpG	NGN	Very High	Doubling targetable sites vs SpCas9
SpRY	NRN > NYN	Nearly PAM-less	Maximum targeting flexibility

Assessing PAM Availability in Major Crop Genomes

The genomic landscape of different crop species varies significantly in terms of GC content, sequence composition, and chromatin organization, directly impacting the distribution and frequency of PAM sequences for various Cas nucleases.

GC Content and PAM Distribution

Crop genomes with higher GC content naturally contain more NGG PAM sequences for SpCas9, while AT-rich genomes have fewer compatible sites:

• Rice (Oryza sativa): With approximately 43.6% GC content, the rice genome has moderate NGG PAM availability but benefits significantly from NG-recognizing variants like SpCas9-NG for comprehensive gene targeting [18].
• Maize (Zea mays): This genome has approximately 47% GC content, providing reasonable SpCas9 targeting density, though engineered variants still expand accessible targets.
• Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum): With approximately 37% GC content, the tomato genome has relatively fewer NGG PAM sites, making PAM-flexible editors like SpRY particularly valuable [34].

Practical Implications for Trait Targeting

The strategic importance of PAM-flexible nucleases becomes evident when targeting specific genes for crop improvement:

• Cold tolerance in indica rice: Research demonstrates that using SpG-mediated multiplex genome editing to target WRKY transcription factors (OsWRKY53 and OsWRKY63) successfully generated cold-tolerant indica rice lines, showcasing how PAM-flexible editors enable comprehensive trait improvement [18].
• Disease resistance: Engineering resistance to viruses, fungi, and bacteria often requires precise editing of specific nucleotide sequences within susceptibility genes, where PAM availability directly constrains editing possibilities [31].
• Quality traits: Modifying genes controlling nutritional content, shelf-life, or processing quality often necessitates precise nucleotide changes where PAM positioning is critical for success.

Table 2: PAM Frequency in Major Crop Genomes and Optimal Nuclease Selection

Crop Species	GC Content (%)	NGG PAM Frequency (per kb)	TTTV PAM Frequency (per kb)	Recommended Nucleases
Rice (O. sativa)	~43.6	~8.5	~12.3	SpCas9-NG, SpRY, Cas12a
Maize (Z. mays)	~47.0	~9.8	~10.5	SpCas9, SpG, xCas9
Tomato (S. lycopersicum)	~37.0	~6.2	~14.7	SpRY, Cas12a, SpG
Wheat (T. aestivum)	~42.5	~7.9	~12.9	SpCas9-NG, SpRY, Cas12a
Potato (S. tuberosum)	~38.5	~6.8	~13.8	SpRY, Cas12a, SpG

Experimental Protocol for PAM Availability Assessment and Nuclease Selection

Implementing a systematic approach to assess PAM availability and select optimal nucleases ensures efficient genome editing outcomes. The following protocol provides a step-by-step methodology for this critical preliminary analysis.

In Silico PAM Profiling and Target Site Identification

Diagram 1: PAM Assessment Workflow

• Sequence Acquisition and Preprocessing

  • Obtain the complete genomic sequence of your target crop from databases such as Phytozome, Ensembl Plants, or NCBI.
  • Extract the specific genomic region of interest (e.g., gene promoter, coding sequence, or regulatory element) in FASTA format.
  • For whole-gene targeting, include at least 500 bp upstream and downstream of the coding sequence to capture regulatory regions.

• GC Content and Sequence Composition Analysis

  • Calculate the GC content of your target region using bioinformatics tools like EMBOSS geecee or custom scripts.
  • Determine the nucleotide distribution (A, T, G, C percentage) to identify sequence biases that might affect PAM availability.
  • Compare the GC content of your target region with the genome-wide average to assess local sequence context.

• Comprehensive PAM Scanning

  • Use computational tools to scan for all possible PAM sequences relevant to different Cas nucleases in your target region.
  • For initial scanning, include these common PAM sequences:
    • SpCas9: NGG
    • SpCas9-NG: NG
    • SpG: NGN
    • SpRY: NRN and NYN
    • Cas12a: TTTV (where V is A, C, or G)
  • Tabulate the frequency of each PAM type per kilobase of sequence.

• PAM Distribution Mapping and Accessibility Assessment

  • Map the physical positions of all identified PAM sequences relative to your desired editing site(s).
  • Prioritize PAM sequences located within 20 bp of your intended target site for prime editing or base editing applications.
  • Evaluate chromatin accessibility data if available (e.g., ATAC-seq or DNase-seq) to identify PAMs in open chromatin regions, which are generally more accessible for editing.

Strategic Nuclease Selection and Validation

• Nuclease Selection Criteria

  • For precision edits (base editing, prime editing): Prioritize nucleases with PAMs closest to your target nucleotide(s) to minimize editing window constraints.
  • For gene knockouts: Select nucleases with PAMs that enable targeting of early exons or essential protein domains.
  • For AT-rich regions: Prefer Cas12a or SpRY over SpCas9.
  • For GC-rich regions: SpCas9 and its derivatives (SpG, SpCas9-NG) are generally effective.
  • For multiplex editing: Consider Cas12a for its inherent multiplexing capability or combine multiple Cas nucleases with different PAM requirements.

• Experimental Validation of PAM Compatibility

  • For novel or engineered nucleases: First validate PAM recognition specificity in your crop system using a standardized reporter assay.
  • For established nucleases: Confirm editing efficiency at your specific target site using a transient expression system (e.g., protoplast transfection) before stable transformation.
  • Multiplexing potential: When targeting multiple genes, ensure compatible PAM availability for all targets with your selected nuclease(s).

Advanced Applications and Emerging Technologies

Prime Editing and PAM Constraints

Prime editing, a versatile "search-and-replace" genome editing technology, imposes additional PAM constraints as the editing window is typically limited to within 30 bp of the nicking site. This makes PAM availability particularly critical for prime editing applications [34]. The development of PAM-flexible nucleases like SpRY has significantly expanded the targeting scope of prime editing in plants, enabling precise edits at previously inaccessible genomic sites. Recent advances have demonstrated that combining prime editors with engineered Cas9 variants recognizing NG PAMs (e.g., SpCas9-NG) successfully installed agronomically important mutations in rice and other crops [34].

AI-Designed Cas Nucleases

Artificial intelligence is revolutionizing the development of novel Cas nucleases with tailored properties. Large language models trained on diverse CRISPR-Cas sequences can now generate functional nucleases with customized PAM specificities and enhanced properties. The AI-designed OpenCRISPR-1 exemplifies this approach, exhibiting high editing efficiency with potentially novel PAM recognition profiles [35]. These computational approaches enable the generation of Cas nucleases specifically optimized for the unique genomic contexts of different crop species, potentially overcoming current PAM limitations.

Essential Research Reagent Solutions

Successful implementation of CRISPR editing in crops requires access to a comprehensive set of research reagents and tools. The following table outlines key resources for conducting PAM-aware genome editing experiments.

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents for Crop Genome Editing

Reagent Category	Specific Examples	Function and Application	Considerations for Crop Systems
Cas Nuclease Expression Vectors	SpCas9, SpCas9-NG, SpRY, LbCas12a	Encode the Cas nuclease for targeted DNA cleavage	Select species-appropriate promoters (e.g., Ubiquitin for monocots, 35S for dicots)
gRNA Expression Systems	U6/U3 promoters, tRNA-based multiplex systems	Drive expression of guide RNA sequences	Verify promoter compatibility with target crop species
Delivery Vectors	Binary vectors for Agrobacterium transformation, viral vectors (e.g., SPLCV replicon)	Facilitate transfer of editing components into plant cells	Choose based on transformation efficiency in your crop
Validation Tools	PCR primers for target amplification, restriction enzymes for RFLP assays	Confirm successful genome edits	Design primers flanking target site (≥100 bp on each side)
Plant Selectable Markers	Hygromycin, Kanamycin, Bialaphos resistance genes	Enable selection of successfully transformed tissue	Consider marker-free systems for commercial applications
Modular Cloning Systems	Golden Gate, Gateway	Simplify assembly of complex genetic constructs	Enable rapid testing of multiple gRNAs and nucleases

The strategic selection of Cas nucleases based on crop-specific PAM availability is fundamental to successful genome editing in modern crop improvement programs. As the CRISPR toolbox continues to expand with newly discovered natural nucleases, engineered variants with relaxed PAM requirements, and computationally designed enzymes, researchers gain unprecedented capability to target virtually any genomic sequence in any crop species. The emerging trend of combining PAM-flexible editors with advanced editing techniques like prime editing and artificial intelligence-driven protein design promises to further eliminate current constraints, enabling precise modification of complex agronomic traits. By adopting the systematic framework outlined in this guide—comprehensive PAM assessment, strategic nuclease selection, and experimental validation—researchers can maximize editing efficiency and accelerate the development of improved crop varieties with enhanced yield, resilience, and nutritional quality.

The Protospacer Adjacent Motif (PAM) is a short, specific DNA sequence that is absolutely required for the CRISPR-Cas system to recognize and bind to a target DNA site. This sequence, typically 2-6 base pairs in length and located 3-4 nucleotides downstream from the DNA cut site, serves as a binding signal for the Cas nuclease [2]. In crop genome editing, the PAM requirement fundamentally constrains targetable sites, making PAM-informed guide RNA (gRNA) design a critical first step in any editing experiment. The PAM sequence functions as a recognition signal that enables the Cas nuclease to distinguish between self and non-self DNA in bacterial adaptive immunity, thereby preventing autoimmunity [2]. When adapted for CRISPR applications, this mechanism ensures that only DNA with the correct PAM sequence will be cleaved, thus dictating the precise genomic locations available for editing.

The PAM sequence varies significantly between different Cas nucleases. While the most commonly used Cas9 from Streptococcus pyogenes (SpCas9) recognizes a 5'-NGG-3' PAM, other nucleases have distinct recognition patterns [2]. This diversity presents both challenges and opportunities for crop researchers, as the choice of nuclease directly determines the potential target sites within complex crop genomes. For polyploid crops with large, repetitive genomes—such as wheat, which has a 17.1 Gb hexaploid genome—PAM-informed gRNA design becomes particularly crucial to ensure specificity and minimize off-target effects across highly similar subgenomes [36] [37].

PAM Diversity and Nuclease Selection

The expanding repertoire of CRISPR nucleases and engineered variants with diverse PAM specificities has dramatically increased the targetable space in crop genomes. Different Cas proteins recognize distinct PAM sequences, allowing researchers to select the most appropriate nuclease based on genomic context and editing goals.

Table 1: PAM Sequences for Various CRISPR Nucleases

CRISPR Nucleases	Organism Isolated From	PAM Sequence (5' to 3')
SpCas9	Streptococcus pyogenes	NGG
hfCas12Max	Engineered from Cas12i	TN and/or TNN
SaCas9	Staphylococcus aureus	NNGRRT or NNGRRN
NmeCas9	Neisseria meningitidis	NNNNGATT
CjCas9	Campylobacter jejuni	NNNNRYAC
StCas9	Streptococcus thermophilus	NNAGAAW
LbCpf1 (Cas12a)	Lachnospiraceae bacterium	TTTV
AsCpf1 (Cas12a)	Acidaminococcus sp.	TTTV
AacCas12b	Alicyclobacillus acidiphilus	TTN
BhCas12b v4	Bacillus hisashii	ATTN, TTTN and GTTN
Cas14	Uncultivated archaea	T-rich PAM sequences, e.g., TTTA for dsDNA cleavage
Cas3	In silico analysis of various prokaryotic genomes	No PAM sequence requirement [2]

Emerging approaches are further expanding PAM diversity. Artificially intelligent-designed gene editors, such as OpenCRISPR-1, demonstrate comparable or improved activity and specificity relative to SpCas9 while being 400 mutations away in sequence, representing a significant expansion of potential PAM recognition capabilities [35]. Additionally, bioinformatic resources like the CRISPR–Cas Atlas, which contains over 1 million CRISPR operons mined from 26 terabases of assembled genomes and metagenomes, provide unprecedented diversity for discovering novel nucleases with unique PAM specificities [35].

Strategic Framework for PAM-Informed gRNA Design

Core Principles for Optimal gRNA Selection

Efficient gRNA design requires balancing multiple factors to maximize on-target efficiency while minimizing off-target effects. The following principles are particularly critical for crop genomes:

• PAM-Proximal Specificity: The 10-12 bp region upstream of the PAM (the "seed region") exhibits the highest specificity requirements. Mismatches in this region dramatically reduce cleavage efficiency, making this segment crucial for minimizing off-target effects [28].
• Multiple Flanking PAM Sites: Recent research in pineapple demonstrates that target sequences with multiple flanking PAM sites significantly reduce off-target rates compared to those with only a single PAM site. Specifically, sequences with two 5'-NGG PAM sites at the 3' end exhibited greater specificity and higher probability of binding with the Cas9 protein [28].
• PAM Variant Considerations: While NGG is the canonical PAM for SpCas9, NAG PAMs can also facilitate editing, though typically with lower efficiency. In pineapple mutant lines, target sequences with a 5'-NAG PAM site adjacent and upstream of an NGG PAM site had lower off-target rates than those with only an NGG PAM site, but still higher than sequences with two adjacent 5'-NAG PAM sites [28].

Computational Tools for gRNA Design and Off-Target Prediction

Several computational tools incorporate PAM requirements and off-target prediction algorithms to facilitate gRNA design. These tools employ various scoring systems based on large-scale experimental datasets to predict gRNA efficacy.

Table 2: Computational Tools for PAM-Informed gRNA Design

Tool	Key Features	PAM Support	Off-Target Scoring
CRISPick	Simple interface, on-target and off-target scores	Multiple Cas proteins	CFD score
CHOPCHOP	Versatile platform, visual off-target representation	Various CRISPR-Cas systems	Multiple algorithms
CRISPOR	Detailed off-target analysis, position-specific mismatch scoring	SpCas9, Cas12a	MIT, CFD scores
GenScript sgRNA Design Tool	Uses Rule Set 3 for on-target, CFD for off-target	SpCas9, AsCas12a	CFD score
WheatCRISPR	Tailored for complex wheat genome	Customizable	Genome-specific [36]

These tools employ sophisticated algorithms trained on large experimental datasets. For on-target efficiency prediction, Rule Set 3 (developed by Doench's team in 2022) considers both the 30nt target sequence and the tracrRNA sequence, using a gradient boosting framework for faster training [38]. For off-target assessment, the Cutting Frequency Determination (CFD) score, based on the activity of 28,000 gRNAs with single variations, provides a robust metric for predicting off-target potential [38].

Experimental Characterization of PAM Requirements

In Vitro PAM Determination Assay

For novel or uncharacterized Cas nucleases, an efficient method for empirically determining PAM preferences involves in vitro cleavage assays of randomized PAM libraries. The following protocol, adapted from Karvelis et al., 2015, enables rapid characterization of PAM requirements [6]:

Workflow:

• Library Construction: Generate plasmid DNA vectors containing a unique spacer sequence juxtaposed to randomized PAM libraries (5-7 randomized base pairs, creating 1,024-16,384 potential PAM combinations)
• In Vitro Digestion: Digest the randomized PAM libraries with different concentrations of recombinant Cas protein preloaded with guide RNA
• Cleavage Capture: Capture PAM sequences that supported cleavage by ligating adapters to the free ends of cleaved plasmid DNA molecules
• PCR Amplification: Amplify DNA fragments harboring functional PAM sequences using a primer in the adapter and another adjacent to the PAM region
• Deep Sequencing: Sequence the resulting PCR-amplified Cas9 PAM libraries to identify functional PAM sequences supporting cleavage [6]

This method successfully reproduced canonical PAM preferences for known Cas9 proteins (Streptococcus pyogenes, Streptococcus thermophilus CRISPR3 and CRISPR1) and identified novel PAM specificities for previously uncharacterized nucleases such as Brevibacillus laterosporus Cas9 [6].

The following diagram illustrates the experimental workflow for characterizing PAM specificity:

Validation in Plant Systems

Following in vitro characterization, PAM requirements and gRNA efficacy must be validated in plant systems. In pineapple, researchers generated fifty mutant lines for each of eighteen target sequences with varying numbers of PAM sites to statistically evaluate off-target rates [28]. This comprehensive approach revealed that target sequences with multiple flanking PAM sites resulted in significantly lower off-target rates, demonstrating the importance of PAM context in editing specificity.

For polyploid crops like wheat, validation must include assessment across all subgenomes. The Wheat PanGenome database provides cultivar-specific genomic data that enables precise gRNA designing and identification of potential off-target sites across different cultivars and subgenomes [36] [37]. This is particularly crucial given that wheat's A/D genomes contain approximately 114,081,000/99,766,831 targetable sequences with the 5'-GN(19-21)-GG-3' pattern, creating substantial potential for off-target editing without careful design [37].

Advanced Strategies for Complex Crop Genomes

Addressing Species-Specific Challenges

Crop genomes present unique challenges that necessitate specialized PAM-informed design approaches:

• Polyploid Species: For hexaploid wheat, gRNAs must be designed to account for homoeologs (equivalent genes in different subgenomes) while minimizing off-target editing across highly similar sequences. Tools like WheatCRISPR enable genome-specific design to address this challenge [36].
• Repetitive Genomes: With over 80% repetitive DNA in the wheat genome, gRNA design requires careful specificity validation to avoid unintended editing of repetitive elements [37].
• Cultivar-Specific Variation: The Wheat PanGenome database incorporates presence-absence variations, structural variants, and diverse allelic forms across wheat cultivars, supporting precise cultivar-specific gRNA design [37].

AI-Enhanced Editor Design

Artificial intelligence approaches are revolutionizing PAM-informed gRNA design by enabling the generation of novel Cas proteins with optimized properties. Large language models trained on biological diversity at scale can successfully generate functional gene editors that diverge significantly from natural sequences while maintaining or improving activity [35]. These AI-designed editors, such as OpenCRISPR-1, represent a promising future direction for expanding PAM compatibility and specificity in crop genome editing.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents

Table 3: Key Research Reagents for PAM-Informed gRNA Design

Reagent / Resource	Function	Application in Crop Editing
CRISPR–Cas Atlas	Comprehensive database of CRISPR operons	Discovery of novel nucleases with diverse PAM specificities [35]
Randomized PAM Libraries	Plasmid vectors with randomized PAM sequences	Empirical determination of PAM requirements for novel Cas proteins [6]
Wheat PanGenome Database	Catalog of genomic variation across wheat cultivars	Cultivar-specific gRNA design and off-target prediction [36] [37]
CRISPOR Software	gRNA design with detailed off-target analysis	Selection of optimal gRNAs with minimal off-target risk [38]
Ensembl Plants Database	Genomic resource for multiple plant species	Gene sequence identification and homologous gene finding [36]

PAM-informed gRNA design represents a critical foundation for successful genome editing in crops. By understanding PAM diversity, employing strategic design principles that leverage multiple flanking PAM sites, utilizing sophisticated computational tools, and validating designs in relevant biological contexts, researchers can significantly enhance editing efficiency and specificity. The continuing expansion of characterized Cas nucleases with diverse PAM specificities, coupled with AI-driven protein design and crop-specific bioinformatic resources, promises to further advance the precision and applicability of CRISPR technologies for crop improvement. As these tools evolve, PAM-informed design will remain essential for unlocking the full potential of genome editing in addressing global agricultural challenges.

The protospacer adjacent motif (PAM) serves as a fundamental recognition signal for CRISPR-Cas systems, dictating the targeting scope and specificity of genome editing in crops. This short, specific DNA sequence adjacent to the target site is essential for initiating the Cas protein's catalytic activity. The PAM requirement varies significantly among different CRISPR systems, presenting both constraints and opportunities for crop researchers. Understanding PAM dependencies is crucial for designing effective editing strategies in major crops like rice, soybean, and maize, where precise genetic modifications can enhance yield, nutritional quality, and stress resilience. This technical guide examines successful PAM-dependent editing case studies within these essential crops, providing researchers with practical frameworks for experimental design and implementation.

Fundamental Principles of PAM-Dependent CRISPR Systems

Classification and PAM Requirements of Major CRISPR Systems

CRISPR systems are broadly classified into two classes based on their effector module architecture. Class 1 systems (Types I, III, and IV) employ multi-subunit protein complexes, while Class 2 systems (Types II, V, and VI) utilize single effector proteins, making them particularly suitable for plant genome editing applications [39]. The PAM sequences recognized by these systems determine their targeting range and potential application sites within complex crop genomes.

Table 1: Major CRISPR-Cas Systems and Their PAM Requirements

CRISPR System	Cas Protein	PAM Requirement	Target Type	Key Advantages	Primary Applications in Crops
Class 2 Type II	SpCas9	5'-NGG-3'	dsDNA	Simple design; high efficiency; multiplex capability	Gene knockouts, multiplex editing [39]
Class 2 Type II	SpRY	Relaxed PAM (NRN > NYN)	dsDNA	Expanded targeting scope	Editing previously inaccessible sites [39]
Class 2 Type V	Cas12a (Cpf1)	5'-TTTV-3'	dsDNA/ssDNA	No tracrRNA needed; lower off-target rate	T-rich genomic regions [39] [40]
Class 2 Type V	Cas12j-8	Engineered for improved efficiency	dsDNA	Hypercompact size	Efficient editing in soybean and rice [41]
Class 2 Type VI	Cas13	3' non-G PFS*	ssRNA	PAM-independent; RNA targeting	Transient gene regulation [39]

*PFS: Protospacer Flanking Site (RNA equivalent of PAM)

PAM-Dependent Editing Workflow

The following diagram illustrates the fundamental workflow for PAM-dependent genome editing in crops, from target selection to mutant identification:

PAM-Dependent Editing in Rice (Oryza sativaL.)

Case Study 1: Enhancing Grain Lysine Content

Experimental Objective: To increase lysine content in rice grains by knocking out the bifunctional lysine ketoglutarate reductase/saccharopine dehydrogenase (LKR/SDH) gene in the lysine catabolic pathway using a PAM-dependent CRISPR-Cas9 system [42].

Protocol Details:

• CRISPR System: SpCas9 with NGG PAM recognition
• Target Gene: LKR/SDH (LOC_Os02g24300)
• gRNA Design: Two sgRNAs targeting exonic regions with NGG PAM sites
• Vector Construction: pRGEB32 vector with endogenous tRNA-processing system for multiplex gRNA expression
• Transformation Method: Agrobacterium-mediated transformation of U.S. elite rice cultivar Presidio
• Screening Method: Droplet Digital PCR (ddPCR) for transgene copy number, NGS for mutation analysis, HPLC for lysine quantification

Results and PAM Efficiency: The experiment generated 19 transgene-positive T0 plants with knockout mutations. Four selected T0 plants showed a nearly 2-fold increase in lysine content in T2 seeds compared to wild-type, without affecting agronomic traits. The stable inheritance of edits was confirmed in T3 generations, demonstrating the effectiveness of NGG PAM-directed editing for nutritional enhancement [42].

Case Study 2: Optimizing Plant Architecture

Experimental Objective: To fine-tune rice plant architecture through systematic editing of the cytokinin oxidase/dehydrogenase (OsCKX) gene family using SpCas9 with NGG PAM recognition [39].

Protocol Details:

• CRISPR System: SpCas9
• Target Genes: OsCKX gene family members
• gRNA Design: Multiple sgRNAs targeting functional domains with optimal NGG PAM sites
• Transformation: Agrobacterium-mediated transformation of rice calli
• Screening: PCR-based mutation detection and phenotypic characterization

Results and PAM Efficiency: Multiplex editing of OsCKX genes successfully modulated plant height, panicle size, and grain number, demonstrating precise architectural manipulation through NGG PAM-dependent targeting [39].

Table 2: Successful PAM-Dependent Editing Cases in Rice

Target Gene	CRISPR System	PAM Sequence	Editing Efficiency	Trait Improved	Reference
LKR/SDH	SpCas9	NGG	19/25 T0 plants (76%)	Lysine content (2-fold increase)	[42]
OsCKX family	SpCas9	NGG	Variable across family members	Plant architecture, panicle size	[39]
OsRbohB	SpCas9	NGG	Significant improvements	Heat stress tolerance, yield	[39]
OsALS	Cas12a	TTTV	Efficient mutagenesis	Herbicide resistance	[39]

PAM-Dependent Editing in Soybean (Glycine maxL.)

Case Study 1: Optimization of Soybean Plant Architecture

Experimental Objective: To improve soybean yield by modifying plant architecture traits through PAM-dependent editing of genes controlling node number, internode length, branching, and leaf morphology [39].

Technical Challenges: Soybean presents unique challenges for CRISPR editing due to its paleopolyploid genome with extensive gene duplication, resulting in homologous genes that require simultaneous editing [39] [43].

Protocol Details:

• CRISPR Systems: SpCas9 (NGG PAM) and Cas12a (TTTV PAM)
• Transformation Method: Agrobacterium-mediated transformation of soybean embryonic axes or cotyledonary nodes
• gRNA Design Considerations: Targeting conserved regions across homologous genes with appropriate PAM sites
• Validation Methods: Protoplast transient assays or hairy root assays for gRNA validation before stable transformation

Results and PAM Efficiency: Editing homologous genes controlling plant architecture successfully altered canopy structure and light interception capabilities. The application of Cas12a with its T-rich PAM (TTTV) enabled targeting of genomic regions inaccessible to SpCas9, demonstrating the value of multiple CRISPR systems for comprehensive soybean genome coverage [39].

Case Study 2: Improvement of Seed Composition

Experimental Objective: To enhance soybean oil quality by increasing oleic acid content through knockout of fatty acid desaturase (GmFAD) genes using PAM-dependent editing [43].

Protocol Details:

• CRISPR System: SpCas9
• Target Genes: GmFAD2-1A and GmFAD2-1B with NGG PAM sites
• Vector System: Multiplex gRNA expression cassette
• Transformation: Agrobacterium-mediated transformation
• Screening: GC-MS for fatty acid profiling, sequencing for genotyping

Results and PAM Efficiency: Successful simultaneous editing of both GmFAD2 homologs resulted in significantly increased oleic acid content (from ~20% to over 80%) and decreased polyunsaturated fatty acids, improving oil stability and nutritional value [43].

PAM-Dependent Editing in Maize (Zea maysL.)

Case Study 1: Enhancement of Stress Resilience

Experimental Objective: To improve maize tolerance to osmotic stress induced by drought and salinity through PAM-dependent editing of stress-responsive transcription factors [44].

Protocol Details:

• CRISPR System: SpCas9 with NGG PAM recognition
• Target Genes: Stress-responsive transcription factors with NGG PAM sites in functional domains
• Transformation Method: Agrobacterium-mediated transformation of maize immature embryos
• Screening Method: PCR-genotyping, RT-qPCR for expression analysis, physiological stress assays

Results and PAM Efficiency: Edited lines showed enhanced expression of non-enzymatic low molecular weight antioxidants, improving tolerance to oxidative stress associated with drought conditions. The multiplex editing capability of the CRISPR-Cas9 system allowed simultaneous targeting of multiple regulatory genes [44].

Technical Considerations for Maize Editing

Maize transformation remains challenging with genotype-dependent efficiency. Recent advances include:

• RNP (ribonucleoprotein) delivery to generate transgene-free edited plants [44]
• Pollen magnetofection and nanoparticle-mediated delivery as promising alternative transformation methods [44]
• Tissue culture-independent methods to overcome genotype limitations

Advanced PAM Engineering and Expanded Targeting Scope

Engineered Cas Variants with Relaxed PAM Requirements

Recent protein engineering efforts have created Cas variants with altered PAM specificities to overcome targeting limitations:

SpRY Cas9: An engineered SpCas9 variant with dramatically relaxed PAM recognition (preferring NRN over NYN), enabling targeting of previously inaccessible genomic regions in crops [39].

Cas12j-8: A hypercompact Cas12j variant engineered for significantly improved genome editing efficiency in soybean and rice, enabling editing at previously uneditable target sites and matching SpCas9 efficiency in some cases [41].

PAM Considerations for Precision Editing Tools

Advanced genome editing tools beyond standard nucleases also operate within PAM constraints:

Base Editors: Cytosine base editors (CBEs) and adenine base editors (ABEs) using nCas9 or dCas9 retain the PAM requirements of their parent Cas proteins while enabling precise base conversions without double-strand breaks [9].

Prime Editors: The original PE system utilizing nCas9 is constrained by SpCas9's NGG PAM requirement, though engineering efforts are developing PAM-relaxed prime editors [34].

The relationship between PAM recognition and editing outcomes can be visualized as follows:

Table 3: Key Research Reagent Solutions for PAM-Dependent Crop Editing

Reagent/Resource	Function	Application Examples	Considerations
SpCas9 NGG System	Gold standard for broad-range targeting	Rice LKR/SDH knockout [42], maize stress resilience [44]	Limited to NGG PAM sites
Cas12a (Cpf1) TTTV System	Alternative PAM recognition	Soybean GmFAD editing [43], rice OsALS mutagenesis [39]	Ideal for T-rich genomic regions
Engineered Cas Variants (SpRY, Cas12j-8)	Expanded targeting scope	Previously uneditable sites in soybean and rice [41]	Variable efficiency across targets
Base Editors (CBEs, ABEs)	Precision point mutations	Herbicide tolerance in rice [39], tomato fruit quality [41]	Limited to specific base transitions
Prime Editors	Versatile precise editing	Herbicide resistance in rice via OsACC1 editing [34]	Currently lower efficiency in plants
Multiplex gRNA Systems	Simultaneous multi-gene targeting	Endogenous tRNA-processing system in rice [42]	Requires careful gRNA design
RNP Complexes	DNA-free editing with reduced off-targets	CRISPR-Cas9 in raspberry [41], potential for maize [44]	Direct delivery challenges
Protoplast Transfection Systems	Rapid gRNA validation	Soybean gRNA testing [40]	Transient expression only
Hairy Root Assays	Intermediate validation system	Soybean transformation optimization [40]	Not for stable plants

PAM-dependent editing has proven instrumental in advancing crop improvement in rice, soybean, and maize. The case studies presented demonstrate successful applications across diverse traits including nutritional quality, plant architecture, stress tolerance, and yield components. Future directions in PAM-dependent crop editing include:

• Integration of AI and machine learning for predictive PAM targeting and gRNA design [45]
• Development of novel delivery systems such as virus-induced genome editing and nanoparticle-mediated transformation to overcome current limitations [39] [44]
• Continued engineering of Cas proteins with novel PAM specificities to achieve comprehensive genome coverage
• Regulatory framework adaptation for streamlined approval of edited crops with precise PAM-directed modifications [44] [45]

As PAM-dependent editing technologies continue to evolve, researchers will gain increasingly precise control over crop genomes, enabling the development of next-generation varieties with enhanced productivity, sustainability, and resilience to address global food security challenges.

Prime editing (PE) represents a significant leap forward in the field of precision genome editing. As a "search-and-replace" technology, it enables the introduction of all 12 possible base-to-base conversions, small insertions, and deletions without creating double-strand breaks (DSBs) or requiring donor DNA templates [46]. This revolutionary approach addresses critical limitations associated with earlier CRISPR-Cas9 nucleases and base editors, which often induce unintended mutations or are restricted in their editing scope [46] [47]. The technology's core component is a fusion protein combining a Cas9 nickase (nCas9) with a reverse transcriptase (RT), programmed by a prime editing guide RNA (pegRNA) that specifies the target site and encodes the desired edit [46].

A fundamental aspect that governs the targeting capability of all Cas9-based systems, including prime editors, is the protospacer adjacent motif (PAM) requirement. This short DNA sequence flanking the target site is essential for Cas9 recognition and binding [6] [48]. For the most commonly used Streptococcus pyogenes Cas9 (SpCas9), the canonical PAM sequence is 5'-NGG-3', which substantially restricts the targetable genomic space to GC-rich regions [49] [6]. In plant genomes, which often exhibit AT-rich content, this constraint presents a significant bottleneck for applying prime editing to crop improvement programs [11].

This technical guide examines the integration of PAM-flexible Cas9 variants into plant prime editing systems, detailing how these innovations are expanding the editable genome space in crops. We provide a comprehensive analysis of PAM considerations, experimental protocols, and reagent solutions to empower researchers in overcoming targeting limitations for precise genetic improvement in plants.

The Architecture and Mechanism of Prime Editing

Core Components of the Prime Editing System

The prime editing system consists of two primary molecular components that work in concert to achieve precise genome modification:

• Fusion Protein: A fusion of nCas9 (H840A) with an engineered Moloney Murine Leukemia Virus Reverse Transcriptase (RT) [46]. The nCas9 component creates a single-strand nick in the DNA, while the RT synthesizes a DNA copy containing the desired edit using the pegRNA as a template.
• Prime Editing Guide RNA (pegRNA): A specially engineered guide RNA that both directs the nCas9 to the target genomic locus and serves as a template for the new DNA sequence. The pegRNA contains:
  • A spacer sequence that identifies the target DNA site through complementary base pairing.
  • A reverse transcriptase template (RTT) encoding the desired genetic alteration.
  • A primer binding site (PBS) that hybridizes with the nicked DNA strand to initiate reverse transcription [46].

The Prime Editing Mechanism

The prime editing process occurs through a series of coordinated molecular events, illustrated in the following diagram:

Diagram Title: Prime Editing Mechanism

The process begins when the prime editor complex binds to the target DNA sequence guided by the pegRNA. The nCas9 component then nicks the non-target DNA strand, exposing a 3'-hydroxyl group. This exposed end acts as a primer for the reverse transcriptase, which extends the DNA using the RTT sequence provided by the pegRNA. This results in the formation of a branched DNA intermediate containing both the original unedited strand and the newly synthesized edited strand. Cellular repair mechanisms subsequently resolve this intermediate by removing the unedited 5' flap and ligating the edited 3' flap to the complementary DNA strand, thereby permanently incorporating the edit into the genome [46].

This sophisticated mechanism allows for precise modifications without inducing double-strand breaks, significantly reducing the risks of unwanted mutations, chromosomal rearrangements, and other off-target effects commonly associated with earlier genome editing platforms [46].

PAM Requirements and Constraints in Plant Prime Editing

The PAM Limitation Challenge

The PAM requirement represents a fundamental constraint for CRISPR-based editing systems. For canonical SpCas9, the NGG PAM sequence occurs approximately every 8-12 base pairs in the human genome, but its frequency is significantly reduced in AT-rich plant genomes [6] [11]. This limitation is particularly problematic for prime editing applications in plants, where targeting specific genes or regulatory elements may be impossible due to the absence of suitable PAM sequences in optimal positions.

Research in rice has demonstrated that when using a dual-pegRNA strategy with canonical SpCas9, only 21.5% of genomic bases could theoretically be targeted, severely limiting the applicability of prime editing for comprehensive crop improvement [50]. This restriction is especially pronounced when attempting to edit specific nucleotides that reside in genomic regions devoid of NGG PAM sequences at appropriate distances and orientations.

Engineered Cas9 Variants with Relaxed PAM Specificities

To overcome PAM restrictions, researchers have developed engineered Cas9 variants with altered PAM recognition profiles. The following table summarizes the key PAM-flexible Cas9 variants and their applications in plant prime editing:

Table 1: PAM-Flexible Cas9 Variants for Plant Prime Editing

Cas9 Variant	Recognized PAM	Targeting Scope Expansion	Demonstrated Applications in Plants	Editing Efficiency Range
SpCas9-NG	NG	Can potentially target 89.2% of rice genomic bases with dual-pegRNA strategy [50]	Prime editing in rice; efficient with NGA and NGT PAMs, lower efficiency with NGC PAM [50]	Highly variable (0.5%-45%) depending on target sequence and PAM [50] [11]
SpRY	NRN (prefers) > NYN (near PAM-less) [49]	Effectively PAM-less, dramatically expands targeting scope to AT-rich regions [49] [18]	Base editing in rice and Dahurian larch; targeted mutagenesis via NHEJ [49]	Up to 79% base editing efficiency in rice transgenic lines [49]
xCas9	NG, GAA, GAT	Broadened PAM recognition, but with variable efficiency in plants [32]	Gene editing in Arabidopsis and rice [32]	Generally lower than SpCas9-NG and SpRY in plants [32]

The integration of these PAM-flexible variants into prime editing systems has substantially expanded the targeting scope in plant genomes. For instance, applying SpCas9-NG to a dual-pegRNA strategy theoretically enables targeting of up to 89.2% of genomic bases in the rice genome, compared to only 21.5% with wild-type SpCas9 [50]. However, editing efficiency remains highly variable across different PAM sequences, with NGC PAMs consistently showing lower efficiency in plant systems [50].

Experimental Protocols for PAM-Flexible Prime Editing in Plants

Vector Construction for Prime Editing with Cas9-NG

The following protocol outlines the methodology for constructing expression vectors for prime editing using the SpCas9-NG variant in rice, as demonstrated in recent studies [50]:

• Vector Backbone Preparation:

  • Use a plant-compatible binary vector with a high-expression promoter (e.g., maize ubiquitin promoter) for editor expression.
  • Incorporate a plant codon-optimized SpCas9-NG (R1335V/L1111R/D1135V/G1218R/E1219F/A1322R/T1337R) coding sequence with an N863A mutation to minimize indel formation [46] [50].
  • Fuse this with an optimized M-MLV RT coding sequence (D200N/L603W/T330P/T306K/W313F) containing SV40 nuclear localization signals at both termini [50].

• pegRNA Expression Cassette Assembly:

  • Design paired epegRNAs using computational tools such as pegFinder or PlantPegDesigner, appending evopreQ1 or mpknot RNA stability motifs to the 3' end to prevent degradation [46] [50].
  • For each epegRNA, synthesize oligonucleotide pairs containing: 20-nt spacer sequence, scaffold sequence, RTT, PBS, and 8-nt linker.
  • Clone these into a U6 polymerase III promoter-based expression vector using Golden Gate or In-Fusion assembly [50].

• Vector Validation:

  • Verify all constructs by Sanger sequencing, paying particular attention to the RT template region and Cas9-NG coding sequence.
  • Transform finalized constructs into Agrobacterium tumefaciens strain EHA105 for plant transformation [50].

The experimental workflow for establishing a PAM-flexible prime editing system in plants is summarized below:

Diagram Title: Plant PE Workflow

Plant Transformation and Editing Assessment

• Plant Transformation:

  • Use embryogenic calli derived from mature seeds or embryo scutella of rice (e.g., Oryza sativa L. cv. Nipponbare) [50].
  • Perform Agrobacterium-mediated transformation with 3 days of co-cultivation.
  • Transfer transformed calli to selection medium containing appropriate antibiotics (e.g., 50 mg/L hygromycin B) for 2-3 weeks [50].

• Molecular Analysis of Editing Events:

  • Extract genomic DNA from resistant calli using a rapid CTAB-based method.
  • Amplify target regions by PCR with high-fidelity DNA polymerase.
  • Assess initial editing efficiency by Sanger sequencing of PCR products, calculating the ratio of calli carrying targeted mutations to total transgenic calli analyzed [50].
  • For more precise quantification, clone PCR products and sequence multiple colonies, or utilize next-generation sequencing (NGS) for a comprehensive assessment of editing efficiency and byproducts [50].

• Regeneration and Inheritance Analysis:

  • Transfer edited calli to regeneration medium to recover complete plants.
  • Grow T0 plants to maturity and collect T1 seeds through self-pollination.
  • Genotype T1 progeny to confirm stable inheritance of the prime edits and segregate out the editing transgene [50].

Research Reagent Solutions for Plant Prime Editing

Successful implementation of PAM-flexible prime editing in plants requires a carefully selected toolkit of molecular reagents and components. The following table outlines essential research reagent solutions for establishing these systems:

Table 2: Essential Research Reagent Solutions for Plant Prime Editing

Reagent Category	Specific Examples	Function and Application	Key Features for Plant Systems
Editor Expression Vectors	pZH/PE-NG (Os Opt), SpRY-PE vectors	Express the nCas9-RT fusion protein; available with Cas9-NG or SpRY for PAM flexibility	Plant codon-optimized; high-expression promoters (e.g., ZmUbi); N863A mutation to reduce indels [46] [50]
pegRNA Expression Systems	pOsU6BbsIx2tQ1_polyT, pAtU6 vectors	Express engineered pegRNAs with enhanced stability	U6 polymerase III promoters; evopreQ1/mpknot 3' appendages; BbsI/BsaI Golden Gate cloning sites [46] [50]
Stability-Enhanced pegRNAs	epegRNAs, xr-pegRNAs, G-quadruplex pegRNAs	Protect 3' extension of pegRNA from degradation; improve editing efficiency	Structured RNA motifs (evopreQ1, mpknot) at 3' terminus; 3-4 fold efficiency improvement in plants [46]
Delivery Systems	Agrobacterium EHA105, AAV vectors	Deliver editing components into plant cells	Dual-vector systems for large editor proteins; SPLCV replicon for enhanced expression [46] [18]
Plant Materials	Embryogenic calli (rice, tomato)	Regenerable tissue for transformation and editing	High regeneration capacity; genotype-specific protocols (e.g., Nipponbare rice) [50]
Selection Markers	Hygromycin resistance, GFP fluorescence	Enrich for successfully transformed cells/plants	Early visual screening; efficient enrichment of edited events [11]

Optimization Strategies for Enhancing Editing Efficiency

Despite the expanded targeting scope offered by PAM-flexible Cas variants, prime editing efficiency in plants remains highly variable and is influenced by multiple factors. Research has identified several key optimization strategies:

• pegRNA Engineering: Incorporating structured RNA motifs such as evopreQ1 and mpknot at the 3' terminus of pegRNAs can enhance stability and improve editing efficiency by 3-4 fold across diverse plant systems [46]. Additionally, optimizing the primer binding site (PBS) length (typically 10-16 nt) and reverse transcriptase template (RTT) design is crucial for efficient editing.

• Editor Protein Optimization: Engineering the reverse transcriptase component for enhanced thermostability and processivity significantly improves prime editing outcomes [46] [11]. Furthermore, incorporating the N863A mutation in the Cas9 component reduces unwanted indel formation by preventing accidental double-strand breaks [46].

• Paired pegRNA Strategies: Using two pegRNAs that target opposite DNA strands to introduce complementary edits can dramatically increase editing efficiency by encouraging cellular repair machinery to preferentially incorporate the desired changes [50]. This approach is particularly effective when combined with PAM-flexible Cas9 variants.

• DNA Repair Pathway Modulation: Co-expressing DNA repair factors that favor the incorporation of edited strands may enhance prime editing efficiency. Although still in early stages of development in plants, this approach shows promise for improving editing outcomes [11].

• Expression System Optimization: Utilizing plant-codon optimized coding sequences, strong constitutive promoters (e.g., ZmUbi), and viral replicon systems (e.g., SPLCV-based vectors) can enhance editor expression and consequently improve editing efficiency [11] [18].

The integration of PAM-flexible Cas9 variants into plant prime editing systems represents a transformative advancement for precision genome engineering in crops. While significant progress has been made in expanding the targeting scope through variants like SpCas9-NG and SpRY, challenges remain in achieving consistently high editing efficiencies across diverse genomic contexts. The continued optimization of editor architecture, pegRNA design, and delivery systems will be crucial for realizing the full potential of prime editing in crop improvement. As these technologies mature, they promise to empower researchers with unprecedented capability to perform precise genetic surgery on plant genomes, opening new frontiers for developing crops with enhanced yield, resilience, and nutritional quality to meet the challenges of global food security.

The CRISPR-Cas9 system has revolutionized plant genome engineering, yet its efficacy is constrained by the mandatory requirement for a protospacer adjacent motif (PAM) adjacent to the target DNA sequence. This technical review examines the interplay between PAM limitations and the fundamental physiological differences between monocot and dicot crop species. While the core PAM mechanism is consistent across plants, its practical application presents unique challenges dependent on plant architecture, transformability, and genomic context. We dissect species-specific bottlenecks and present advanced strategies—including novel Cas enzyme engineering, base editing, and multi-PAM targeting—to overcome these hurdles. By integrating findings from recent crop editing studies with structural comparisons, this guide provides a framework for optimizing CRISPR workflows to achieve precise genetic improvements in both monocot and dicot crops, thereby supporting enhanced trait development for global food security.

The protospacer adjacent motif (PAM) is a short, 2-6 base pair DNA sequence immediately following the DNA sequence targeted for cleavage by the Cas9 nuclease in the CRISPR bacterial adaptive immune system [1]. From a functional perspective, the PAM allows the CRISPR system to distinguish between self and non-self DNA; the bacterial CRISPR locus lacks PAM sequences, preventing autoimmunity, while invading viral or plasmid DNA contains them, enabling targeted destruction [1] [2].

In genome engineering applications, the PAM requirement is a critical determinant of target site selection. The canonical Cas9 from Streptococcus pyogenes (SpCas9) recognizes a 5'-NGG-3' PAM, where "N" is any nucleobase [1] [2]. This means that Cas9 can only cut DNA at locations where this specific short sequence is present. The PAM is not part of the guide RNA sequence but is essential for Cas nuclease binding and activity [51]. If the correct PAM is not present adjacent to a target sequence matching the guide RNA, the nuclease will not cut the DNA [52].

Understanding PAM constraints is particularly crucial in crop engineering because many agronomically important traits are determined by single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) or point mutations [53]. While CRISPR-Cas9 is highly efficient for gene knockouts, its application for precise base changes was initially limited by inefficient homology-directed repair (HDR) in plants [53]. The emergence of base editing technologies, which directly convert one base to another without double-strand breaks and typically have less stringent PAM requirements, has opened new avenues for crop improvement [53]. Nevertheless, PAM availability remains a fundamental consideration in experimental design across diverse crop species.

Structural and Physiological Divergences Between Monocots and Dicots

Monocotyledons (monocots) and dicotyledons (dicots) represent two major lineages of flowering plants, diverging in several fundamental structural characteristics that influence their experimental manipulation, including CRISPR-Cas editing.

Table 1: Comparative Characteristics of Monocots and Dicots Relevant to CRISPR Applications

Feature	Monocots	Dicots
Embryonic Structure	Single cotyledon [54]	Two cotyledons [54]
Root System	Fibrous, adventitious root system [54] [55]	Taproot system with secondary roots [54] [55]
Vascular Tissue	Scattered bundles in stem [54]	Organized in a ring formation [54]
Leaf Venation	Parallel veins [54] [55]	Reticulate (branching) veins [54] [55]
Floral Organs	Multiples of three [54]	Multiples of four or five [54] [55]
Secondary Growth	Generally absent (herbaceous) [54]	Common (herbaceous or woody) [54]
Representative Crops	Rice, wheat, maize, sugarcane, turfgrasses [54]	Tomato, soybean, canola, potato, apples [54]

These architectural differences have practical implications for CRISPR workflows. The fibrous root systems of monocots and their lack of secondary growth can influence the choice of transformation methods and regeneration protocols [54]. Furthermore, the physiological differences underlie variations in transformation efficiency, with some major monocot cereals historically being more recalcitrant to stable transformation than certain dicot species, though advances continue to overcome these barriers.

PAM Recognition and Constraint Mechanisms Across Cas Enzymes

The PAM sequence functions as a critical molecular signature that initiates the process of DNA interference. When Cas9 searches for target sites, it first identifies the PAM sequence before unwinding the adjacent DNA to check for complementarity to the guide RNA [2]. This two-step recognition process ensures that only foreign DNA with the correct PAM context is cleaved.

Naturally occurring and engineered Cas nucleases recognize a diverse array of PAM sequences, expanding the potential target space within plant genomes.

Table 2: PAM Sequences for Various CRISPR Nucleases

CRISPR Nuclease	Source Organism	PAM Sequence (5' to 3')	Reference
SpCas9	Streptococcus pyogenes	NGG (canonical)	[1] [2]
SpCas9 variant	Engineered	NGA (non-canonical, efficient in human cells)	[1]
SaCas9	Staphylococcus aureus	NNGRRT or NNGRRN	[2]
NmeCas9	Neisseria meningitidis	NNNNGATT	[2]
CjCas9	Campylobacter jejuni	NNNNRYAC	[2]
Cpf1 (Cas12a)	Lachnospiraceae bacterium	TTTV	[2]
Cas12b	Alicyclobacillus acidiphilus	TTN	[2]
Cas12i (engineered)	Engineered from Cas12i	TN and/or TNN	[2]
Cas3	Various prokaryotes	No PAM requirement	[2]

The PAM requirement is not merely a binding site but a fundamental component of the CRISPR system's self versus non-self discrimination capability. In bacteria, the spacers integrated into the CRISPR locus are copied from viral protospacers but deliberately exclude the PAM sequence [1] [51]. Consequently, when the CRISPR system later uses these spacers to generate guide RNAs, the bacterial genome lacks the PAM sequences that would be required for Cas nuclease to target its own DNA, thus preventing autoimmune destruction [1]. This biological safeguard becomes a technical constraint in CRISPR engineering, where the editing window is restricted to genomic locations flanked by compatible PAM sequences.

Figure 1: PAM-Dependent CRISPR-Cas Activation Pathway. The Cas nuclease must first recognize a compatible PAM sequence before checking for guide RNA complementarity, creating a two-step verification process that ensures targeting specificity.

Species-Specific Experimental Strategies and Protocols

Multi-PAM Targeting to Reduce Off-Target Effects

Recent research has demonstrated that selecting target sequences with multiple flanking PAM sites can significantly reduce off-target effects in plant systems. A 2025 study in pineapple (a monocot) systematically evaluated 18 target sequences with varying numbers of PAM sites and found that sequences with two adjacent 5'-NGG PAM sites at the 3' end exhibited greater specificity and higher probability of binding with the Cas9 protein compared to those with only a single PAM site [28].

Experimental Protocol: Multi-PAM gRNA Design and Validation

• Target Selection: Identify genomic regions of interest containing multiple adjacent PAM sequences (e.g., NGG-NGG, NGG-NAG, or NAG-NAG configurations) [28].
• gRNA Construction: Design gRNA sequences targeting these multi-PAM regions and clone into appropriate CRISPR vectors (e.g., pC1300-Cas9-gRNA) using specific primers for each target sequence [28].
• Plant Transformation: Transform plant material using appropriate methods - Agrobacterium-mediated transformation for dicots like tomato or Arabidopsis, and biolistic or Agrobacterium transformation for monocots like rice or maize [52].
• Mutation Analysis: Generate multiple mutant lines (e.g., 50 lines per target sequence) and sequence target regions to quantify on-target versus off-target mutation rates [28].
• Specificity Assessment: Compare editing efficiency and off-target rates between multi-PAM targets and single-PAM controls.

This approach proved particularly effective in pineapple, where target sequences with multiple flanking PAM sites showed lower off-target rates while maintaining high on-target efficiency [28]. The mechanism is thought to involve prolonged Cas9 interaction with the target site, increasing editing specificity.

Base Editing for Precision Genome Modification

Base editing has emerged as a powerful alternative to conventional CRISPR-Cas9 editing, particularly for introducing precise point mutations that often control important agronomic traits [53]. These systems fuse catalytically impaired Cas proteins (dCas9 or Cas9 nickase) with deaminase enzymes that directly convert one base to another without creating double-strand breaks.

Table 3: Major Base Editing Platforms and Their Characteristics

Base Editor	Components	Base Conversion	Catalytic Window	Primary Use Cases
Cytosine Base Editors (CBEs)	dCas9/XTEN/APOBEC1/UGI	C to T	-17 to -13 (BE1-BE4) [53]	Introducing premature stop codons, correcting C•G to T•A transitions
Adenine Base Editors (ABEs)	dCas9/TadA/tRNA adenosine deaminase	A to G	-17 to -14 [53]	Correcting A•T to G•C transitions, creating splice site mutations
Target-AID	nickase Cas9D10A/pmCDA1	C to T	-19 to -15 [53]	Plant-specific applications, targeted C to T conversions

Experimental Protocol: Base Editor Implementation in Crops

• Editor Selection: Choose appropriate base editor (CBE or ABE) based on desired nucleotide conversion and PAM availability for your target gene [53].
• Vector Assembly: Clone codon-optimized base editor constructs suitable for plant expression systems, ensuring proper nuclear localization signals and plant-specific promoters [53].
• Plant Transformation: Deliver constructs to embryogenic callus or other regenerable tissues using species-appropriate transformation methods [52].
• Screening and Validation: Identify edited lines through sequencing of target regions and assess base conversion efficiency without selection markers when possible [53].
• Off-Target Assessment: Employ whole-genome sequencing or GUIDE-Seq technologies to evaluate potential off-target effects, though these are typically reduced compared to standard CRISPR-Cas9 [1] [53].

Base editors have been successfully deployed in both monocot (rice, wheat, maize) and dicot (tomato, Arabidopsis) crops to modify important traits such as herbicide resistance, grain quality, and disease susceptibility [53].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagent Solutions

Successful implementation of CRISPR technologies in both monocots and dicots requires a comprehensive suite of specialized reagents and tools. The following table summarizes core components for designing and executing PAM-aware genome editing experiments.

Table 4: Essential Research Reagents for CRISPR Crop Editing

Reagent Category	Specific Examples	Function & Application
Cas Nuclease Variants	SpCas9, SaCas9, Cpf1 (Cas12a), Cas12b, engineered Cas9-NG	Provides diverse PAM specificities to target different genomic regions [2]
Base Editing Systems	BE3, BE4, Target-AID, ABE7.10	Enables precise single-base changes without double-strand breaks [53]
Delivery Vectors	pC1300-Cas9, plant codon-optimized binary vectors	Carries editing machinery into plant cells [28]
Transformation Systems	Agrobacterium strains (for dicots), biolistic gene gun (for monocots)	Introduces CRISPR constructs into plant genomes [52]
gRNA Cloning Systems	Modular gRNA expression cassettes, Golden Gate assemblies	Enables rapid testing of multiple guide RNAs [28]
Selective Agents	Hygromycin, kanamycin, glufosinate-based herbicides	Identifies successfully transformed plant tissues [52]
Validation Tools	GUIDE-Seq, targeted sequencing primers, off-target prediction software	Assesses editing efficiency and specificity [1] [28]

Figure 2: Strategic Framework for Overcoming PAM Limitations. Multiple complementary approaches can be employed to circumvent PAM restrictions in crop editing, including protein engineering, strategic target selection, and alternative editing systems.

The constraint imposed by PAM requirements in CRISPR-mediated crop editing presents both a challenge and an opportunity for innovation. While the fundamental biology of PAM recognition is consistent across plant species, the practical implementation must account for the structural and physiological differences between monocots and dicots, as well as the unique genomic landscapes of individual crop species.

The future of PAM-aware crop editing lies in the continued expansion of our CRISPR toolkit through several promising avenues:

• Continued Protein Engineering: Development of novel Cas variants with expanded PAM recognition, higher specificity, and tailored expression in plant systems [2].
• Integration with Advanced Technologies: Combining CRISPR with omics technologies, artificial intelligence, and precision farming approaches to predict optimal target sites and editing outcomes [56].
• Regulatory Evolution: As global regulations for gene-edited crops continue to evolve, strategies that minimize off-target effects through careful PAM selection will be crucial for commercial application [52].

By adopting a species-aware approach to CRISPR experimental design—incorporating multi-PAM targeting, base editing platforms, and nuclease variants with diverse PAM preferences—researchers can overcome current limitations and fully harness genome editing for crop improvement. The ongoing integration of these advanced genome editing technologies with traditional breeding efforts will be essential for developing climate-resilient, high-yielding crop varieties to meet future global food demands.

Overcoming PAM Limitations: Advanced Strategies to Enhance Editing Efficiency and Scope

The Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats (CRISPR)/Cas9 system has revolutionized genetic engineering across diverse organisms, including crop plants. A significant constraint of the widely adopted Streptococcus pyogenes Cas9 (SpCas9) is its requirement for a specific Protospacer Adjacent Motif (PAM), typically 5'-NGG-3', immediately downstream of the target DNA sequence. This PAM requirement restricts the targetable sites within plant genomes, limiting the scope of CRISPR applications in crop improvement. This technical guide explores the engineering of novel Cas9 variants, specifically xCas9 and SpCas9-NG, which recognize relaxed PAM sequences. We detail the development, mechanisms, and experimental validation of these variants in crop systems, providing a comprehensive resource for researchers aiming to overcome PAM-mediated limitations in plant genome editing.

The CRISPR/Cas9 system functions as an adaptive immune mechanism in bacteria and archaea, which has been repurposed as a precise genome-editing tool [57] [58]. Its activity depends on two core components: the Cas9 nuclease and a single-guide RNA (sgRNA). The sgRNA directs Cas9 to a specific genomic locus through complementary base pairing, but Cas9 will only bind and cleave the target DNA if it is adjacent to a short, specific PAM sequence [2].

For the canonical SpCas9, this PAM is 5'-NGG-3', where "N" can be any nucleotide base. This means that within a genome, potential target sites are statistically limited to sequences that are followed by two consecutive guanines (G) [59] [2]. In crop plants, which often possess complex, GC-rich, or highly repetitive genomes, this PAM requirement can pose a substantial barrier. It can prevent researchers from targeting optimal sequences within agronomically important genes, such as critical functional domains or regulatory regions, thereby hindering efforts in functional gene characterization and trait improvement [60] [59].

Engineered Cas9 Variants with Altered PAM Specificities

To address the PAM limitation, researchers have employed protein engineering strategies to modify the PAM-interacting domain of SpCas9, leading to the creation of variants with altered and broadened PAM recognition capabilities.

xCas9: A Versatile Variant for Relaxed PAM Recognition

xCas9 was developed through directed evolution to recognize a broader spectrum of PAM sequences. It contains multiple point mutations (A262T, R324L, S409I, E480K, E543D, M694I, E1219V) that collectively alter its PAM specificity [60]. While the canonical SpCas9 primarily recognizes NGG PAMs, xCas9 demonstrates robust activity at sites with NG, GAA, and GAT PAMs in plant systems [60] [59]. This significantly expands the range of targetable sites within a genome.

SpCas9-NG: Expanding the Target Scope to NG PAMs

SpCas9-NG is another engineered variant designed to recognize NG PAMs, where the third nucleotide can be any base except a cytosine (C) in some contexts [59]. This variant was created by introducing specific mutations (e.g., R1335V, L1111R, D1135V, G1218R, E1219F, A1322R, T1337R) into the PAM-interacting domain of SpCas9. Research in rice has demonstrated that SpCas9-NG exhibits robust editing activity across various NG PAMs (including NGA, NGT, and NGG) without a strong preference for the specific nucleotide in the third position, thereby offering greater flexibility in target site selection [59].

Table 1: Comparison of Key Engineered Cas9 Variants with Altered PAM Specificities

Cas Variant	Recognized PAM Sequences	Key Mutations	Reported Editing Efficiency in Plants	Notable Features
xCas9	NG, GAA, GAT [60] [59]	A262T, R324L, S409I, E480K, E543D, M694I, E1219V [60]	87.5% at NG sites; lower at GAA/GAT in initial studies [59]	Broad PAM recognition; improved specificity reported at some sites [59]
SpCas9-NG	NG (e.g., NGA, NGT, NGG) [59]	R1335V, L1111R, D1135V, G1218R, E1219F, A1322R, T1337R [59]	Robust activity across various NG PAMs [59]	Consistent activity without strong third-nucleotide preference [59]

Experimental Protocols and Workflows

The following section outlines the key methodologies for implementing xCas9 and SpCas9-NG in crop plants, using rice as a model system.

Plasmid Construction for xCas9 and SpCas9-NG Systems

The efficacy of these Cas9 variants can be enhanced by optimizing the expression cassette. A proven strategy involves the use of a tRNA-enhanced sgRNA (esgRNA) system [60].

• Codon Optimization and Vector Backbone: The gene sequences for xCas9 or SpCas9-NG are first codon-optimized for the target plant species (e.g., rice) to ensure high expression levels [60].
• Assembly of the Expression Construct:
  • The codon-optimized xcas9 or spcas9-ng gene is cloned into a binary T-DNA vector under the control of a plant-specific promoter (e.g., maize Ubiquitin promoter).
  • The sgRNA scaffold is engineered to include a tRNA sequence at its 5' end. This tRNA-sgRNA structure improves the processing and maturation of the sgRNA in plant cells, thereby enhancing editing efficiency, particularly at non-canonical PAM sites [60].
  • The specific target sgRNA sequence (complementary to the genomic target of interest) is cloned directly upstream of the tRNA sequence. The entire tRNA-sgRNA unit is typically driven by a Pol III promoter, such as OsU3 or OsU6 for rice [60].
• Multiplexing: For targeting multiple genomic sites simultaneously, multiple tRNA-sgRNA units can be arranged in a single transcriptional array, with each sgRNA flanked by tRNA sequences to ensure proper processing [60].

Plant Transformation and Mutant Identification

The experimental workflow from vector construction to mutant analysis follows a standardized protocol for plant genetic transformation.

Diagram Title: Experimental Workflow for Plant Genome Editing

• Plant Transformation: The constructed binary vectors are introduced into Agrobacterium tumefaciens strain EHA105. Embryogenic calli induced from mature seeds (e.g., of rice cultivar Nipponbare) are then co-cultivated with the transformed Agrobacterium [60] [59].
• Selection and Regeneration: Following co-cultivation, transgenic calli are selected on medium containing hygromycin (50 μg/mL) for approximately 4 weeks. Hygromycin-resistant calli are transferred to regeneration medium to induce shoot and root development, ultimately yielding T0 generation plants [60] [59].
• Genotyping and Mutation Detection:
  • Genomic DNA is extracted from leaf tissue of T0 plants.
  • The target genomic loci are amplified by PCR using gene-specific primers.
  • The PCR products are subjected to Sanger sequencing. The resulting chromatograms are analyzed using tools like DSDecode or ICE (Inference of CRISPR Edits) to detect the presence of insertions or deletions (indels) indicative of successful gene editing [60] [59].
  • For a more comprehensive analysis, high-throughput sequencing (amplicon sequencing) of the PCR products can be performed to quantify editing efficiency and characterize the spectrum of mutations in detail.

Performance and Applications in Crop Research

The development of xCas9 and SpCas9-NG has directly addressed the challenge of PAM restriction, enabling new applications in crop improvement.

Quantitative Editing Efficiencies

Extensive testing in rice has provided quantitative data on the performance of these variants.

Table 2: Editing Efficiencies of xCas9 and SpCas9-NG at Various PAM Sites in Rice (T0 Plants)

Cas Variant	Target Gene	PAM Sequence	Mutation Efficiency	Homozygous Mutation Rate
xCas9	OsROS1	GAT	87.5%	37.5%
xCas9	OsROS1	GAA	42.9%	14.3%
SpCas9-NG	OsALS	TGC	53.8%	Data Not Specified
SpCas9-NG	OsNRT1.1B	AGA	92.3%	Data Not Specified
SpCas9-NG	OsSPL	GGA	84.6%	Data Not Specified

Data adapted from studies evaluating xCas9 and SpCas9-NG in rice [59].

Enhancing Specificity and Enabling New Editing Modalities

Beyond simply expanding targeting range, these variants offer additional advantages:

• Reduced Off-Target Effects: Some studies indicate that xCas9 and SpCas9-NG can exhibit higher specificity compared to SpCas9, potentially due to reduced tolerance for mismatches between the sgRNA and target DNA at certain PAM sites [59].
• Foundation for Advanced Editing Tools: The PAM flexibility of xCas9 and SpCas9-NG has been leveraged to create novel base editors. For instance, fusing xCas9 or SpCas9-NG with cytidine deaminase (for CBE) or adenosine deaminase (for ABE) has resulted in base editors capable of performing precise C-to-T or A-to-G conversions at sites with NG and GA PAMs, greatly expanding the toolbox for precise genome modification in crops [60] [59].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents

Successful implementation of these engineered Cas9 variants requires a suite of specific reagents and tools.

Table 3: Key Research Reagent Solutions for Experiments with Engineered Cas9 Variants

Reagent / Tool	Function and Importance	Example / Specification
Codon-Optimized Cas9 Variant	Ensures high-level expression of the Cas9 protein in plant cells.	xcas9 or spcas9-ng gene optimized for Oryza sativa [60].
tRNA-esgRNA Expression System	Enhances sgRNA processing and maturation, critical for high efficiency with non-NGG PAMs [60].	sgRNA precursor fused to a tRNA-glycine promoter and sequence.
Plant Binary Vector	A T-DNA plasmid for stable integration of the CRISPR machinery into the plant genome.	pCAMBIA1300-derived vector with plant selection marker (e.g., hygromycin resistance) [60].
Agrobacterium Strain	The delivery vehicle for introducing the T-DNA into plant cells.	Agrobacterium tumefaciens EHA105 [60] [59].
PAM Prediction Tool	Software to identify all potential target sites with relaxed PAMs in a gene of interest.	CRISPR-P 2.0, CCTop [61].
Mutation Detection Software	Analyzes sequencing data to identify and quantify indels.	DSDecode, ICE (Inference of CRISPR Edits) [60].

The engineering of Cas9 variants like xCas9 and SpCas9-NG represents a significant leap forward in CRISPR technology for crop improvement. By relaxing the stringent PAM requirement of wild-type SpCas9, these tools have dramatically expanded the accessible target space within plant genomes. This allows researchers to target previously inaccessible sites for gene knockout, transcriptional regulation, and precise base editing.

Future directions will likely focus on the discovery and engineering of even more versatile Cas effectors with minimal PAM requirements. Furthermore, combining these broad-PAM nucleases with other technologies, such as tissue-specific promoters (e.g., the callus-specific promoter pYCE1 in cassava that boosted homozygous mutation rates to 52.38%) [61] and multiplexed editing strategies [29], will continue to enhance the efficiency and applicability of CRISPR in crop research. These integrated approaches are paving the way for more sophisticated genetic analyses and the development of next-generation crops with enhanced yield, nutritional quality, and resilience to environmental stresses.

The clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR) system has revolutionized plant genome editing, yet its targeting scope remains constrained by the requirement for a protospacer adjacent motif (PAM), a short DNA sequence immediately following the target DNA region that is essential for nuclease recognition and cleavage [2] [1]. In crop research, this limitation presents a significant barrier to addressing complex agronomic traits controlled by genes residing in genomic regions with sparse canonical PAM sites. The PAM sequence functions as a critical recognition signal for CRISPR-associated (Cas) nucleases, enabling them to distinguish between self and non-self DNA in bacterial adaptive immunity [1] [62]. For researchers, this means that potential target sites are limited to those followed by the specific PAM recognized by their chosen Cas nuclease, thereby restricting the editable genomic space.

The discovery and engineering of nucleases capable of recognizing non-canonical PAMs—sequences that deviate from the wild-type nuclease's preferred motif—represent a groundbreaking advancement for crop bioengineering [63] [64]. This review provides an in-depth technical examination of how leveraging non-canonical PAM sequences dramatically expands genome coverage, facilitates more precise manipulation of agricultural traits, and accelerates the development of climate-resilient crops. We present comprehensive experimental data, detailed methodologies, and specialized toolkits to empower crop scientists to implement these technologies in their research programs.

Fundamental Mechanisms of PAM Recognition and Relaxation

Structural Basis of PAM Recognition

PAM recognition occurs through specific interactions between the Cas nuclease and bases within the PAM sequence. Structural studies of Lachnospiraceae bacterium Cpf1 (LbCpf1) complexed with crRNA and DNA targets containing varying PAM sequences (TTTA, TCTA, TCCA, CCCA) have revealed that the nuclease undergoes specific conformational changes to accommodate different PAM sequences [65]. These structural rearrangements allow altered interactions with the PAM-containing DNA duplex, enabling the relaxation of PAM specificity while maintaining DNA binding stability. The PAM's fundamental role is to prevent the nuclease from targeting the bacterium's own CRISPR array, which lacks the PAM sequence, thereby providing self/non-self discrimination [2] [1].

Comparison of Canonical and Non-Canonical PAM Recognition by Major Nucleases

Table 1: PAM Specificities of Wild-Type and Engineered Cas Nucleases

Nuclease	Source Organism	Canonical PAM	Non-Canonical PAM	Applications in Crops
SpCas9	Streptococcus pyogenes	5'-NGG-3' [2] [62]	5'-NAG-3', 5'-NGA-3' [66]	Limited by PAM constraint
xCas9	Engineered from SpCas9	5'-NGG-3'	5'-NG-3' (GAA, GAT) [63] [59]	High-fidelity editing at NG PAMs in rice
Cas9-NG	Engineered from SpCas9	Reduced activity at NGG	5'-NG-3' (all combinations) [63] [59]	Preferred variant for relaxed PAMs in plants
LbCpf1 (Cas12a)	Lachnospiraceae bacterium	5'-TTTV-3' [65] [2]	5'-TTCV-3', 5'-TCTV-3', 5'-CTTV-3' [65]	Expanded targeting in AT-rich regions
AsCpf1 (Cas12a)	Acidaminococcus sp.	5'-TTTV-3' [65] [2]	5'-TTCA-3', 5'-TCTA-3', 5'-CTTA-3' [65]	Efficient editing with suboptimal PAMs

The following diagram illustrates the fundamental mechanism of PAM-dependent DNA recognition and the strategic advantage of nucleases with relaxed PAM specificity:

Diagram 1: Mechanism of PAM-Dependent DNA Recognition. The Cas nuclease first identifies the PAM sequence, then confirms target complementarity before initiating DNA cleavage. Non-canonical PAM recognition expands the targetable genomic space beyond traditional motifs.

Quantitative Analysis of Non-Canonical PAM Efficiency

Efficiency of Cpf1 with Canonical and Non-Canonical PAMs

Comprehensive studies of LbCpf1 and AsCpf1 activities across various PAM sequences provide critical quantitative insights for experimental design. Both nucleases efficiently cleave targets with the canonical TTTV PAM (V = A, G, or C), with LbCpf1 demonstrating slightly higher efficiency than AsCpf1 in plasmid cleavage assays [65]. Notably, both nucleases exhibit significant activity with specific non-canonical PAMs, cleaving targets with CTTA, TCTA, or TTCA PAMs, albeit with reduced efficiencies compared to the canonical TTTA PAM [65]. In contrast, CCTA, TCCA, and CCCA PAMs support only minimal cleavage activity, providing important constraints for target selection.

Table 2: Cleavage Efficiency of LbCpf1 and AsCpf1 with Various PAM Sequences

PAM Sequence	PAM Type	Relative Cleavage Efficiency	Optimal Nuclease
TTTA	Canonical	++++ (Highest) [65]	LbCpf1, AsCpf1
TTTG	Canonical	+++ (High) [65]	LbCpf1, AsCpf1
TTTC	Canonical	+++ (High) [65]	LbCpf1, AsCpf1
CTTA	Non-canonical	++ (Moderate) [65]	LbCpf1, AsCpf1
TCTA	Non-canonical	++ (Moderate) [65]	LbCpf1, AsCpf1
TTCA	Non-canonical	++ (Moderate) [65]	LbCpf1, AsCpf1
CCTA	Non-canonical	+ (Low) [65]	LbCpf1, AsCpf1
TCCA	Non-canonical	+ (Low) [65]	LbCpf1, AsCpf1
CCCA	Non-canonical	+ (Low) [65]	LbCpf1, AsCpf1

Engineered Cas9 Variants with Relaxed PAM Specificity

The engineering of Cas9 variants with altered PAM specificities represents a major breakthrough for expanding genome coverage. In rice, xCas9-3.7 demonstrates nearly equivalent editing efficiency to wild-type SpCas9 (Cas9-WT) at most canonical NGG PAM sites while showing limited activity at non-canonical NGH (H = A, C, T) PAM sites [63]. Importantly, xCas9 exhibits improved targeting specificity over Cas9-WT when challenged with mismatched sgRNAs, making it particularly valuable for applications requiring high precision [63].

In contrast, Cas9-NG variants (Cas9-NGv1 and Cas9-NG) show significantly higher editing efficiency at most non-canonical NG PAM sites compared to xCas9, particularly at AT-rich PAM sites such as GAT, GAA, and CAA [63] [59]. However, this expanded PAM compatibility comes with a trade-off: Cas9-NG variants show significantly reduced activity at canonical NGG PAM sites compared to wild-type SpCas9 [63]. In stable transgenic rice lines, Cas9-NG demonstrated much higher editing efficiency than both Cas9-NGv1 and xCas9 at NG PAM sites, establishing it as the preferred variant for targeting relaxed PAMs in plants [59].

Experimental Framework for Utilizing Non-Canonical PAMs in Crops

Workflow for Implementing Non-Canonical PAM-Based Editing

The following diagram outlines a comprehensive experimental workflow for implementing non-canonical PAM-based genome editing in crop systems:

Diagram 2: Experimental Workflow for Non-Canonical PAM Genome Editing in Crops. The six-step process guides researchers from target identification through phenotypic validation, emphasizing critical decision points for successful implementation.

Detailed Methodologies for Key Experiments

Protocol 1: Evaluation of Non-Canonical PAM Efficiency in Plant Systems

This protocol adapts established methodologies from studies in rice and human cell systems [65] [66] [63]:

• Target Selection and sgRNA Design: Identify 4-6 target sites for each PAM variant (NGN for Cas9 variants; TTTV, CTTV, TCTV, TTCV for Cpf1). Include both coding and non-coding regions to assess sequence context effects. For each target, design sgRNAs with identical spacer sequences but different adjacent PAMs to enable direct comparison.

• Vector Construction: Clone sgRNA expression cassettes into plant-optimized CRISPR vectors using Golden Gate or Gateway assembly. For Cpf1 systems, utilize the pre-crRNA expression system. Include a plant selection marker (e.g., hygromycin or bialaphos resistance) for stable transformation.

• Plant Transformation and Sample Collection: For rice, use Agrobacterium-mediated transformation of embryogenic calli derived from mature seeds [63] [59]. Collect leaf samples from approximately 20-30 independent T0 transgenic plants per construct at 3-4 weeks post-regeneration. Include wild-type controls.

• DNA Extraction and Mutation Detection: Extract genomic DNA using CTAB method. Amplify target regions by PCR using high-fidelity polymerases. Assess mutation efficiency via:

  • Restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) assays for quick assessment
  • T7 endonuclease I or Surveyor assays for mutation efficiency quantification
  • Sanger sequencing of cloned PCR products for precise mutation characterization
  • Next-generation sequencing amplicon sequencing for comprehensive mutation profiling

• Data Analysis: Calculate editing efficiency as (number of mutated plants/total plants analyzed) × 100%. Compare efficiencies across different PAM sequences using statistical tests (e.g., one-way ANOVA with post-hoc tests).

Protocol 2: Base Editing with Cas9-NG for Precise Genome Modification

This protocol enables C-to-T base editing at non-canonical NG PAM sites, adapted from successful implementations in rice [63] [59]:

• Base Editor Construction: Fuse Cas9-NG nickase (D10A variant) with cytidine deaminase domains (rAPOBEC1 or PmCDA1) and uracil glycosylase inhibitor (UGI) in a plant expression vector. Include a nuclear localization signal and plant codon optimization.

• sgRNA Design for Base Editing: Design sgRNAs with the target cytidine located within positions 4-8 of the protospacer for optimal editing efficiency. Ensure the PAM is in NG format (e.g., GAA, GAT, CAA).

• Plant Transformation and Selection: Transform rice calli as described in Protocol 1. Select transformed plants using appropriate antibiotics and regenerate into whole plants.

• Editing Analysis: Extract genomic DNA from T0 plants and amplify target regions. Sequence PCR products directly to detect C-to-T conversions. Calculate base editing efficiency as the percentage of sequenced clones showing the desired conversion. Assess off-target effects by sequencing potential off-target sites identified through in silico prediction tools.

• Phenotypic Analysis: Advance edited T0 plants to T1 and T2 generations to assess inheritance and stability of edits. Evaluate phenotypic consequences of nucleotide changes under controlled environment and field conditions.

Research Reagent Solutions for Non-Canonical PAM Applications

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents for Non-Canonical PAM Genome Editing

Reagent Category	Specific Examples	Function and Application	Considerations for Crop Systems
Engineered Nucleases	xCas9, Cas9-NG, LbCpf1, AsCpf1 [65] [63] [59]	Recognize non-canonical PAM sequences to expand targeting range	Select based on PAM availability and editing efficiency requirements
Base Editor Systems	Cas9-NG-PmCDA1-UGI, xCas9-cytidine deaminase fusions [63] [59]	Enable precise nucleotide conversions without double-strand breaks	Optimal activity windows vary by deaminase; requires testing
Delivery Vectors	Plant-optimized binary vectors with appropriate promoters (Ubi, 35S) [63] [64]	Facilitate stable integration and expression of editing components	Consider vector size constraints and marker options
sgRNA Expression Systems	Polymerase III promoters (U6, U3) for sgRNA transcription [63] [64]	Drive high-level expression of guide RNAs	Verify promoter compatibility with target plant species
Selection Markers	Hygromycin, Bialaphos, Herbicide resistance genes [63] [64]	Enable selection of successfully transformed tissue	Match selection agent to crop species and transformation efficiency
Analysis Tools	T7E1/Surveyor assays, amplicon sequencing protocols [65] [63]	Detect and quantify editing events	Establish baseline for background mutation rate in target species

Applications in Crop Improvement and Future Perspectives

The utilization of non-canonical PAM sequences has profound implications for crop improvement programs, particularly as agricultural systems face increasing challenges from climate change and population growth [64] [67]. By dramatically expanding the targetable genome space, these technologies enable more precise manipulation of complex traits controlled by genes in previously inaccessible genomic regions.

Successful applications already demonstrated in crop species include the modification of yield-related traits in rice through targeting of the LAZY1, Gn1a, DEP1, and GS3 genes [67], improvement of oil quality profiles in soybean and Camelina sativa by targeting fatty acid desaturase (FAD) genes [67], and enhancement of starch composition in maize and potato through editing of waxy genes [67]. The ability to target non-canonical PAMs further expands possibilities for multi-gene stacking, a crucial strategy for developing crops with enhanced climate resilience and nutritional profiles.

Future directions in this field include the continued engineering of nucleases with novel PAM specificities, the development of more efficient base editing systems for non-canonical PAMs, and the integration of machine learning approaches to predict optimal guide RNA designs for non-canonical PAM targets. As regulatory frameworks evolve worldwide, technologies that produce edits indistinguishable from natural mutations offer promising pathways for commercializing improved crop varieties with significant societal benefits [64] [67].

The strategic implementation of non-canonical PAM-based genome editing represents a transformative approach for crop bioengineering, effectively overcoming one of the most significant limitations of current CRISPR systems and opening new frontiers for agricultural innovation.

The protospacer adjacent motif (PAM) represents both the fundamental mechanism for self/non-self discrimination in bacterial adaptive immunity and a primary constraint in CRISPR-based genome editing applications. This short, conserved DNA sequence adjacent to the target site is essential for Cas nuclease recognition and activation [2]. In crop research, the limited availability of PAM sequences restricts the genomic space accessible for editing, particularly in complex genomes with low GC content. Multi-nuclease approaches that combine Cas proteins with complementary PAM requirements directly address this limitation by expanding the available target space while maintaining editing precision.

The PAM requirement varies significantly among different Cas nucleases. While Streptococcus pyogenes Cas9 (SpCas9) recognizes a 5'-NGG-3' PAM, other nucleases exhibit distinct preferences: Cas12a recognizes T-rich PAMs (TTTV), Cas12i recognizes NTTN, and engineered variants such as Cas12i2Max recognize NTTN PAMs with enhanced efficiency [2] [68]. This diversity enables researchers to deploy multiple nucleases with complementary PAM recognition patterns, thereby increasing the density of potential target sites within a genomic region of interest. The strategic combination of these systems represents a paradigm shift in crop genome engineering, moving from single nuclease applications to integrated editing platforms.

PAM Diversity Among CRISPR-Cas Systems

Classification and Mechanisms

CRISPR-Cas systems are broadly classified into two categories based on their effector module architecture. Class 1 systems (types I, III, and IV) utilize multi-protein effector complexes, while Class 2 systems (types II, V, and VI) employ single effector proteins such as Cas9, Cas12, and Cas13 [69] [70]. For genome editing applications in crops, Class 2 systems have been widely adopted due to their simplicity and programmability. Within this class, different nucleases exhibit distinct structural features and functional mechanisms that dictate their PAM preferences and catalytic activities.

Table 1: Structural and Functional Characteristics of Major Cas Effectors

Cas Effector	Class/Type	PAM Requirement	Target Nucleic Acid	Cleavage Activity	Size (aa)
SpCas9	II-A	5'-NGG-3'	dsDNA	cis-cleavage (HNH & RuvC domains)	~1368
Cas12a (Cpf1)	V-A	5'-TTTV-3'	dsDNA/ssDNA	cis-cleavage (RuvC domain)	~1300
Cas12i	V-I	5'-NTTN-3'	dsDNA	cis-cleavage (RuvC domain)	~1054-1093
Cas12b	V-B	5'-TTN-3'	dsDNA/ssDNA	cis-cleavage (RuvC domain)	~1100
Cas13a	VI-A	None (targets ssRNA)	ssRNA	cis- and trans-cleavage (HEPN domain)	~1150

As illustrated in Table 1, Cas nucleases demonstrate remarkable diversity in their structural characteristics and functional capabilities. This diversity directly enables multi-nuclease approaches by providing orthogonal targeting systems with minimal cross-talk. The variation in protein size is particularly relevant for crop applications where delivery constraints often limit the size of genetic constructs, especially when using viral vectors or multiplexed systems [71] [30].

PAM Recognition and Conformational Activation

The PAM sequence serves as a critical conformational checkpoint that gates the activation of CRISPR-Cas effectors. For Cas9, PAM recognition triggers a series of coordinated structural rearrangements that enable DNA unwinding, heteroduplex formation, and ultimately nuclease activation [69]. The PAM-interacting (PI) domain within the nuclease lobe makes specific contacts with the DNA, with key arginine residues conferring specificity for the NGG sequence in SpCas9 [69]. This initial recognition event provides a kinetic window for DNA interrogation, allowing the Cas complex to verify target complementarity before committing to DNA cleavage.

Similar conformational regulation occurs in other Cas effectors, though with distinct structural mechanisms. Cas12a proteins recognize T-rich PAMs through a different structural domain, resulting in altered kinetics of activation and DNA processing capabilities. Unlike Cas9, Cas12a possesses inherent RNase activity that processes its own crRNA arrays, simplifying multiplexed applications [69] [30]. Recent structural studies have revealed that Cas12i effectors employ a unique mechanism of PAM recognition that involves substantial DNA distortion, enabling efficient editing with compact protein sizes [68]. Understanding these mechanistic differences is essential for rationally designing multi-nuclease strategies that leverage the unique properties of each system.

Experimental Design for Multi-Nuclease Approaches

Strategic Selection of Complementary Nucleases

The foundation of successful multi-nuclease editing lies in the strategic selection of Cas proteins with orthogonal PAM requirements that collectively maximize target space coverage. Experimental design begins with comprehensive bioinformatic analysis of the target genomic region to map all potential binding sites for available nucleases. This analysis should consider both the canonical PAM sequences and the growing repertoire of engineered variants with relaxed PAM specificities.

Table 2: Targeting Density Comparison of Different Cas Nucleases in Model Crop Genomes

Crop Species	Genome Size (Gb)	SpCas9 (NGG) Sites/Mb	Cas12a (TTTV) Sites/Mb	Cas12i (NTTN) Sites/Mb	Combined Sites/Mb
Oryza sativa (rice)	0.39	15.2	9.8	32.5	57.5
Zea mays (maize)	2.3	14.8	9.5	31.9	56.2
Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)	0.9	15.1	9.7	32.1	56.9
Triticum aestivum (wheat)	16.0	14.9	9.6	31.8	56.3

As demonstrated in Table 2, the combination of multiple nucleases significantly increases potential targeting sites across diverse crop genomes. The NTTN PAM requirement of Cas12i systems provides particularly high targeting density due to its minimal sequence constraints, approximately doubling the available sites compared to SpCas9 alone [68]. This expanded coverage is especially valuable for targeting specific genomic regions with biased sequence composition, such as promoter elements or AT-rich gene families.

Diagram 1: Experimental workflow for multi-nuclease genome editing in crops.

Vector Assembly and Delivery Strategies

Implementing multi-nuclease approaches requires sophisticated vector design to coordinate the expression of multiple Cas proteins and their cognate guide RNAs. For stable plant transformation, the following protocol has been successfully applied to engineer rice and tobacco lines:

Protocol: Assembly of Multiplex CRISPR Vectors for Multi-Nuclease Editing

• Modular Vector Backbone Preparation

  • Select a plant binary vector with appropriate selection markers (e.g., pCAMBIA, pGreen, or pRI series)
  • Incorporate individual expression cassettes for each Cas nuclease under constitutive promoters (e.g., CaMV 35S, ZmUbi)
  • Include separate polymerase II or polymerase III promoters for gRNA expression

• gRNA Expression Cassette Assembly

  • Design gRNA scaffolds optimized for each nuclease type (Cas9, Cas12a, Cas12i)
  • Clone specific target sequences using Golden Gate or BsaI-based assembly
  • For multiplexing, employ tRNA or ribozyme-based processing systems to express multiple gRNAs from a single transcript

• Plant Transformation

  • For monocots: Use Agrobacterium-mediated transformation of embryogenic callus or biolistic delivery
  • For dicots: Employ Agrobacterium-mediated leaf disc transformation
  • Apply appropriate selection regime (antibiotics, herbicides, or visual markers)

• Molecular Characterization

  • PCR-based genotyping to confirm integration of transgenes
  • Sequencing of target loci to identify induced mutations
  • Off-target assessment through whole-genome sequencing or targeted amplification of potential off-target sites

Recent studies have demonstrated that the use of polycistronic tRNA-gRNA arrays (PTG) enables efficient processing of multiple guide RNAs from a single transcriptional unit, significantly simplifying vector assembly for multi-nuclease systems [71]. This approach was successfully employed in rice to simultaneously target three genes using Cas9 and Cas12a systems, resulting in efficient multiplexed editing with minimal off-target effects [68].

Case Studies in Crop Improvement

Simultaneous Targeting of Multiple Agronomic Traits

The application of multi-nuclease approaches has enabled sophisticated engineering of complex agronomic traits in crop plants. A notable example involves the simultaneous improvement of disease resistance and yield components in rice through coordinated targeting of susceptibility and yield-related genes. Researchers deployed Cas9 and Cas12a nucleases to concurrently edit the OsSWEET14 promoter region (conferring bacterial blight resistance) and the GRAIN SIZE3 gene (controlling grain dimensions), achieving transgene-free edited lines with enhanced field performance [70].

In another study, Cas9 and Cas12i systems were combined to engineer polygenic stress tolerance traits in tomato. The approach targeted three key regulatory nodes: the pyrabactin resistance-like (PYL) ABA receptors for drought tolerance, MAP kinase phosphatases for oxidative stress response, and Mildew Locus O proteins for powdery mildew resistance. Field trials of the edited lines demonstrated a 31% increase in yield under combined stress conditions compared to wild-type controls [71]. This case highlights the power of multi-nuclease approaches for stacking multiple beneficial alleles in a single breeding cycle.

Marker Gene Excision and Complex Genome Rearrangements

Multi-nuclease approaches have proven particularly valuable for precise excision of selectable marker genes and orchestration of complex genomic rearrangements. A recent study in tobacco demonstrated a CRISPR/Cas9-based strategy to eliminate the DsRED selectable marker gene from established transgenic lines [72]. Researchers designed four gRNAs targeting the flanking regions of the SMG cassette, resulting in precise excision with approximately 10% efficiency in the T0 generation. The resulting marker-free plants displayed normal growth, flowering, and seed set, addressing significant regulatory and public acceptance concerns associated with transgenic crops.

The simultaneous use of multiple gRNAs with Cas9 has also enabled programmed chromosomal rearrangements in crops, including inversions and large deletions previously inaccessible through conventional breeding. In wheat, researchers employed a dual nuclease approach using Cas9 and Cas12i to delete a 45-kb regulatory region controlling heading date, creating novel allelic variation for climate adaptation [30]. The editing system successfully generated homozygous deletions in the T1 generation, demonstrating the efficiency of this approach for creating structural variation.

Enhanced Specificity Through Multi-PAM Recognition

A significant advantage of multi-nuclease approaches lies in their potential to enhance editing specificity through redundant PAM recognition. Research in pineapple has demonstrated that target sequences with multiple flanking PAM sites exhibit significantly lower off-target rates compared to those with single PAM sites [28]. Experimental data revealed that sequences with two adjacent 5'-NGG PAM sites showed greater specificity and higher probability of productive Cas9 binding than those with only one PAM site.

The mechanistic basis for this enhanced specificity involves prolonged association of the Cas complex with genomic regions containing multiple PAM sequences, increasing the likelihood of on-target binding while reducing off-target interactions. This principle can be extended to multi-nuclease systems by designing gRNAs that require simultaneous recognition by different Cas proteins at adjacent sites, effectively creating an AND gate that dramatically increases specificity. In practice, this approach has reduced off-target rates by 3- to 5-fold compared to single nuclease editing in plant systems [28].

Table 3: Off-Target Rates in Pineapple with Varying PAM Configurations

PAM Configuration	Number of Target Sequences Tested	Average On-Target Efficiency (%)	Off-Target Rate (%)
Single NGG PAM	6	72.3	18.5
Two adjacent NGG PAMs	4	68.9	6.2
NGG + NAG PAMs	5	65.7	12.4
Two adjacent NAG PAMs	3	58.2	4.8

As shown in Table 3, the strategic selection of target sites with multiple PAM sequences significantly reduces off-target effects while maintaining robust on-target activity. This finding has important implications for the design of high-precision editing systems in crops, particularly for applications requiring maximal specificity, such as therapeutic compound production or commercial variety development.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents

Table 4: Key Reagents for Multi-Nuclease CRISPR Experiments in Crops

Reagent Category	Specific Examples	Function and Application
Cas Expression Vectors	pRGE32 (Cas9), pYCAS12i (Cas12i), pICSL80009 (Cas12a)	Constitutive or inducible expression of Cas nucleases with plant codon optimization
gRNA Cloning Systems	BsaI Golden Gate modules, tRNA-gRNA arrays, U6/U3 promoters	Modular assembly of single or multiplexed gRNA expression cassettes
Delivery Vectors	pCAMBIA, pGreen, pRI series	Agrobacterium-mediated plant transformation with selection markers
Plant Transformation Systems	Agrobacterium LBA4404, EHA105; Biolistic PDS-1000	DNA delivery into plant cells for stable integration or transient expression
Selection Markers	Kanamycin resistance (nptII), Hygromycin (hpt), Herbicide resistance (bar)	Selection of successfully transformed plant tissues
Editing Detection Reagents	restriction enzyme (RE) assay primers, T7E1, targeted sequencing primers	Molecular characterization of editing efficiency and specificity
Modular Assembly Systems	MoClo Plant Toolkit, GoldenBraid	Standardized assembly of complex multi-nuclease constructs

Emerging Technologies and Future Perspectives

The field of multi-nuclease editing is rapidly advancing through the development of novel CRISPR systems and engineering approaches. Recent work has demonstrated the application of AI-based protein language models to generate synthetic Cas proteins with novel PAM specificities and enhanced functionalities. The OpenCRISPR-1 system, designed through computational modeling of natural CRISPR diversity, exhibits comparable activity to SpCas9 while being 400 mutations distant from any known natural sequence [35]. This approach dramatically expands the potential for creating customized nucleases with precisely tailored PAM requirements.

Additionally, the discovery and adaptation of compact Cas effectors such as Cas12f (Cas14) and CasΦ with minimal protein sizes (400-700 amino acids) enables more efficient delivery of multi-nuclease systems, particularly via viral vectors [30]. These ultra-compact systems provide additional PAM options while reducing the metabolic burden on engineered plants, facilitating more complex genetic circuits and sophisticated regulation of trait expression.

Future applications of multi-nuclease approaches will likely focus on the implementation of logical genetic circuits for conditional trait expression, dynamic response to environmental cues, and sophisticated metabolic engineering. The integration of orthogonal CRISPR systems with different nucleic acid targets (DNA, RNA) and regulatory capabilities (activation, repression, modification) will enable multi-layered control of plant gene expression, opening new frontiers in crop design and adaptation to changing climatic conditions.

Diagram 2: Logical relationship between PAM diversity and crop improvement outcomes through multi-nuclease approaches.

The strategic combination of Cas proteins with complementary PAM requirements represents a transformative approach in crop genome engineering. By leveraging the diverse PAM specificities of naturally occurring and engineered nucleases, researchers can overcome the targeting limitations of individual systems while enhancing editing specificity through multi-PAM recognition. The experimental frameworks and case studies presented herein provide a roadmap for implementing these sophisticated editing strategies in crop species, enabling precise manipulation of complex agronomic traits. As the CRISPR toolbox continues to expand with novel systems and AI-designed nucleases, multi-nuclease approaches will play an increasingly central role in advancing crop improvement for sustainable agriculture.

In the realm of crop genome editing, the protospacer adjacent motif (PAM) serves as the critical gateway for CRISPR-Cas system functionality. This short, sequence-specific motif dictates where Cas nucleases can bind and initiate DNA cleavage, thereby fundamentally constraining the targetable genomic space [52]. For crop researchers, the PAM requirement presents both a challenge and an opportunity—while it limits potential target sites, its precise understanding enables the strategic optimization of editing systems for agricultural applications. The PAM specificity of the most commonly used Streptococcus pyogenes Cas9 (SpCas9), for instance, recognizes the 5'-NGG-3' sequence, which must be present immediately adjacent to the target site [52] [73]. Within crop improvement programs, this constraint necessitates sophisticated approaches to vector design and component delivery to achieve efficient editing. This technical guide examines current strategies for maximizing editing efficiency in crops through optimized promoter selection, advanced vector architecture, and tailored delivery methods, all framed within the context of PAM-dependent editing constraints.

Promoter Selection for Optimized gRNA and Cas Expression

Promoter selection constitutes a fundamental determinant of CRISPR editing efficiency, directly influencing the expression levels of both Cas proteins and guide RNAs (gRNAs). Strategic promoter choice ensures sufficient concentrations of editing components while minimizing cellular stress responses that can reduce viability [74].

gRNA Expression Promoters

For gRNA expression, RNA polymerase III (Pol III) promoters are predominantly employed due to their precision in initiating transcription without additional nucleotides that could interfere with gRNA function [73]. The human U6 snRNA promoter is widely utilized in plant systems, driving high-level, constitutive expression of gRNAs [73]. In dual-gRNA vector configurations, two consecutive U6 promoters enable simultaneous expression of multiple gRNAs, facilitating complex editing strategies such as gene fragment deletions or paired nicking approaches [73].

Cas Protein Expression Promoters

For Cas protein expression, RNA polymerase II (Pol II) promoters offer diverse options with varying strengths and specificities:

• Constitutive promoters, such as the human phosphoglycerate kinase (hPGK) promoter or the Cauliflower Mosaic Virus (CaMV) 35S promoter in plants, provide continuous, ubiquitous expression suitable for most editing applications [74] [73].
• Tissue-specific promoters restrict Cas expression to particular organs or cell types, minimizing off-target effects in non-target tissues and enabling tissue-functional studies [74].
• Inducible promoters allow temporal control over Cas expression through chemical or environmental triggers, enabling researchers to separate the editing event from subsequent developmental stages [74].

Quantitative Comparison of Promoter Performance

Table 1: Promoter Types and Their Applications in Crop Gene Editing

Promoter Type	Examples	Expression Profile	Primary Applications	Considerations for Crop Editing
Pol III Promoters	U6, U3	High, constitutive	gRNA expression	Consistent expression across tissues; minimal size requirements
Constitutive Pol II Promoters	CaMV 35S, Ubiquitin	Strong, ubiquitous	Cas protein expression	May cause cellular stress; potential pleiotropic effects
Tissue-Specific Promoters	Root, leaf, seed-specific	Restricted to specific tissues	Tissue-specific editing	Reduces off-target editing in non-target tissues
Inducible Promoters	Chemical, heat, light-inducible	Temporally controlled	Conditional gene editing	Allows separation of transformation and editing events

Promoter optimization extends beyond simple selection to include engineering approaches such as promoter truncation, mutagenesis, and fusion strategies to enhance activity or specificity [74]. For instance, modified versions of the CaMV 35S promoter with duplicated enhancer regions can significantly boost expression levels in dicot crops.

Vector Design Strategies for Enhanced Editing Efficiency

Vector architecture plays a pivotal role in determining the efficiency, specificity, and safety of CRISPR-Cas genome editing in crop systems. The design considerations span from basic plasmid vectors to advanced viral delivery platforms.

Vector Cargo Configurations

CRISPR-Cas components can be delivered in three primary forms, each with distinct advantages for crop applications:

• Plasmid DNA (pDNA): Traditional vectors encoding both Cas and gRNA sequences offer simplicity and low-cost manipulation but face challenges with large size, potential genomic integration, and lower editing efficiency in some crop species [75].
• mRNA/gRNA combinations: In vitro transcribed Cas9 mRNA paired with synthetic gRNAs enables transient expression without genomic integration, reducing off-target risks and enabling DNA-free editing approaches [75].
• Ribonucleoprotein (RNP) complexes: Pre-assembled Cas protein-gRNA complexes offer the most rapid editing action, highest specificity, and minimal off-target effects, making them ideal for transformation-free editing protocols [75] [76].

Vector System Architectures

• All-in-One Vectors: These single-vector systems incorporate both Cas expression cassettes and gRNA expression units, ensuring coordinated delivery but limiting flexibility for multiplexed editing [73].
• Modular Vector Systems: Separate vectors for Cas and gRNA expression offer superior flexibility, allowing researchers to combine different Cas variants with various gRNAs without constructing new vectors for each experiment [73]. This approach enables the creation of stable Cas-expressing crop lines that can subsequently be crossed with gRNA lines or transformed with minimal gRNA vectors.

Table 2: Comparison of Vector Cargo Configurations for Crop Editing

Cargo Type	Editing Efficiency	Specificity	Delivery Methods	Advantages	Limitations
Plasmid DNA	Variable (cell-type dependent)	Lower (prolonged expression)	Agrobacterium, biolistics, PEG	Simple, cost-effective, selection marker compatibility	Potential integration, larger size, higher off-target risk
mRNA/gRNA	High	Moderate (transient expression)	LNPs, electroporation, PEG	No genomic integration, reduced off-target effects	mRNA stability concerns, requires in vitro transcription
RNP Complexes	Highest	Highest (immediate activity)	Particle bombardment, electroporation, PEG	Rapid degradation, minimal off-target effects, DNA-free	No selection marker, requires protein purification

Specialized Vectors for Advanced Applications

Dual-gRNA vectors represent a powerful architectural approach for complex editing scenarios in crops. These vectors employ two U6 promoters to drive expression of distinct gRNAs, enabling: (1) paired Cas9 nickase applications using the Cas9-D10A mutant for enhanced specificity; (2) genomic fragment deletions between two target sites; and (3) simultaneous multiplexed editing of multiple genes [73]. For crop enhancement, this approach facilitates the deletion of entire gene regulatory regions or the simultaneous modification of multiple members of gene families.

Diagram 1: Dual-gRNA vector architecture enables three advanced applications for crop editing.

Delivery Methods for CRISPR Components in Crop Systems

Effective delivery of CRISPR components into plant cells remains a critical challenge in crop biotechnology. The delivery method significantly influences editing efficiency, specificity, and the range of transformable species.

Physical Delivery Methods

Biolistic particle bombardment (gene gun) represents a widely utilized physical delivery method, particularly for monocot crops and species recalcitrant to Agrobacterium-mediated transformation. This approach involves coating gold or tungsten microparticles with DNA, mRNA, or RNP complexes and propelling them into plant cells or tissues [52]. The method is versatile but can cause significant cellular damage and typically results in complex integration patterns.

Electroporation applies brief electrical pulses to create temporary pores in cell membranes, facilitating the entry of CRISPR components. While highly effective for protoplast systems, its application to whole plant tissues remains limited [75].

Biological Delivery Methods

Agrobacterium-mediated transformation employs the natural DNA transfer capability of Agrobacterium tumefaciens to deliver T-DNA containing CRISPR cassettes into plant cells. This method remains the gold standard for many dicot crops due to its efficiency in generating stable integrations with defined borders and lower copy numbers [52].

Viral vector systems have emerged as powerful tools for DNA-free editing approaches. Engineered RNA viruses, such as Tomato spotted wilt virus (TSWV), can deliver CRISPR-Cas components systemically throughout the plant without genomic integration [76]. These vectors enable high editing efficiency in somatic tissues and can potentially eliminate the need for tissue culture regeneration, significantly accelerating the editing process.

Nanocarrier Delivery Systems

Lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) and other nanocarriers show promise for plant transformation, particularly for delivering RNP complexes. While established in mammalian systems [77] [75], plant-specific LNP applications are emerging, leveraging the natural affinity of certain formulations for specific plant tissues or organelles.

Table 3: Delivery Methods for CRISPR-Cas in Crop Systems

Delivery Method	Cargo Compatibility	Key Applications in Crops	Efficiency Range	Advantages	Limitations
Agrobacterium-mediated	Plasmid DNA	Stable transformation; most dicots	Variable (species-dependent)	Defined integration; low copy number; established protocols	Host range limitations; lengthy regeneration
Biolistic Particle Bombardment	DNA, mRNA, RNP	Monocots; recalcitrant species	~40% transient [75]	Broad species range; no bacterial contamination	Complex integration patterns; tissue damage
Viral Vectors (TSWV)	RNA, RNP	DNA-free editing; rapid testing	High somatic efficiency [76]	No tissue culture needed; systemic delivery	Limited cargo size; no stable inheritance
Electroporation	DNA, mRNA, RNP	Protoplast transformation	Highly efficient for protoplasts	High efficiency; uniform delivery	Regeneration challenges; specialized equipment
Nanocarriers (LNPs)	RNP, mRNA	Emerging plant applications	Under investigation	Potentially tissue-specific; minimal infrastructure	Early development stage; optimization needed

Experimental Protocols for PAM-Dependent Editing in Crops

Protocol: Transformation-Free Genome Editing Using RNA Virus Vectors

This protocol leverages engineered RNA viruses for DNA-free delivery of CRISPR-Cas components, enabling rapid editing without stable transformation [76].

Materials Required:

• Engineered TSWV vector with CRISPR-Cas insert
• Nicotiana benthamiana plants for viral amplification
• Target crop species (e.g., tomato, pepper)
• Tissue culture media for plant regeneration
• PCR reagents for mutation detection
• Agarose gel electrophoresis system

Procedure:

• Viral Vector Construction: Clone the Cas nuclease and gRNA expression cassettes into the TSWV vector backbone, ensuring preservation of viral replication elements.
• Vector Recovery via Agroinoculation: Introduce the constructed vector into Agrobacterium tumefaciens and infiltrate N. benthamiana leaves for viral amplification.
• Mechanical Inoculation of Target Plants: Harvest systemically infected N. benthamiana tissue, homogenize in inoculation buffer, and rub-inoculate onto leaves of target crop species.
• Analysis of Somatic Mutagenesis: After 10-14 days, harvest newly emerged leaves from inoculated plants and extract genomic DNA for PCR amplification of target loci. Assess editing efficiency via restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) or sequencing.
• Regeneration of Mutant Plants: Isolate edited somatic sectors and regenerate whole plants through tissue culture to obtain heritable mutations.

Diagram 2: DNA-free plant editing workflow using viral vectors.

Protocol: Dual-gRNA Vector Assembly for Multiplexed Editing

This protocol describes the construction of a dual-gRNA vector for complex genome editing applications in crops [73].

Materials Required:

• Base vector with two U6 promoters
• PCR reagents and thermocycler
• Restriction enzymes (e.g., BsaI) for Golden Gate assembly
• T4 DNA ligase
• Competent E. coli cells
• LB media with appropriate antibiotics
• Sequencing primers

Procedure:

• gRNA Oligo Design: Design oligonucleotides encoding 20-nt guide sequences for each target site with appropriate overhangs for cloning.
• Annealing of Oligos: Phosphorylate and anneal oligos to form double-stranded gRNA inserts.
• Golden Gate Assembly: Set up restriction-ligation reaction with BsaI enzyme, T4 DNA ligase, digested vector backbone, and annealed gRNA inserts.
• Transformation: Introduce assembled vectors into competent E. coli cells and plate on selective media.
• Colony Screening: Pick individual colonies, isolate plasmid DNA, and verify correct assembly by restriction digest and sequencing.
• Plant Transformation: Introduce verified dual-gRNA vectors into your chosen crop system using Agrobacterium-mediated transformation or biolistics.

Advanced Strategies: Expanding PAM Compatibility and Specificity

While optimizing delivery and expression is crucial, researchers are also developing innovative molecular tools to overcome the inherent limitations of PAM recognition.

PAM Engineering through Directed Evolution

Dual selection systems employing both positive and negative selection pressures have enabled the evolution of Cas9 variants with altered PAM specificities [78]. These systems select for variants that recognize non-canonical PAMs (positive selection) while simultaneously counterselecting against retention of wild-type PAM recognition (negative selection). The resulting variants, such as those with enhanced activity on NAG PAMs, significantly expand the targetable genomic space in crops [78].

Reverse Prime Editing (rPE) Systems

Recent advances in reverse prime editing (rPE) systems have created editing tools with reverse editing windows that operate through the HNH-mediated nick site rather than the traditional RuvC-mediated site [79]. These systems employ Cas9-D10A nickase and specifically engineered reverse transcriptase domains to achieve editing efficiencies up to 44.41% while potentially offering higher fidelity than conventional prime editing systems [79]. For crop research, such technologies enable precise base conversions at previously inaccessible genomic locations.

AI-Guided Editing Design

The emergence of AI-assisted tools like CRISPR-GPT provides researchers with sophisticated platforms for designing optimal editing strategies [80]. These systems leverage large language models trained on extensive CRISPR literature to assist with CRISPR system selection, gRNA design, delivery method recommendation, and protocol optimization—particularly valuable for researchers targeting complex crop genomes with specific PAM constraints [80].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Reagents for PAM-Dependent Editing

Table 4: Key Research Reagent Solutions for Crop CRISPR Experiments

Reagent/Category	Specific Examples	Function in Experiment	Considerations for Crop Research
Cas Expression Vectors	pCambia-Cas9, pGreen-Cas9	Provides Cas nuclease expression	Choose species-appropriate promoters; consider codon optimization
gRNA Cloning Vectors	Regular plasmid gRNA vector [73]	Enables gRNA expression with U6 promoter	Compatible with Golden Gate assembly; allows single or dual gRNA expression
Delivery Tools	Agrobacterium strains (GV3101), Biolistic PDS	Introduces CRISPR components into plant cells	Match to crop species and explant type; consider transformation efficiency
Selection Markers	Kanamycin, Hygromycin resistance	Identifies successfully transformed tissue	Optimize concentration for specific crops; consider marker-free approaches
Viral Vector Systems	TSWV-CRISPR [76]	Enables DNA-free editing delivery	Limited to systemic viruses for target species; biosafety considerations
Editing Detection Reagents	RFLP enzymes, Sequencing primers	Confirms successful genome editing	Choose detection method based on expected mutation type
Plant Regeneration Media	MS media with hormones	Regenerates whole plants from edited cells	Optimize cytokinin:auxin ratios for specific crops

Optimizing PAM-dependent editing in crops requires a holistic approach that integrates promoter selection, vector design, and delivery method optimization. The strategic deployment of Pol III promoters for gRNA expression, coupled with appropriate Pol II promoters for Cas proteins, establishes the foundation for efficient editing. Advanced vector systems, particularly dual-gRNA configurations, enable complex editing scenarios beyond simple knockouts. Meanwhile, emerging delivery methods such as viral vectors and RNP complexes offer pathways to DNA-free editing with reduced off-target effects. As PAM engineering continues to expand the targeting scope of CRISPR systems, and AI tools streamline experimental design, researchers are positioned to overcome the historical constraints of PAM dependencies, unlocking new possibilities for crop improvement and functional genomics in agriculturally important species.

The protospacer adjacent motif (PAM) sequence is a fundamental determinant in CRISPR-based genome editing systems, governing target site selection and overall editing efficacy. In crop research, the requirement for a specific PAM sequence adjacent to the target site severely limits the number of editable genomic loci, creating a significant bottleneck for functional genomics and precision breeding. While the canonical NGG PAM for the Streptococcus pyogenes Cas9 is prevalent, its distribution is not uniform across complex crop genomes, often leaving key agronomic trait genes inaccessible to editing [81]. This constraint is particularly problematic for advanced editing techniques like prime editing (PE), where the PAM requirement of the associated nCas9 directly influences the targeting scope for installing beneficial alleles or repairing deleterious mutations.

Overcoming the dual challenges of restricted targeting scope and low editing efficiency requires a two-pronged strategy: the systematic optimization of the editing reaction conditions themselves and the sophisticated modulation of the cellular repair pathways that process the editing intermediates. The optimization of reaction conditions encompasses the engineering of more efficient editor proteins, the design of high-performance guide RNAs, and the fine-tuning of delivery and expression parameters. Concurrently, modulating the plant's innate DNA damage response (DDR)—a complex signaling network that detects DNA lesions and orchestrates their repair through pathways such as non-homologous end joining (NHEJ) and homology-directed repair (HDR)—is critical for steering the outcome of genome editing events toward the desired precise modification [82] [83]. This technical guide synthesizes current methodologies for both approaches, providing a framework to enhance the efficiency and applicability of prime editing and related technologies in crop species, thereby expanding the horizons of what is achievable in crop improvement.

Systematic Optimization of Reaction Conditions

The performance of a genome editing system is governed by a multitude of interdependent variables. A systematic approach to optimization, which moves beyond one-factor-at-a-time experiments, is essential for achieving robust and high-efficiency editing.

Core Component Engineering

The architecture of the genome editing machinery itself is a primary determinant of efficiency. For prime editing systems, this involves the simultaneous engineering of multiple protein components and their associated nucleic acid guides.

Table 1: Optimization of Core Editor Components

Component	Engineering Strategy	Impact on Efficiency & Specificity	Example in Crops
Cas9 Variant	Use of Cas9 nickase (nCas9) with relaxed or altered PAM specificity (e.g., xCas9, SpCas9-NG).	Broadens targeting scope to previously inaccessible genomic sites; reduces off-target nicking [11].	Successful targeting of genes with non-NGG PAMs in rice and wheat.
Reverse Transcriptase (RT)	Fusion of processive, high-fidelity RT mutants to nCas9; optimization of linker peptides.	Increases the fidelity and length of DNA synthesis from the pegRNA template, enabling longer insertions [11].	Improved precise insertion rates of >30 bp sequences.
Editor Architecture	Development of dual-pegRNA systems or PE-GR system for genomic rearrangements.	Enables targeted deletion, inversion, or replacement of large DNA fragments (e.g., kilobase-scale) [11].	Creation of novel promoter-swap alleles and targeted gene knock-outs.
pegRNA Design	Optimizing primer binding site (PBS) length and sequence, and RT template stability; incorporating RNA-stabilizing motifs.	Dramatically increases editing efficiency by ensuring stable primer binding and successful reverse transcription [11].	Variations in pegRNA design led to efficiency fluctuations from 0.0% to 14.6% at the same locus.

Expression and Delivery Optimization

The delivery of editing components into plant cells and their subsequent expression levels are critical. Different crops and cell types may require tailored approaches.

• Promoter Selection: The choice of promoter driving the expression of the editor protein and pegRNA is crucial. Strong, constitutive promoters like the Ubiquitin promoter from maize are often effective in monocots, while dicots may respond better to other promoters like CaMV 35S. Testing a suite of promoters can identify the optimal combination for a specific crop and transformation method [11].
• Vector and Delivery System: The mode of delivery (e.g., Agrobacterium-mediated transformation, biolistics, or protoplast transfection) influences the copy number and genomic context of the editing construct. For Agrobacterium, the use of binary vectors with optimized T-DNA borders is standard. For difficult-to-transform species, ribonucleoprotein (RNP) delivery of pre-assembled editor complexes can achieve editing without DNA integration [11].

Systematic Parameter Screening

Key reaction parameters interact in complex ways. A Design of Experiments (DOE) approach is superior for identifying optimal conditions and revealing interactions between variables.

• Design of Experiments (DOE): Instead of varying one parameter at a time, DOE methodologies like factorial designs allow for the efficient exploration of multi-parameter spaces. For instance, a response surface methodology can simultaneously model the effects of temperature, reagent concentration, and time on editing efficiency, pinpointing the global optimum [84].
• High-Throughput Screening: Automated, microscale reaction systems enable the rapid testing of hundreds of parameter combinations. This is particularly valuable for optimizing chemical treatments intended to modulate DNA repair pathways (e.g., small molecule inhibitors), conserving precious plant materials and accelerating the discovery of effective conditions [84].

Modulation of Cellular Repair Pathways

Following the creation of a precise nick and reverse transcription by the prime editor, the cell's endogenous DNA repair machinery is responsible for integrating the edited strand into the genome. Steering these pathways is therefore a powerful lever to boost prime editing efficiency.

The Plant DNA Damage Response (DDR)

The DDR is a highly conserved signaling network that senses DNA lesions and coordinates their repair.

• Key Sensors and Transducers: The phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase-related kinases (PIKKs), ATM (Ataxia Telangiectasia Mutated) and ATR (ATM and Rad3-related), are the master regulators of the DDR. ATM is primarily activated by double-strand breaks (DSBs), while ATR responds to replication stress and single-stranded DNA. In plants, these kinases converge on the transcription factor SOG1 (Suppressor of Gamma Response 1), which acts as a central commander, regulating the transcription of hundreds of genes involved in cell cycle arrest, DNA repair, and programmed cell death [83].
• Major Repair Pathways:
  • Non-Homologous End Joining (NHEJ): The dominant, error-prone pathway for repairing DSBs. It is active throughout the cell cycle and often results in small insertions or deletions (indels). While PE is designed to avoid DSBs, incomplete repair or off-target nicking can engage NHEJ, leading to unwanted mutations [82] [81].
  • Homology-Directed Repair (HDR): A high-fidelity pathway that uses a homologous template (such as the sister chromatid or the flap created in PE) for repair. HDR is most active in the S and G2 phases of the cell cycle but is generally inefficient in plants, presenting a major barrier for techniques that rely on exogenous donor templates [82].
  • MMR and Other Pathways: The mismatch repair (MMR) pathway can recognize and correct mispaired nucleotides that arise during replication or editing, potentially rejecting the edited strand in PE and reverting the change [11] [82].

Strategic Pathway Manipulation

Modulating the balance between these repair pathways can significantly enhance the yield of precise editing events.

Table 2: Strategies for Modulating DNA Repair Pathways

Target Pathway	Modulation Strategy	Mechanism of Action	Experimental Protocol
Mismatch Repair (MMR)	Transient silencing of key MMR genes (e.g., MSH2, MSH6) via RNAi or CRISPRi during editing.	Prevents the MMR system from recognizing and rejecting the edited DNA strand as a mismatch, increasing PE efficiency [11].	Design siRNA or gRNAs against MSH2/6. Co-express with PE machinery in protoplasts. Analyze editing efficiency via NGS after 72h.
HDR / NHEJ Balance	Chemical inhibition of NHEJ key proteins (e.g., DNA-PKcs using KU-0060648) or overexpression of HDR-promoting factors (e.g., CtIP).	Suppresses error-prone NHEJ, indirectly favoring HDR-like integration of the PE-edited strand.	Treat plant cells or explants with a titrated dose of inhibitor (e.g., 5-10 µM KU-0060648) 24h pre- and post-transfection.
Cell Cycle Synchronization	Treatment with aphidicolin or other replication blockers.	Arrests cells in S/G2 phase, where HDR is more active, potentially benefiting PE integration [83].	Synchronize cell cultures with 1.5 µg/mL aphidicolin for 24h before delivering editing reagents.
Chromatin Accessibility	Co-expression of chromatin remodelers or targeting of euchromatic regions.	Opens compacted chromatin, allowing better access for the PE machinery to the target DNA site [11].	Select target sites with high AT-content and low nucleosome occupancy. Fuse editor with chromatin-loosening peptides.

Integrated Experimental Workflow for Crop Prime Editing

Combining the optimization of reaction conditions with the strategic modulation of repair pathways provides a powerful, integrated workflow for achieving high-efficiency prime editing in crops.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Key Research Reagent Solutions

Reagent / Material	Function in Experiment	Application Example
PEG-4000 (Polyethylene Glycol)	Induces membrane fusion for highly efficient delivery of editing constructs (DNA, RNA, RNP) into plant protoplasts.	Protoplast transfection for rapid testing of new pegRNA designs or editor variants.
MSH2-siRNA / shRNA Construct	Knocks down the expression of the MMR protein MSH2 to prevent rejection of the prime-edited DNA strand.	Co-delivery with PE machinery to increase the proportion of precise edits in regenerated plants.
KU-0060648 (DNA-PKcs Inhibitor)	A small molecule inhibitor that specifically blocks the classical NHEJ pathway by targeting DNA-PKcs.	Treatment of plant explants to bias repair toward HDR-like pathways during editing, reducing indel formation.
NGS Library Prep Kit	For preparing sequencing libraries from the target genomic region to quantitatively measure editing efficiency and precision.	Deep sequencing of amplicons from edited plant tissue to calculate the percentage of precisely edited alleles.
Plant Tissue Culture Media	Supports the growth, division, and regeneration of plant cells (callus, explants) after the editing procedure.	Selection and regeneration of edited events into whole plants under appropriate antibiotic or herbicide selection.

The challenge of low efficiency in advanced genome editing techniques like prime editing is a multi-faceted problem rooted in both biochemical limitations and cellular defense mechanisms. However, as this guide outlines, a systematic and integrated approach provides a clear path forward. By simultaneously engineering the core editing machinery for enhanced performance and broader PAM compatibility, optimizing its delivery and expression, and strategically modulating the plant's DNA repair pathways to favor the desired outcome, researchers can significantly boost editing efficiencies in even the most recalcitrant crop species. This holistic strategy, leveraging the latest tools in molecular biology and chemical biology, is pivotal for unlocking the full potential of precision genome editing to develop climate-resilient, high-yielding crops to meet the demands of the future.

Ensuring Precision: Validation Frameworks and Comparative Analysis of PAM-Dependent Editing Outcomes

The precision and efficacy of CRISPR-Cas-mediated genome editing in crops are fundamentally governed by the protospacer adjacent motif (PAM), a short DNA sequence adjacent to the target site that is essential for nuclease recognition and cleavage. This technical guide provides an in-depth analysis of quantitative methods for evaluating PAM-dependent modification success, framing the discussion within the broader objective of optimizing CRISPR tools for crop improvement. We summarize the editing efficiencies and specificities of various Cas nuclease variants, detail high-throughput sequencing methodologies for comprehensive off-target profiling, and present standardized experimental protocols for assessing editing outcomes. Furthermore, we explore the application of these quantitative frameworks in agricultural research, enabling the development of novel crop varieties with enhanced yield, nutritional quality, and stress resilience. The insights herein are intended to equip researchers with the rigorous tools necessary to propel forward the field of precision agriculture.

The protospacer adjacent motif (PAM) is a critical short DNA sequence (typically 2-6 base pairs) located directly adjacent to the DNA region targeted for cleavage by the CRISPR-Cas system [2]. This motif serves as a binding signal for the Cas nuclease, initiating the DNA unwinding that allows the guide RNA to pair with the target protospacer sequence. In the context of crop improvement, the PAM requirement simultaneously confers specificity and imposes a significant limitation on targetable genomic loci.

The foundational CRISPR-Cas9 system from Streptococcus pyogenes (SpCas9) recognizes a canonical 5'-NGG-3' PAM, where "N" can be any nucleotide base [2]. This requirement means that, statistically, a potential target site occurs roughly every 8-12 base pairs in a typical plant genome. While this frequency provides numerous targeting opportunities, it may not coincide with agriculturally critical genes or specific polymorphic sites that researchers need to edit. Consequently, understanding and quantifying the efficiency of PAM-dependent modifications is paramount for successfully applying CRISPR technology to engineer traits such as disease resistance in citrus [52] or architectural improvements in tomato [52].

This guide establishes a quantitative framework for assessing editing efficiency, moving beyond simple confirmation of mutagenesis to a precise measurement of success that accounts for PAM compatibility, on-target efficacy, and off-target activity. Such rigorous assessment is a prerequisite for the responsible development and regulatory approval of next-generation edited crops.

PAM Compatibility and Cas Nuclease Variants

The landscape of available Cas nucleases has expanded dramatically, offering researchers a toolkit with diverse PAM specificities. The choice of nuclease directly determines the targeting range within a crop's genome.

Established and Engineered Cas Variants

Natural and engineered Cas nucleases recognize different PAM sequences [2]:

Table 1: PAM Sequences for Various CRISPR Nucleases

CRISPR Nuclease	Organism Isolated From	PAM Sequence (5' to 3')
SpCas9	Streptococcus pyogenes	NGG
hfCas12Max	Engineered from Cas12i	TN and/or TNN
SaCas9	Staphylococcus aureus	NNGRRT or NNGRRN
NmeCas9	Neisseria meningitidis	NNNNGATT
LbCpf1 (Cas12a)	Lachnospiraceae bacterium	TTTV

To overcome the limitations of naturally occurring PAMs, protein engineering has created variants with altered PAM recognition. For instance, xCas9(3.7) and SpG are SpCas9 variants that recognize broader NGN PAMs, significantly expanding the targeting scope compared to the wild-type NGG [85]. The more recently engineered SpRY effectively functions as a near-PAM-less variant, capable of targeting sequences with NNN PAMs, though it still shows a preference for NRN (R = A/G) over NYN (Y = C/T) [85].

Quantitative Trade-offs: Efficiency vs. Specificity

A critical consideration when using PAM-flexible variants is the inherent trade-off between targeting range and editing fidelity. A comprehensive assessment of a dozen SpCas9 variants revealed that PAM-flexible enzymes like SpRY, while offering unparalleled targeting scope, also exhibit significantly increased levels of off-target activity [85]. This inverse relationship underscores the necessity of quantitative evaluation in the tool selection process. For crop breeding applications where off-target effects in complex, often polyploid, genomes are a major concern, selecting a nuclease with the optimal balance of range and specificity is crucial.

Quantitative Methods for Assessing Editing Outcomes

Accurately measuring the outcomes of a CRISPR editing experiment—both on-target and off-target—is essential for evaluating the success of a PAM-dependent modification.

High-Throughput Sequencing Methods

Advanced sequencing techniques provide a quantitative and comprehensive view of editing outcomes.

• Primer-Extension-Mediated Sequencing (PEM-seq): This high-throughput method is particularly powerful for its ability to capture a wide array of editing consequences simultaneously. PEM-seq can profile small insertions/deletions (indels), large deletions, and—crucially—off-target activity and chromosomal translocations resulting from double-strand breaks (DSBs) [85]. The process involves using a biotinylated primer near the Cas9 target site for primer extension, followed by amplification with nested primers and Illumina sequencing. This method was instrumental in identifying the trade-off between targeting range and specificity in PAM-flexible variants [85].

• T7 Endonuclease I (T7EI) Cleavage Assay: While less comprehensive than sequencing, this method offers a cost-effective and rapid way to initially confirm editing. After PCR amplification of the target region, the products are denatured and reannealed, creating heteroduplexes where edited and wild-type strands are mismatched. The T7EI enzyme cleaves these mismatches, and the resulting fragments are visualized by electrophoresis to provide a semi-quantitative estimate of indel frequency [85].

Key Quantitative Metrics

When analyzing sequencing data, the following metrics are fundamental for assessing editing efficiency:

• On-Target Indel Efficiency: The percentage of sequencing reads containing insertions or deletions at the intended target site. This is the most direct measure of editing success.
• Off-Target Ratio: The frequency of indels at known or predicted off-target sites relative to the on-target site. This is a key metric for specificity.
• Large Deletion Frequency: The percentage of reads indicating deletions larger than a few base pairs, which can be a concern for genomic stability.
• Translocation Frequency: The rate at which chromosomal rearrangements are detected between the on-target site and off-target sites, a critical safety assessment [85].

Table 2: Quantitative Performance of Selected SpCas9 Variants at NGG PAM Sites

SpCas9 Variant	Relative On-Target Efficiency*	Relative Off-Target Activity*	Key Characteristic
Wild-Type SpCas9	High	High (Baseline)	Benchmark for efficiency and specificity
eSpCas9(1.1)	High	Low	Reduced sgRNA-DNA binding affinity
HypaCas9	High	Low	Enhanced proofreading capacity
evoCas9	Variable (very low at some loci)	Low	Developed via high-throughput screening
SpRY (at NGG)	High	High	Near-PAM-less, used for range, not fidelity

*Relative performance based on data from HEK293T cells at multiple loci [85]. Performance in plant cells may vary.

Experimental Protocol for Comprehensive PAM-Dependent Editing Analysis

The following protocol, adapted from high-throughput studies, provides a robust framework for quantitatively evaluating PAM-dependent modification success in a crop research context [85].

Plasmid Construction and Cell Transfection

• Vector Design: Clone the gene for the Cas9 variant of interest (e.g., SpCas9, SpG, SpRY) into a plant expression vector under a constitutive promoter (e.g., CMV or Ubiquitin). Include a fluorescent marker like mCherry for selection. For fair comparison between variants, use an identical plasmid backbone and promoter system [85].
• sgRNA Cloning: Design and clone the sgRNA sequence targeting a genomic locus of interest into a separate expression cassette, often driven by a U6 or U3 promoter. A GFP marker can be included for tracking. Crucially, the sgRNA sequence should exclude the PAM sequence to prevent self-targeting of the CRISPR construct in plasmid-based systems [2].
• Plant Transformation: Transform the constructs into the target crop system. For initial validation in a controlled system, transfect HEK293T cells with 3 µg of each plasmid using a method like polyethylenimine (PEI) transfection [85]. For plants, use established methods like Agrobacterium-mediated transformation or biolistic delivery [52].

Sample Harvest and Genomic DNA Extraction

• Harvest: Collect cells or tissue 72 hours post-transfection (or at an appropriate time for stable transformation in plants).
• Sorting (for transient assays): Use Fluorescence-Activated Cell Sorting (FACS) to isolate cells co-expressing both mCherry (Cas9) and GFP (sgRNA) to enrich for successfully transfected cells [85].
• DNA Extraction: Lyse the sorted cells or plant tissue using a buffer containing Proteinase K. Precipitate genomic DNA (gDNA) with isopropanol, purify, and resuspend in nuclease-free water [85].

Editing Analysis via PEM-seq

• Primer Extension: Design a biotinylated primer within ~150 bp of the Cas9 cutting site. Perform primer extension on the purified gDNA.
• Library Preparation: Amplify the extended products using nested primers specific to the target site. Prepare sequencing libraries from this amplification.
• Sequencing and Data Analysis: Sequence the libraries on an Illumina HiSeq platform. Analyze the data to identify:
  • On-target indels: Align reads to the reference genome to quantify mutations at the target site.
  • Off-target sites: Search for junctions proximal to genomic sequences with high homology to the sgRNA (allowing for ≤8 mismatches) and a valid PAM for the nuclease used.
  • Translocations and Large Deletions: Use tools like MACS2 to call peaks and identify significant enrichment of junction reads indicative of chromosomal rearrangements or large deletions [85].

Data Validation and Prediction

• Deep Learning Modeling: For advanced analysis, a deep learning model can be employed to verify the consistency and predictability of off-target sites, particularly for novel tools like SpRY. This involves training a convolutional neural network on true off-targets (from PEM-seq) and false randomly generated sequences to predict potential off-target loci in the genome [85].
• Experimental Validation: Validate high-frequency off-target sites predicted by PEM-seq or computational models using targeted Sanger sequencing or T7EI assays.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Reagents and Solutions

Table 3: Key Research Reagent Solutions for PAM-Dependent Editing Assessment

Reagent / Solution	Function in the Experimental Process	Specific Example / Note
Cas9 Variant Plasmids	Source of the CRISPR nuclease with defined PAM specificity.	pX330 backbone for SpCas9; engineered vectors for SpG, SpRY, etc.
sgRNA Expression Constructs	Guides the Cas nuclease to the specific genomic target.	U6-promoter driven sgRNA cassette; must be designed to exclude the PAM [2].
PEI Transfection Reagent	Enables plasmid delivery into mammalian cells for initial validation.	1 mg/mL solution used at 18 µL per transfection in a 6-cm dish [85].
Proteinase K	Digests proteins during genomic DNA extraction to yield high-purity DNA.	Used at 200 µg/mL in lysis buffer for overnight incubation [85].
T7 Endonuclease I (T7EI)	Validates editing by cleaving heteroduplex DNA formed by indels.	Rapid, cost-effective initial screening tool [85].
Biotinylated Primers	Enables capture and amplification of target loci for PEM-seq library prep.	Designed within 150 bp of the cut site for primer extension [85].
FACS Sorter	Enriches for successfully co-transfected cells based on fluorescent markers.	Critical for obtaining a pure population for analysis in transient assays [85].

Application in Crop Improvement: A Quantitative Perspective

The quantitative assessment of PAM-dependent editing is directly applicable to developing improved crop varieties. By selecting the optimal nuclease for the target, researchers can precisely engineer traits that are difficult to achieve through conventional breeding.

• Expanding the Targeting Scope for Complex Traits: Many agronomically important genes lack an NGG PAM at the optimal location for editing. PAM-flexible variants like Cas9-NG (NG PAM) or SpRY (NNN PAM) allow researchers to target specific promoter elements, splice sites, or coding sequences that were previously inaccessible. This is crucial for projects like engineering citrus greening (HLB) resistance in citrus, where natural resistance sources are limited [52].
• Enhancing Fidelity for Safety: The use of high-fidelity variants like HypaCas9 or eSpCas9(1.1) is essential for minimizing unintended mutations in crop genomes, especially in polyploid species like wheat where multiple homologous copies of a gene exist. This ensures that only the intended gene is modified, reducing the risk of pleiotropic effects.
• Base Editing Integration: Base editors, which are fusions of catalytically impaired Cas proteins (nickase or dCas9) and deaminase enzymes, enable precise single-base changes without creating double-strand breaks [53]. The PAM requirement of the Cas component directly constrains the "editing window" within the target site. Quantitative assessment of base editing efficiency must therefore account for both the PAM compatibility and the positioning of the target base within the catalytic window of the deaminase [53].

The systematic quantification of PAM-dependent modification success is a cornerstone of effective CRISPR-based crop improvement. As the field progresses, the integration of high-throughput methods like PEM-seq with predictive computational models will become standard practice, enabling the pre-selection of optimal nucleases and sgRNAs with high efficiency and minimal off-target effects. This data-driven approach is essential for expanding the targeting scope to previously inaccessible genes, enhancing the fidelity of edits, and ultimately accelerating the development of precisely edited, climate-resilient, and high-yielding crop varieties to ensure global food security. The future of crop breeding lies in the intelligent application of these quantitative principles to harness the full potential of CRISPR technology.

The Protospacer Adjacent Motif (PAM) is a short, sequence-specific motif that the Cas nuclease recognizes adjacent to the target DNA site, serving as the initial binding and activation signal for CRISPR systems. In crops research, understanding PAM recognition is fundamental to predicting and mitigating off-target effects—unintended modifications at sites similar to the target sequence. The PAM requirement primarily constrains target site selection but also crucially influences specificity by limiting potential off-target sites to those containing a compatible PAM sequence [86]. However, evidence demonstrates that Cas nucleases can exhibit flexibility in PAM recognition, tolerating non-canonical sequences and thereby expanding the potential for off-target effects in plant genomes [86] [87].

The fundamental challenge in crop genome engineering stems from the balance between achieving high on-target efficiency and minimizing off-target activity. While the PAM was initially thought to provide a strict specificity checkpoint, studies reveal that PAM flexibility allows Cas9 to engage sequences beyond the canonical NGG motif, recognizing variants like NAG or NGA with reduced efficiency [86]. This relaxed stringency, combined with partial complementarity between the guide RNA and genomic DNA, enables cleavage at unexpected loci, posing significant challenges for precise crop trait development. Consequently, comprehensive specificity profiling must account not only for guide RNA homology but also for the spectrum of PAM sequences nucleases might recognize within complex crop genomes.

PAM Recognition and Its Direct Role in Off-Target Effects

The Molecular Mechanism of PAM Recognition

PAM recognition initiates the DNA editing process. For the most commonly used Streptococcus pyogenes Cas9 (SpCas9), the canonical PAM is the 3-base pair sequence 5'-NGG-3', where "N" represents any nucleotide [86] [88]. The PAM interface on the Cas9 protein contacts the major groove of the DNA duplex, recognizing the specific guanine bases and triggering local DNA unwinding to allow guide RNA:DNA hybridization. The seed sequence—the PAM-proximal 10–12 nucleotide region of the guide RNA—is particularly critical for specific recognition and cleavage [86]. Mismatches in the seed region typically prevent efficient cleavage, whereas mismatches in the distal region are more tolerated, leading to potential off-target activity [86].

PAM Flexibility as a Source of Off-Target Effects

A primary cause of PAM-linked off-target effects is the nuclease's ability to engage with non-canonical PAM sequences. SpCas9 has demonstrated tolerance for variants such as NAG and NGA, albeit with lower cleavage efficiency [86]. This flexibility means that numerous genomic sites with similar-but-imperfect PAMs become potential off-target candidates, especially if they also feature high complementarity to the guide RNA. The recent development of PAM-relaxed or PAM-free engineered Cas variants, such as SpRY (which recognizes NRN > NYN PAMs, where R is A/G and Y is C/T) and xCas9, further complicates the specificity landscape [86]. While these variants greatly expand the targetable range of crop genomes for therapeutic applications, they also inherently increase the number of potential off-target sites by reducing the stringency of this primary recognition checkpoint [86].

Interaction Between PAM and Guide RNA Mismatches

Off-target effects result from the combined effect of imperfect PAM recognition and guide RNA mismatches, bulges, or DNA/RNA bulges [86]. Studies indicate CRISPR/Cas9 can induce cleavage even with up to six base mismatches in the DNA sequence at the distal region of the guide RNA binding site [87]. The risk is highest when a non-canonical PAM is paired with a genomic site exhibiting strong complementarity to the seed region of the guide RNA. Furthermore, genetic variation in crop populations, such as single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), can create novel, unintended PAM-like sequences or disrupt existing ones, thereby generating new potential off-target sites or reducing on-target efficiency [86].

Table 1: Common Cas Nuclease PAM Specificities and Off-Target Implications

Cas Nuclease	Source Organism	Canonical PAM Sequence	Off-Target Risk Profile
SpCas9	Streptococcus pyogenes	5'-NGG-3'	Moderate; tolerates NAG, NGA
SaCas9	Staphylococcus aureus	5'-NNGRRT-3'	Lower; longer PAM reduces potential sites
NmCas9	Neisseria meningitidis	5'-NNNNGATT-3'	Lower; longer PAM reduces potential sites
SpCas9-NG	Engineered Variant	5'-NG-3'	Higher; relaxed PAM expands potential sites
SpRY	Engineered Variant	5'-NRN > NYN-3'	Highest; near PAM-less behavior

Methodologies for Detecting PAM-Linked Off-Target Effects

A robust toolkit of computational, in vitro, and cell-based methods has been developed to nominate and validate off-target effects, including those driven by atypical PAM recognition.

Computational Prediction (In Silico) Methods

Computational tools provide the first line of defense by predicting potential off-target sites based on sequence similarity. These algorithms scan reference genomes for loci containing both a compatible PAM (canonical or non-canonical) and sequence homology to the guide RNA.

Table 2: In Silico Tools for Predicting CRISPR/Cas9 Off-Target Effects

Method Name	Core Algorithm	PAM Flexibility Handling	Key Features
CasOT [89]	Alignment-based	Customizable PAM input	Exhaustive search; allows user-defined PAM and mismatch numbers
Cas-OFFinder [89]	Alignment-based	Highly adjustable PAM types	Widely applied; tolerates various PAMs, mismatches, and bulges
FlashFry [89]	Alignment-based	Considered in scoring	High-throughput; provides GC content and on/off-target scores
CCTop [89]	Scoring-based (distance to PAM)	Implicit in scoring	User-friendly web interface; scores based on mismatch distance to PAM
DeepCRISPR [89]	Machine Learning	Considers epigenetic features	Integrates sequence and epigenetic data for improved prediction

These tools are essential for initial guide RNA selection, allowing researchers to prioritize guides with minimal potential off-target sites across the crop genome. However, their major limitation is the incomplete consideration of the cellular context, such as chromatin accessibility and epigenetic states, which significantly influence Cas9 binding and cleavage [89].

Experimental Detection Methods

Experimental validation is crucial, as biochemical factors in living cells can cause off-target effects not predicted by in silico models.

Cell-Free Methods

• Digenome-seq [86] [89]: This highly sensitive method involves isolating genomic DNA and performing in vitro digestion with pre-assembled Cas9/guide RNA Ribonucleoprotein (RNP). The cleaved DNA is then subjected to whole-genome sequencing (WGS). The resulting reads are mapped to the reference genome to identify cleavage sites with high sensitivity, as the lack of cellular proteins allows for unobstructed nuclease access.
• CIRCLE-seq [89]: A more advanced cell-free method where genomic DNA is sheared and circularized. The circular library is incubated with Cas9/guide RNA RNP, which linearizes DNA at cleavage sites. These linearized fragments are then prepared for next-generation sequencing. CIRCLE-seq is exceptionally sensitive with a low background, capable of detecting even very rare off-target sites.

Cell-Based Methods

• GUIDE-seq [90] [89]: This method captures double-strand breaks (DSBs) in living cells by transfecting cells with Cas9/guide RNA along with short, double-stranded oligonucleotides (dsODNs). These dsODNs are integrated into DSB sites during repair. The genomic DNA is then sequenced, and the integrated tags allow for the precise mapping of both on-target and off-target cleavage events, providing a highly sensitive profile of nuclease activity in a cellular context.
• DISCOVER-seq [89]: This technique leverages the natural DNA repair machinery. It uses Chromatin Immunoprecipitation (ChIP) with an antibody against the DNA repair protein MRE11, which is recruited to DSB sites. Sequencing the bound DNA fragments reveals the locations of active CRISPR/Cas9 cleavage, making it a powerful method for detecting off-targets in vivo without requiring artificial tag incorporation.

The following diagram illustrates the core workflow for two primary experimental methods for detecting off-target effects.

A Practical Toolkit for Off-Target Assessment in Crop Research

For researchers designing CRISPR experiments in crops, the following reagents and protocols are essential for a thorough specificity profile.

Table 3: Research Reagent Solutions for Off-Target Assessment

Reagent / Tool Category	Specific Examples	Function in Specificity Profiling
High-Fidelity Cas Variants	SpCas9-HF1, eSpCas9(1.1), HiFi Cas9 [91] [90]	Engineered for reduced non-specific DNA binding; lowers off-target while maintaining on-target activity.
Alternative Cas Nucleases	SaCas9, NmCas9, Cas12a [86] [90]	Offer different PAM requirements, providing alternative targeting options and potentially lower off-target risk.
Chemically Modified Guide RNAs	2'-O-methyl (2'-O-Me), 3' phosphorothioate (PS) [90]	Increases stability and can reduce off-target editing by improving binding fidelity.
Computational Design Tools	CRISPOR, CHOPCHOP [90]	Algorithms for guide selection that rank guides based on predicted on-target efficiency and off-target potential.
Off-Target Detection Kits	GUIDE-seq, CIRCLE-seq Kits [90] [89]	Commercialized reagents and protocols for standardized, sensitive detection of off-target sites.

Detailed Experimental Protocol: Digenome-seq for Plant Genomic DNA

This protocol is adapted for crop genomics applications [86] [89].

• Genomic DNA Extraction: Isolate high-molecular-weight genomic DNA from the target crop tissue using a method that minimizes shearing (e.g., CTAB method).
• RNP Complex Formation: In a tube, assemble the editing complex by incubating a purified Cas9 protein (e.g., 100-500 nM) with a molar excess of the synthesized guide RNA (e.g., 120-600 nM) in an appropriate reaction buffer for 10-15 minutes at 25°C.
• In Vitro Digestion: Add the purified genomic DNA (e.g., 1-5 µg) to the pre-formed RNP complex. Adjust the buffer conditions to optimal levels for Cas9 activity (e.g., providing Mg²⁺ as a cofactor) and incubate for 4-16 hours at 37°C.
• DNA Purification and Sequencing Library Prep: Purify the digested DNA using magnetic beads or column-based kits. Prepare a next-generation sequencing library from the fragmented DNA. As the Cas9 creates precise breaks, the resulting fragments will have identical 5' ends at cleavage sites.
• Bioinformatic Analysis: Sequence the library to a high depth (e.g., 50-100x coverage). Map the sequencing reads to the crop reference genome. Use specialized algorithms (e.g., compared to an undigested control) to identify sites with a significant enrichment of sequencing read starts, which correspond to Cas9 cleavage sites, both on-target and off-target.

Detailed Experimental Protocol: GUIDE-seq in Plant Protoplasts

This protocol can be applied to plant cells, such as protoplasts, which are amenable to transfection [90] [89].

• Protoplast Preparation and Transfection: Isolate protoplasts from the crop species of interest. Co-transfect the protoplasts with the following using PEG-mediated transformation or electroporation:
  • Plasmid DNA encoding Cas9 and the guide RNA, or pre-assembled Cas9/guide RNA RNP.
  • The GUIDE-seq dsODN tag (typically a 34-36 bp double-stranded oligodeoxynucleotide with phosphorothioate modifications on the ends for stability).
• Cell Culture and Genomic DNA Extraction: Culture the transfected protoplasts for 48-72 hours to allow for genome editing and tag integration. Harvest the cells and extract genomic DNA.
• Library Preparation and Sequencing: Prepare a sequencing library from the genomic DNA. A key step is the enrichment of DNA fragments containing the integrated dsODN tag, often achieved via PCR using one primer specific to the tag and another a generic genomic primer, or through tag-specific capture.
• Data Analysis: Perform high-throughput sequencing. Bioinformatic pipelines are then used to identify genomic locations where the dsODN tag has been integrated, thereby revealing the landscape of Cas9-induced double-strand breaks throughout the genome.

The path to precise and safe application of CRISPR technology in crop improvement relies on a multi-faceted approach to understanding and mitigating off-target effects linked to PAM recognition. Researchers must leverage computational predictions as a first filter, followed by empirical validation using sensitive experimental methods like Digenome-seq or GUIDE-seq, tailored for plant systems. The choice of nuclease is critical; while PAM-relaxed variants offer greater targeting scope, high-fidelity Cas9s or nucleases with longer, more stringent PAMs often provide a superior specificity profile for applications where safety is paramount, such as the development of commercial crop varieties [86] [92]. By integrating careful reagent design, robust detection methodologies, and stringent selection within the plant breeding pipeline, the risks posed by off-target edits can be effectively managed, unlocking the full potential of gene editing for sustainable agriculture.

The CRISPR-Cas system has revolutionized plant biotechnology, enabling precise genomic modifications for crop improvement. A critical determinant for the successful application of any CRISPR system is the protospacer adjacent motif (PAM) requirement, which restricts targetable genomic sites. This technical review provides a comprehensive benchmarking analysis of diverse Cas orthologs and their engineered variants, evaluating their editing efficiency, PAM requirements, and applicability in plant systems. Understanding these parameters is fundamental to selecting the optimal CRISPR tool for specific crop engineering applications, particularly within the context of developing climate-resilient crops to address global food security challenges.

Classification of CRISPR-Cas Systems and PAM Fundamentals

CRISPR-Cas systems are broadly categorized into two classes based on their effector module architecture. Class 1 systems (types I, III, and IV) utilize multi-subunit protein complexes for crRNA processing and interference, while Class 2 systems (types II, V, and VI) employ single effector proteins, making them more adaptable for biotechnological applications [5] [93]. Among Class 2 systems, Cas9 (type II) and Cas12 (type V) function as DNA endonucleases, whereas Cas13 (type VI) targets RNA molecules [93] [94].

The PAM sequence, a short DNA motif adjacent to the target site, is essential for immune function in prokaryotes by distinguishing self from non-self DNA. In genome editing applications, the PAM requirement constitutes the primary constraint on targetable genomic loci. Different Cas orthologs recognize distinct PAM sequences, which directly influences their targeting scope and practical utility [12] [93]. For instance, the commonly used Streptococcus pyogenes Cas9 (SpCas9) recognizes a 5'-NGG-3' PAM, while other orthologs recognize AT-rich or minimal PAM sequences, substantially expanding the potential targeting space [23] [12].

Benchmarking Cas Orthologs in Plant Systems

Cas9 Orthologs

The exploration of Cas9 orthologs beyond SpCas9 has revealed several promising effectors with distinctive PAM preferences and molecular properties. Recent research has identified four functional Cas9 orthologs from bacterial species including Streptococcus uberis, S. iniae, S. gallolyticus, and S. lutetiensis that demonstrate robust editing capabilities in human cells [23]. These orthologs recognize AT-rich PAM motifs and feature sgRNA designs orthogonal to SpCas9 and Staphylococcus aureus Cas9 (SaCas9), thereby expanding the targeting range for complementary genome editing applications. While their characterization in plant systems is ongoing, their distinct PAM recognition profiles make them valuable additions to the plant CRISPR toolbox [23].

Table 1: Benchmarking Cas9 Orthologs in Eukaryotic Systems

Cas9 Ortholog	Source Organism	Size (aa)	PAM Sequence	Editing Efficiency	Key Features
SpCas9	Streptococcus pyogenes	1368	5'-NGG-3'	High (Benchmark)	Broadly applicable, well-characterized
SaCas9	Staphylococcus aureus	1053	5'-NNGRRT-3'	High	Compact size for viral delivery
SuCas9	Streptococcus uberis	~1100-1400	AT-rich	Competitive to SpCas9 [23]	Orthogonal sgRNA, effective for repression, activation, nuclease, and base editing [23]
CjCas9	Campylobacter jejuni	984	5'-NNNNRYAC-3'	Moderate	Extended PAM characterization via GenomePAM [12]
GS-Cas9	Engineered (SpCas9-derived)	>1368	5'-NGG-3'	High precision	Expanded REC domain reduces off-target effects [95]

Cas12 Family Orthologs

The Cas12 protein family offers substantial diversity, with several compact orthologs showing promise for plant genome editing, particularly due to their smaller molecular size which facilitates delivery via viral vectors.

Cas12j (Casφ) variants, derived from bacteriophages, represent hypercompact editors (700-800 amino acids) that recognize 5'-TTN-3' PAM sequences [96]. While the wild-type Cas12j-8 exhibited low editing efficiency in soybean hairy roots (0-30.82% across 10 targets, with many targets showing no activity), rational engineering of both the crRNA and nuclease markedly improved its performance [96]. The engineered system achieved editing efficiencies comparable to SpCas9 for certain target sequences in soybean and rice, and outperformed Cas12j-2 variants across all tested targets [96].

Cas12f homologs are even more compact (400-700 amino acids) but have demonstrated suboptimal editing efficiency in plants to date [96]. Other Cas12 orthologs like FnCas12a recognize 5'-YYN-3' PAMs and have been successfully characterized in plant systems using the GenomePAM method [12].

Table 2: Performance of Cas12 Orthologs in Plant Systems

Cas Ortholog	Type	Size (aa)	PAM Requirement	Editing Efficiency in Plants	Applications Demonstrated
Cas12j-8 (WT)	V	~700-800	5'-TTN-3'	Low (0-30.82%, target-dependent) [96]	Genome editing in soybean hairy roots
Engineered Cas12j-8	V	~700-800	5'-TTN-3'	High (comparable to SpCas9 for some targets) [96]	Genome and base editing in soybean and rice
Cas12a (FnCas12a)	V	1629	5'-YYN-3' [12]	Moderate to high	Genome editing across multiple species
Cas12f	V	400-700	Varies	Suboptimal [96]	Proof-of-concept editing

Cas13 Orthologs for Transcriptional Knockdown

CRISPR-Cas13 systems represent a powerful approach for targeted RNA degradation, enabling transcript knockdown without genomic modification. A recent comprehensive evaluation of seven Cas13 orthologs from five subtypes (VI-A: LwaCas13a; VI-B: PbuCas13b; VI-D: RfxCas13d; VI-X: Cas13x.1, Cas13x.2; VI-Y: Cas13y.1, Cas13y.2) in cotton and tobacco revealed distinct performance characteristics [94].

The study demonstrated that RfxCas13d, Cas13x.1, and Cas13x.2 exhibited enhanced stability with editing efficiencies ranging from 58% to 80% for endogenous transcripts (GhCLA and GhPGF) in cotton [94]. Furthermore, Cas13x.1 and Cas13y.1 successfully achieved simultaneous degradation of two endogenous transcripts using a tRNA-crRNA cassette approach, with efficiencies reaching up to 50% [94]. When targeting Tobacco Mosaic Virus (TMV) RNA, transgenic tobacco plants expressing these Cas13 orthologs showed significant reductions in viral damage, along with only mild oxidative stress and minimal accumulation of viral particles [94].

Advanced PAM Characterization and Engineering

Methodologies for PAM Determination

Accurate PAM characterization remains crucial for deploying novel Cas orthologs. Traditional methods include:

• In vitro cleavage assays requiring protein purification [12]
• Bacterial-based selection systems like PAM-SCANR [12]
• Cell-free transcription-translation (TXTL) systems [12]

Recently, GenomePAM has emerged as a powerful method that leverages genomic repetitive sequences as natural target libraries for direct PAM characterization in mammalian cells [12]. This approach identifies highly repetitive sequences (e.g., the "Rep-1" sequence occurring ~16,942 times in human diploid cells) flanked by diverse nucleotides, which serve as comprehensive PAM libraries without requiring synthetic oligos [12]. The method has been successfully validated for type II and type V nucleases, including defining the minimal PAM requirement for near-PAMless SpRY and extended PAM for CjCas9 [12].

GenomePAM Workflow for PAM Characterization

Bioinformatics Tools for PAM Prediction

Computational approaches have become indispensable for PAM characterization. PAMPHLET (PAM Prediction HomoLogous-Enhancement Toolkit) represents a significant advancement, employing a homology-based strategy to expand spacer databases for improved PAM prediction accuracy [97]. This tool addresses the limitation of conventional bioinformatics tools that struggle with prediction accuracy when few spacers are available from the CRISPR array [97]. PAMPHLET enhances the initial spacer input with homologous spacers, improving prediction reliability and reducing false positives, as validated across 20 CRISPR-Cas systems where it successfully predicted PAMs for 18 systems [97].

Experimental Protocols for Plant CRISPR Editing

Protocol: Engineering Plant Genome Editing Systems Using Cas12j-8

Background: This protocol outlines the methodology for implementing the engineered hypercompact CRISPR/Cas12j-8 system in plants, based on recent successful applications in soybean and rice [96].

Materials:

• Rice-codon optimized Cas12j-8 nuclease
• All-in-one expression vector system
• Arabidopsis U6 (AtU6) promoter-driven crRNA expression cassette
• Ruby gene as a selectable marker
• Agrobacterium rhizogenes for soybean hairy root transformation

Procedure:

• Vector Construction: Clone the Cas12j-8 nuclease into an all-in-one expression system containing the crRNA scaffold and Ruby marker gene [96].
• crRNA Engineering: Design crRNAs with 18-nt spacer sequences and incorporate structural optimizations including stable hairpins in the stem-loop region [96].
• Plant Transformation:
  • For soybean: Use Agrobacterium rhizogenes-mediated transformation of hairy roots
  • For rice: Employ protoplast transformation or stable transformation methods
• Selection and Analysis:
  • Select transgenic tissues using the Ruby marker
  • Harvest transformed tissue 10-14 days post-transformation
  • Extract genomic DNA and amplify target regions
  • Assess editing efficiency via next-generation sequencing

Expected Outcomes: The engineered system enables robust editing of previously uneditable target sites, with efficiencies comparable to SpCas9 for certain sequences and superior to Cas12j-2 variants [96].

Protocol: Cytosine Base Editing in Plants Using Engineered Cas12j-8

Background: This protocol describes the development of cytosine base editors based on engineered Cas12j-8, achieving C-to-T conversions with high efficiency and minimal indels [96].

Materials:

• Engineered Cas12j-8 (en4Cas12j-8)
• Optimized crRNA with ribozyme (crRNA-Rz)
• Cytidine deaminase fusion construct
• Plant transformation materials

Procedure:

• Base Editor Assembly: Fuse cytidine deaminase domain to engineered Cas12j-8 nickase variant.
• Vector Construction: Incorporate the base editor construct alongside optimized crRNA-Rz into plant expression vectors.
• Plant Transformation: Introduce constructs into target plant species using appropriate transformation methods.
• Evaluation:
  • Sequence target loci to assess C-to-T conversion efficiency
  • Screen for indels at target sites
  • Calculate base editing efficiency across multiple loci

Expected Outcomes: The engineered system demonstrates an average 5.36- to 6.85-fold increase in base-editing efficiency compared to the unengineered system, with maximum efficiency reaching 91.90% and minimal indel formation [96].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents

Table 3: Key Research Reagents for CRISPR Plant Research

Reagent/Category	Specific Examples	Function and Application
Cas Effectors	SpCas9, SaCas9, Cas12j-8, RfxCas13d	Core editing enzymes with distinct PAM requirements and applications
Optimization Tools	Engineered crRNA scaffolds, Nuclear localization signals (NLS)	Enhance editing efficiency and nuclear targeting
Delivery Vectors	All-in-one expression systems, Agrobacterium binary vectors	Facilitate efficient delivery of editing components to plant cells
Selection Markers	Ruby gene, antibiotic resistance genes	Enable identification and selection of successfully transformed tissues
Promoters	Arabidopsis U6 (AtU6) promoter, constitutive plant promoters	Drive expression of Cas proteins and guide RNAs in plant cells
Characterization Tools	GenomePAM, PAMPHLET, GUIDE-seq	Enable PAM determination and editing efficiency assessment

The expanding repertoire of CRISPR-Cas systems offers plant researchers an increasingly diverse toolkit for genome engineering. The benchmarking data presented herein demonstrates that while established editors like SpCas9 remain highly effective, newer orthologs such as engineered Cas12j-8 and various Cas13 variants provide unique advantages including compact size, alternative PAM recognition, and specialized applications like transcriptional knockdown.

Future directions in this field will likely focus on several key areas: (1) continued discovery and engineering of novel Cas orthologs with minimal PAM requirements; (2) enhancement of editing precision through structural modifications, as demonstrated by the REC domain expansion in GS-Cas9 [95]; and (3) integration of machine learning approaches to predict Cas activity and specificity [98]. Furthermore, the development of more sophisticated PAM characterization methods like GenomePAM [12] and bioinformatics tools like PAMPHLET [97] will accelerate the deployment of newly discovered systems.

As climate change intensifies, deploying these advanced genome editing tools to develop stress-resilient crops will be crucial for maintaining global food security [5]. The comprehensive performance analysis provided in this review serves as a technical foundation for selecting appropriate CRISPR systems for specific crop improvement applications.

The protospacer adjacent motif (PAM) serves as the fundamental molecular signature that enables CRISPR-based genome editors to distinguish between self and non-self DNA, representing a critical gateway for precise genetic modifications in crops [99] [100]. In plant genome editing, PAM recognition directly determines the targeting scope, editing efficiency, and ultimately the heritability of introduced traits [101] [99]. As crop breeders increasingly turn to precision genome editing to develop climate-resilient varieties, understanding how PAM requirements influence the stability of edits across generations has become paramount for advancing sustainable agriculture [102] [100]. The sequence-specific nature of PAM recognition creates both opportunities and constraints for developing transgene-free edited crops, as the motif dictates which genomic loci can be targeted for modification and influences the probability of obtaining heritable, stable edits [99] [103].

This technical guide examines the interplay between PAM requirements and the inheritance patterns of genome edits in crop plants, highlighting recent advances in PAM-flexible editing systems and their implications for tracking edits through generational cycles. We provide a comprehensive framework for researchers seeking to optimize editing strategies for stable trait introgression in diverse crop species, with particular emphasis on quantitative metrics of heritability and methodologies for ensuring edit stability.

Technical Foundations: PAM-Directed Editing Systems and Their Mechanisms

Core PAM Requirements of Major CRISPR Systems

RNA-guided genome editing systems rely on PAM sequences adjacent to target sites for precise DNA recognition and cleavage [101] [99]. The PAM requirement represents a key determinant of targeting flexibility, with different CRISPR systems exhibiting distinct PAM specificities that directly influence their applicability for crop improvement [99] [100].

Table 1: PAM Requirements and Characteristics of Major Genome Editing Systems

Editing System	PAM Sequence	Cleavage Pattern	Targeting Flexibility	Representative Applications in Plants
SpCas9	5'-NGG-3' [101] [100]	Blunt ends 3-4 bp upstream of PAM [101]	High specificity, limited to GG-rich sites [99]	Disease resistance in rice and wheat [101] [102]
Cas12a (Cpf1)	5'-TTTN-3' [101]	Staggered ends with 4-5 bp overhangs [101]	Prefers T-rich regions, higher specificity [101]	Multiplex editing in monocots and dicots [101]
xCas9/SpCas9-NG	5'-NG-3' [99]	Blunt ends	Expanded targeting range [99]	Editing at previously inaccessible sites [99]
SpRY	5'-NRN-3' (prefers) > 5'-NYN-3' [99]	Blunt ends	Near-PAMless editing [99]	Maximum targeting flexibility [99]
TnpB-ISYmu1	T-rich sequence [103]	Deletion-dominant profiles [103]	Compact size enables viral delivery [103]	Transgene-free editing in Arabidopsis [103]

The molecular machinery underlying PAM recognition involves specific domain interactions between the Cas protein and the DNA target site. For Streptococcus pyogenes Cas9 (SpCas9), the PAM interaction domain recognizes the 5'-NGG-3' motif, triggering conformational changes that enable DNA cleavage by the HNH and RuvC nuclease domains [99] [100]. This recognition mechanism is conserved across Cas9 orthologs but varies in other CRISPR systems, with Cas12a employing a distinct recognition pattern for T-rich PAMs [101].

PAM Recognition and DNA Cleavage Mechanism

Figure 1: Molecular Mechanism of PAM Recognition and DNA Cleavage. The process begins with PAM sequence identification (1), followed by Cas complex binding (2), sgRNA-guided targeting (3), R-loop formation (4), nuclease activation (5), and double-strand break (DSB) generation (6).

The PAM recognition mechanism initiates a cascade of molecular events culminating in DNA cleavage. Following PAM identification, the Cas enzyme unwinds the DNA duplex, allowing the guide RNA to form an R-loop structure through complementary base pairing with the target strand [99] [100]. Successful R-loop formation activates the catalytic domains of the Cas protein: the HNH domain cleaves the target strand complementary to the guide RNA, while the RuvC domain cleaves the non-target strand, generating a double-strand break (DSB) [100]. This cleavage event triggers cellular DNA repair pathways that ultimately lead to the desired genetic modifications.

Quantitative Analysis of Editing Efficiency and Heritability

PAM-Dependent Editing Performance Across Crop Species

Editing efficiency varies significantly across PAM types, crop species, and target tissues, directly influencing the likelihood of obtaining heritable edits. The following table synthesizes performance metrics for various PAM-guided systems across diverse crops.

Table 2: Editing Efficiency and Heritability Metrics by PAM System and Crop Species

Crop Species	Editing System	PAM Type	Average Efficiency (%)	Germline Transmission Rate (%)	Stable Inheritance (T2+) (%)
Arabidopsis thaliana	ISYmu1-TnpB [103]	T-rich	0.1-75.5 (site-dependent) [103]	Demonstrated in T1 [103]	Not specified
Rice (Oryza sativa)	Prime Editing [11]	NGG	0.0-29.2 (site-dependent) [11]	10-60 (varies by construct) [11]	>80 for precise edits [11]
Tomato	CRISPR-Cas9 [104]	NGG	15-40 [104]	25-70 [104]	60-90 [104]
Maize	CRISPR-Cas9 [102]	NGG	20-50 [102]	30-80 [102]	70-95 [102]
Wheat	Prime Editing [11]	NGG	1.5-25.0 [11]	5-40 [11]	60-85 [11]

The data reveal substantial variability in editing performance, with PAM selection representing just one factor influencing efficiency. For instance, the compact ISYmu1-TnpB system achieved remarkably high editing efficiency (75.5%) at specific target sites in Arabidopsis while demonstrating germline transmission, highlighting the potential of non-Cas9 systems for heritable editing [103]. Prime editing systems, while offering precision, exhibit wide efficiency ranges (0.0-29.2%) influenced by PAM accessibility and local genomic context [11].

Factors Influencing Heritability of PAM-Guided Edits

Multiple technical and biological factors determine whether PAM-guided edits successfully incorporate into the germline and stably transmit to subsequent generations:

• Edit Type and Complexity: Precise base substitutions typically show higher heritability rates (60-95%) compared to large insertions or deletions [11] [104].
• Cellular Repair Pathways: The balance between non-homologous end joining (NHEJ) and homology-directed repair (HDR) pathways influences edit precision and stability [105] [100].
• Target Tissue and Developmental Stage: Meristematic editing approaches demonstrate higher germline transmission compared to somatic tissue editing [103].
• PAM Accessibility and Chromatin State: Euchromatic regions with accessible PAM sites show superior editing efficiency and heritability [99].

Experimental Protocols for Tracking Heritable Edits

Generational Tracking Workflow

Figure 2: Experimental Workflow for Tracking Heritable Edits Across Generations. The multi-generational process begins with T0 transformation, progresses through segregation analysis, and culminates in molecular characterization of stable homozygous lines.

Detailed Methodological Approaches

Initial Edit Generation and Validation

For the T0 generation, genome editing reagents must be delivered to plant cells using appropriate methods. Agrobacterium-mediated transformation remains the gold standard for dicot species, while biolistic methods are often preferred for monocots [101] [104]. Recent advances include viral delivery systems using engineered tobacco rattle virus (TRV) to carry compact editing systems like TnpB, enabling transgene-free editing in Arabidopsis [103]. Following delivery, initial edit validation should include:

• DNA extraction from putative edited tissues using CTAB or commercial kit methods
• Target-specific PCR amplification with primers flanking the target site
• Amplicon sequencing (Amp-seq) with next-generation sequencing platforms to quantify editing efficiency and characterize editing profiles [103]
• Off-target assessment by examining potential off-target sites predicted by in silico tools

The editing efficiency should be calculated as (number of edited reads / total reads) × 100% [11] [103]. For the ISYmu1-TnpB system, researchers observed that editing outcomes were predominantly deletion-dominant, a important consideration for predicting phenotypic outcomes [103].

Segregation Analysis and Homozygous Line Establishment

In the T1 generation, individual plants should be screened to identify those carrying the desired edits. This involves:

• Germination of T1 seeds on selective media if applicable
• Leaf tissue sampling from individual plants for DNA extraction
• Genotypic analysis using restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) assays or sequencing to identify heterozygous, homozygous, and wild-type individuals
• Segregation ratio analysis to confirm Mendelian inheritance patterns

For prime editing systems, studies in rice and wheat have shown that editing efficiency in T1 plants varies considerably (0.0-29.2%) depending on the target site and pegRNA design [11]. Segregation analysis should confirm expected Mendelian ratios (3:1 for heterozygous T0 plants), with significant deviations indicating potential fitness issues associated with the edit.

Multi-Generational Stability Assessment

To confirm edit stability, T2 and subsequent generations should be evaluated through:

• Homozygous line propagation for at least three generations (T2-T4)
• Molecular validation at each generation to confirm edit stability
• Phenotypic consistency assessment across generations under controlled environments
• Field performance evaluation for agronomically important traits in later generations

Research has demonstrated that precisely engineered edits in crops like tomato and maize show high stability (>90%) across generations when the editing does not affect viability [102] [104]. However, edits that confer fitness costs in controlled or field environments may show progressive decline in frequency, necessitating careful selection at each generation.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents

Table 3: Key Research Reagents for PAM-Guided Editing and Heritability Tracking

Reagent Category	Specific Examples	Function and Application	Technical Considerations
Editor Expression Plasmids	pRGEB vectors, pHEE401E, pCXUN [101] [103]	Delivery of editing machinery to plant cells	Species-specific promoters (Ubiquitin for monocots, 35S for dicots) enhance expression
Viral Delivery Systems	Engineered TRV-TnpB constructs [103]	Transgene-free editing reagent delivery	Limited cargo capacity requires compact editors; ideal for dicots
Plant Selectable Markers	Hygromycin, Kanamycin resistance genes [101]	Selection of successfully transformed events	Consider removal in final products for regulatory compliance
PCR and Sequencing Reagents	Amplicon-EZ kits, Illumina sequencing reagents [11] [103]	Detection and quantification of editing events	Deep sequencing (>1000X coverage) needed for accurate efficiency calculation
Cell Culture Media	MS media, callus induction media [104]	Plant tissue culture and regeneration	Species-specific formulations critical for efficiency
Antibodies for Protein Detection	Anti-Cas9, Anti-HA tags [99]	Verification of editor protein expression	Useful for troubleshooting low-efficiency experiments

Emerging Technologies and Future Perspectives

PAM-Flexible Editing Systems

Recent advances in protein engineering have yielded CRISPR systems with dramatically relaxed PAM requirements, substantially expanding the targetable genomic space in crops [99]. SpRY, a nearly PAM-less Cas9 variant, recognizes NRN (preferring) and NYN PAMs, potentially accessing previously untargetable sites for crop improvement [99]. Similarly, xCas9 and SpCas9-NG variants recognize NG PAMs, offering improved targeting flexibility while maintaining high specificity [99]. These innovations are particularly valuable for targeting specific genetic elements with limited PAM availability, such as promoter regions or specific exons where conventional SpCas9 cannot be applied.

Compact Editing Systems for Enhanced Delivery

The discovery and engineering of compact RNA-guided nucleases like TnpB (~400 amino acids) enable versatile delivery approaches, including viral vectors that circumvent the need for tissue culture [103]. The ISYmu1 TnpB system has demonstrated efficient germline editing in Arabidopsis when delivered via engineered tobacco rattle virus, creating heritable edits without transgene integration [103]. These compact systems exhibit unique PAM preferences (T-rich for ISYmu1) but share the programmable targeting of larger CRISPR systems, offering new avenues for trait stacking and complex genome engineering in crops.

Prime Editing for Precision Enhancement

Prime editing represents a particularly promising advancement for precise genome modification without double-strand breaks, potentially enhancing the stability and predictability of inherited edits [11]. Though current prime editing systems still rely on PAM recognition (typically NGG for Cas9-based editors), they offer unprecedented precision for installing desired nucleotide changes. Optimization strategies including engineered reverse transcriptases, improved pegRNA designs, and enhanced editor architecture have steadily improved prime editing efficiency in plants, with reports of up to 29.17% efficiency in rice [11]. As these systems mature, they offer the potential for precisely introducing natural alleles conferring valuable agronomic traits while minimizing unintended impacts on crop fitness.

The heritability and stability of PAM-guided edits in crop plants are influenced by a complex interplay of molecular, technical, and biological factors. While PAM requirements initially constrained targeting scope, emerging technologies have substantially expanded the editable genome space. The successful development of crops with stable, heritable edits requires careful consideration of PAM selection, editing system optimization, and rigorous multi-generational tracking. As editing technologies continue to evolve toward greater precision and flexibility, researchers are increasingly equipped to develop climate-resilient, high-yielding crop varieties with precisely engineered traits that remain stable across generations, contributing to global food security efforts.

In the realm of modern crop improvement, the Protospacer Adjacent Motif (PAM) serves as a critical molecular gateway for precise genome editing. This specific short DNA sequence adjacent to a target site dictates the binding and cleavage activity of CRISPR-associated nucleases, thereby influencing the efficacy and scope of genomic modifications [81]. The functional validation of PAM-dependent genotypic changes represents a fundamental process for connecting targeted DNA edits to meaningful phenotypic outcomes in crops, enabling researchers to bridge the gap between genetic manipulation and trait enhancement.

The PAM requirement, typically a 3-6 nucleotide sequence such as the 5'-NGG-3' for the commonly used Streptococcus pyogenes Cas9, presents both a constraint and an opportunity in crop genome editing [81]. While it limits the targeting space within complex crop genomes, understanding PAM specificity allows researchers to strategically design editing systems for optimal precision and efficiency. Recent advances in prime editing (PE) systems have further emphasized the importance of PAM constraints, as these "search-and-replace" technologies demonstrate significant potential for crop genetic improvement through their precision and versatility [11].

This technical guide examines the methodologies and frameworks for functionally validating PAM-dependent genotypic changes and their correlation with phenotypic traits in crops. By integrating systematic approaches from initial genotypic characterization to multi-environment phenotypic assessment, we provide a comprehensive roadmap for researchers seeking to validate genome edits and their contributions to agriculturally important traits.

PAM Specificity in Editing Systems

The molecular machinery of CRISPR-based editing systems relies fundamentally on PAM recognition, with different Cas proteins exhibiting distinct PAM requirements that directly influence their targeting capabilities in complex crop genomes. The PAM sequence serves as a recognition signal for the Cas nuclease, enabling it to distinguish between self and non-self DNA, a vestige of its prokaryotic immune system origin [81]. Following PAM recognition, the Cas protein unwinds the DNA duplex, allowing the guide RNA to hybridize with its complementary target sequence through Watson-Crick base pairing, ultimately leading to site-specific DNA cleavage.

Prime editing systems represent a significant advancement in overcoming traditional PAM limitations while maintaining editing precision. These systems utilize an engineered reverse transcriptase fused to a Cas9 nickase (nCas9) and a specialized prime editing guide RNA (pegRNA) that both specifies the target site and encodes the desired edit [11]. While still requiring PAM recognition for initial targeting, prime editing substantially expands the range of possible edits beyond traditional CRISPR-Cas9 systems, enabling all 12 possible base-to-base conversions, as well as precise insertions and deletions, without generating double-strand breaks [11]. However, prime editing efficiency in plants has consistently faced challenges of being low and highly variable, representing a major bottleneck hindering its broader application [11].

The following table summarizes key editing systems and their PAM requirements relevant to crop genome engineering:

Table 1: Genome Editing Systems and Their PAM Requirements

Editing System	PAM Requirement	Editing Scope	Key Considerations for Crop Applications
CRISPR-Cas9	5'-NGG-3' (SpCas9)	DSB induction, NHEJ/HDR	Broad application but limited by G-rich PAM; potential for off-target effects
Cas9 variants	5'-NNGRRT-3' (SaCas9)	DSB induction, NHEJ/HDR	Expanded targeting range but potentially reduced efficiency
Prime Editing	5'-NGG-3' (PE2/PE3)	All 12 base substitutions, small indels	No DSBs; broader editing types but variable efficiency in plants
Base Editing	5'-NGG-3' (BE3)	C→T, G→A transitions (CBE) A→G, T→C transitions (ABE)	No DSBs; restricted to specific base changes; potential bystander edits

Experimental Framework for Functional Validation

Genotypic Validation of Edits

The initial step in functional validation involves comprehensive molecular characterization of introduced edits, confirming both the intended modification and absence of unintended changes. High-fidelity genotyping requires a multi-layered approach that assesses the precise sequence alteration, potential off-target effects, and edit purity in subsequent generations.

DNA Extraction and PCR Amplification: Begin with high-quality genomic DNA extraction from edited plant tissues using established protocols (e.g., CTAB method for crops with high polysaccharide content). Design primer pairs flanking the target site (typically 300-500bp amplicons) with appropriate melting temperatures (Tm ≈ 60°C) for specific amplification. Incorporate touchdown PCR protocols to enhance specificity, particularly for complex crop genomes with duplicated regions.

Sequencing and Edit Confirmation: Sanger sequencing remains the gold standard for validating intended edits in individual lines, while next-generation sequencing (NGS) approaches provide deeper insights into editing efficiency and potential off-target effects. For prime editing applications, deep amplicon sequencing is particularly valuable as it can quantitatively measure editing efficiencies that often show high variability across species, targets, and edit types [11]. Implement appropriate bioinformatic pipelines (e.g., CRISPResso2, PE-Analyzer) for precise quantification of editing outcomes from sequencing data.

Off-Target Analysis: Identify potential off-target sites through in silico prediction tools based on sequence similarity to the target site, with particular attention to sites with up to 3-4 mismatches in the seed region. Employ genome-wide methods like CIRCLE-seq or GUIDE-seq for unbiased off-target detection, though these approaches may require adaptation for crop species with complex genomes.

Table 2: Genotypic Validation Methods for PAM-Dependent Edits

Method	Key Applications	Resolution	Throughput	Limitations
Sanger Sequencing	Confirmation of specific edits in individual lines	Single nucleotide	Low	Limited to characterized loci; low throughput
Amplicon Sequencing (NGS)	Quantitative editing efficiency, detection of heterogeneous outcomes	Single nucleotide	Medium-High	Requires bioinformatic expertise; higher cost
Whole Genome Sequencing	Genome-wide off-target analysis, structural variations	Single nucleotide	Low (for off-target)	High cost; computational intensive; data interpretation challenges
RhAmpSeq	Multiplexed target capture for many edited lines	Single nucleotide	High	Requires specialized probe design

Phenotypic Assessment Strategies

Connecting genotypic changes to meaningful phenotypic outcomes requires rigorous, multi-dimensional assessment strategies that capture both expected and unexpected trait modifications. The phenotypic validation pipeline should progress from controlled environment screens to field-scale evaluations, with increasing biological relevance but decreasing experimental control.

Controlled Environment Assays: Initial phenotypic screening under controlled growth conditions provides standardized assessment of specific traits while minimizing environmental variability. For abiotic stress tolerance traits linked to PAM-dependent edits in stress-responsive genes, implement standardized stress protocols:

• Drought stress: Gradual soil drying or osmotic stress induction using PEG solutions
• Salinity stress: Incremental NaCl application in hydroponic systems or soil mixes
• Temperature stress: Precision growth chambers with ramping temperature regimes

These controlled assays should measure both physiological parameters (photosynthetic rate, stomatal conductance, chlorophyll fluorescence) and morphological traits (biomass accumulation, root architecture, survival rates).

Field-Based Phenotyping: Multi-environment field trials are essential for validating the functional significance of edits in agriculturally relevant contexts. As demonstrated in pea breeding studies, genotype by environment (G×E) interactions can significantly influence trait expression, with genotype by year by location interactions being a major source of variation for important agronomic traits [106]. Implement randomized complete block designs with sufficient replication (typically 3-4 replicates) across multiple locations and growing seasons to account for environmental variability. Key agronomic measurements should include:

• Yield and yield components (e.g., grains per plant, thousand seed weight)
• Phenological staging (days to flowering, maturity)
• Stress tolerance indices based on yield maintenance under stress conditions
• Quality parameters (protein content, nutritional composition)

High-Throughput Phenotyping: Leverage automated phenotyping platforms to capture dynamic trait responses throughout development. Canopy imaging, hyperspectral reflectance, and 3D structure from motion technologies can quantify subtle phenotypic changes resulting from precise genomic edits, enabling correlations between genotypic modifications and trait expression patterns.

Advanced Analytical Approaches

Multi-Omics Integration

Advanced analytical frameworks that integrate multiple data layers provide unprecedented insights into the functional consequences of PAM-dependent edits. Pan-transcriptome approaches have revealed extensive transcriptional complexity in crops, with resources like PanBaRT20 for barley demonstrating genotype-dependent expression patterns that could influence how edits manifest phenotypically [107]. These approaches enable researchers to move beyond single-reference genome limitations and capture the full transcriptional diversity within species, which is particularly valuable when validating edits across diverse genetic backgrounds.

Integrating epigenomic profiling further elucidates how edited regions may influence chromatin accessibility and DNA methylation patterns, potentially affecting gene expression stability and trait heritability. For prime editing applications specifically, researchers have developed four major optimization strategies that can enhance functional validation: (1) engineering core components such as Cas9, reverse transcriptase (RT), and editor architecture; (2) enhancing expression and delivery via optimized promoters and vectors; (3) improving reaction processes by modulating DNA repair pathways or external conditions; and (4) enriching edited events through selectable or visual markers [11].

Artificial Intelligence and Predictive Modeling

Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning approaches are increasingly revolutionizing the functional validation pipeline by enabling predictive modeling of genotype-phenotype relationships. AI-driven analysis of large-scale biological data has revealed intricate genetic networks and regulatory pathways that underpin stress responses, growth, and yield patterns [108]. These models can predict how specific PAM-dependent edits might influence complex trait architectures, thereby prioritizing the most promising edits for rigorous functional validation.

Coupling artificial intelligence and machine learning models with phenomics data from various crops including rice, wheat, and maize has enabled accurate yield prediction in variable climatic conditions across the globe [108]. For functional validation, these approaches can identify molecular biomarkers that serve as early indicators of successful trait modification, potentially shortening the validation timeline for perennial crops or traits that are difficult to measure directly.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Research Reagent Solutions

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents for PAM-Dependent Edit Validation

Reagent/Category	Specific Examples	Function in Validation Pipeline	Considerations for Crop Applications
Editing Systems	PE2, PE3, PE3b prime editors; Cas9 base editors	Introduction of precise PAM-dependent edits	Variable efficiency across species; optimization required for different crops [11]
Delivery Vectors	CRISPR-Cas binary vectors; geminiviral replicons; lipid nanoparticles	Delivery of editing components to plant cells	Species-dependent transformation efficiency; tissue culture requirements
Selection Markers	Fluorescent proteins (GFP, RFP); antibiotic resistance (Hygromycin, Kanamycin); visual markers (YGFP, RUBY)	Enrichment of edited events	Regulatory considerations for field testing; alternative visual markers preferred for non-GMO approaches
Genotyping Reagents	High-fidelity PCR enzymes; NGS library prep kits; target capture panels	Molecular characterization of edits	Cost considerations for large-scale screening; optimized protocols for polysaccharide-rich tissues
Phenotyping Tools	Chlorophyll fluorimeters; hyperspectral cameras; root imaging systems; portable photosynthesis systems	Quantitative trait assessment	Throughput vs. precision trade-offs; field-robust equipment requirements
Reference Materials	Wild-type control seeds; standardized DNA extracts; synthetic reference RNA	Experimental standardization and calibration	Genetic background matching for proper controls; long-term storage stability

Functional validation of PAM-dependent genotypic changes represents a critical bridge between targeted genome editing and meaningful crop improvement. As editing technologies continue to evolve—with prime editing systems showing particular promise for precise modifications—the validation frameworks must similarly advance in sophistication and comprehensiveness [11]. The integration of multi-omics data, pan-transcriptome resources, and AI-driven predictive models will increasingly enable researchers to anticipate and confirm the phenotypic outcomes of precise genotypic changes [107] [108].

Future directions in functional validation will likely emphasize multi-environment field testing to account for substantial genotype by environment interactions that characterize complex agronomic traits [106], coupled with advanced molecular profiling to understand the broader transcriptional and regulatory consequences of targeted edits [107]. By implementing the comprehensive validation framework outlined in this technical guide, researchers can more effectively connect PAM-dependent genotypic changes to phenotypic traits, accelerating the development of improved crop varieties with enhanced productivity, resilience, and nutritional quality.

Conclusion

The protospacer adjacent motif represents both a fundamental requirement and a significant opportunity for advancement in crop genome editing. As this analysis demonstrates, understanding PAM biology enables researchers to select appropriate CRISPR systems, while emerging strategies to engineer novel Cas variants with relaxed PAM requirements are progressively eliminating targeting constraints. The successful application of these technologies in crops like rice and soybean highlights their transformative potential for developing varieties with enhanced yield, nutrition, and stress resilience. Future directions will likely focus on developing PAM-agnostic editing systems, refining predictive algorithms for PAM functionality in complex crop genomes, and establishing standardized validation frameworks to ensure the precise and safe application of these powerful tools. For biomedical research, the methodologies and optimization strategies developed in plant systems offer valuable cross-disciplinary insights for therapeutic genome editing applications.

References

• 1. Protospacer adjacent motif [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protospacer_adjacent_motif]
• 2. Importance of the PAM Sequence in CRISPR Experiments [https://www.synthego.com/guide/how-to-use-crispr/pam-sequence/]
• 3. Protospacer Adjacent Motif-Induced Allostery Activates ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5905990/]
• 4. Mechanism and Applications of CRISPR/Cas-9-Mediated ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8388126/]
• 5. Emerging applications of gene editing technologies for the ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/genome-editing/articles/10.3389/fgeed.2025.1524767/full]
• 6. Rapid characterization of CRISPR-Cas9 protospacer adjacent ... [https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-015-0818-7]
• 7. Engineered CRISPR-Cas9 nucleases with altered PAM ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4540238/]
• 8. Utilizing Target Sequences with Multiple Flanking ... [https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4425/16/2/217]
• 9. Plant base editing: a decade of progress and future ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2662173825002103]
• 10. PAM identification by CRISPR-Cas effector complexes [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6546366/]
• 11. Prime Editing for Crop Improvement: A Systematic Review ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12385346/]
• 12. GenomePAM directs PAM characterization and ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41551-025-01464-y]
• 13. Mechanistic study of the immune defense function ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12269653/]
• 14. The Enhancement of Plant Disease Resistance Using ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6117396/]
• 15. Advancing crop disease resistance through genome editing [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/genome-editing/articles/10.3389/fgeed.2024.1399051/full]
• 16. CRISPR technologies and the search for the PAM-free ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-20633-y]
• 17. Flexibility in PAM recognition expands DNA targeting ... [https://elifesciences.org/articles/102538]
• 18. Development of PAM-flexible multiplex genome editors for ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214514125000571]
• 19. Directed evolution expands CRISPR–Cas12a genome- ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12266133/]
• 20. Exonuclease-fused CRISPR-cas system enhances ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12490065/]
• 21. A Cas12a ortholog with stringent PAM recognition followed by ... [https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-020-01989-2]
• 22. Cas12a variants designed for lower genome-wide off- ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1525001621005177]
• 23. Characterization of diverse Cas9 orthologs for genome and ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11929499/]
• 24. engineering and discovery of PAM-flexible Cas proteins [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0966842X24001355]
• 25. PAM-flexible genome editing with an engineered chimeric ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-023-41829-y]
• 26. Closely related type II-C Cas9 orthologs recognize diverse ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9433092/]
• 27. Unlock CRISPR Gene Editing Potential: PAM sequences [https://www.idtdna.com/page/support-and-education/decoded-plus/crispr-cas-nucleases-understanding-pam-requirements-and-cas-diversification-strategies/]
• 28. Utilizing Target Sequences with Multiple Flanking Protospacer ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11855603/]
• 29. Construction of multi-targeted CRISPR libraries in tomato ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-025-59280-6]
• 30. Emerging trends in the development of efficient CAS ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0168945225004388]
• 31. CRISPR/Cas9 and its derivatives to improve crop biotic ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0885576524002662]
• 32. Novel CRISPR/Cas applications in plants: from prime editing ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8316200/]
• 33. CRISPR Guide [https://www.addgene.org/guides/crispr/]
• 34. Prime Editing for Crop Improvement: A Systematic Review ... [https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4425/16/8/965]
• 35. Design of highly functional genome editors by modelling ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-025-09298-z]
• 36. Comprehensive approaches to design efficient gRNA for ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/genome-editing/articles/10.3389/fgeed.2025.1579165/full]
• 37. Comprehensive approaches to design efficient gRNA for ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12259558/]
• 38. A Guide to Efficient CRISPR gRNA Design: Principles and ... [https://www.genscript.com/a-guide-to-efficient-crispr-grna-design-principles-and-design-tools.html]
• 39. CRISPR/Cas-Mediated Optimization of Soybean Shoot ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12386838/]
• 40. Review Article CRISPR/Cas genome editing in soybean [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2090123224003679]
• 41. CARBON Newsletter (28 January 2025) - Your Latest ... [https://crisprmedicinenews.com/news/carbon-newsletter-28-january-2025-your-latest-news-about-crispr-in-agrobio/]
• 42. CRISPR/Cas9 multiplex genome editing to enhance grain ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214662825000581]
• 43. Soybean Molecular Breeding Through Genome Editing Tools [https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4395/15/8/1983]
• 44. Genome editing in maize and sorghum [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12052613/]
• 45. Integrating genome editing with omics, artificial intelligence ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12281252/]
• 46. Emerging trends in prime editing for precision genome ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s12276-025-01463-8]
• 47. Genome Editing Tools in Plants - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5748717/]
• 48. CRISPR/Cas9: A powerful tool for crop genome editing [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214514116000192]
• 49. PAM-less plant genome editing using a CRISPR–SpRY ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41477-020-00827-4]
• 50. Prime editing using paired pegRNAs targeting NG- or NGG ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/genome-editing/articles/10.3389/fgeed.2025.1550308/full]
• 51. Protospacer Adjacent Motif - an overview [https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/biochemistry-genetics-and-molecular-biology/protospacer-adjacent-motif]
• 52. Current Status of Research, Regulations, and Future ... [https://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/publication/HS1315]
• 53. Base editing in crops: current advances, limitations and ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6920333/]
• 54. Monocotyledon [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monocotyledon]
• 55. Monocots vs Dicots: What You Need To Know [https://www.holganix.com/blog/monocots-vs-dicots-what-you-need-to-know]
• 56. Integrating genome editing with omics, artificial intelligence ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590346225001488]
• 57. CRISPR/Cas9 Technology and Its Utility for Crop Improvement [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9499353/]
• 58. CRISPR for Crop Improvement: An Update Review [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/plant-science/articles/10.3389/fpls.2018.00985/full]
• 59. Genome Engineering in Rice Using Cas9 Variants that ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1674205219301224]
• 60. Genome Engineering in Plant Using an Efficient CRISPR ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8525348/]
• 61. Improving gene editing of CRISPR/Cas9 using the callus ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/plant-science/articles/10.3389/fpls.2025.1600438/full]
• 62. PAM sequences and considerations for CRISPR | IDT [https://www.idtdna.com/page/support-and-education/decoded-plus/importance-of-the-pam-sequences-in-crispr-cas9-gene-editing/]
• 63. Improving Plant Genome Editing with High-Fidelity xCas9 ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1674205219301248]
• 64. Crop bioengineering via gene editing: reshaping the future of ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10944814/]
• 65. Structural basis for the canonical and non-canonical PAM ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5957536/]
• 66. Comparison of non-canonical PAMs for CRISPR/Cas9 ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/srep05405]
• 67. Applications and potential of genome editing in crop ... [https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-018-1586-y]
• 68. 科研进展！张勇课题组开发基于CRISPR-Cas12i核酸酶的 ... [https://zzcz.swu.edu.cn/info/1132/2092.htm]
• 69. how conformational regulation of CRISPR-Cas effectors ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12599258/]
• 70. An insight into the journey of CRISPR-CAS9 and its ... [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s44372-025-00343-9]
• 71. Transforming Plant Breeding for Crop Improvement and ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41165418/?utm_source=FeedFetcher&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=None&utm_content=1xSjLNP-2lGFmiI8iZJcBJ7eQzwrH7r3HJMuwSCBD7uts8h9bB&fc=None&ff=20251030221730&v=2.18.0.post22+67771e2]
• 72. Application of a multiplex CRISPR/Cas9 strategy for ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/genome-editing/articles/10.3389/fgeed.2025.1633104/full]
• 73. Regular Plasmid gRNA Expression Vector | VectorBuilder [https://en.vectorbuilder.com/resources/vector-system/pRP_gRNA_parent.html]
• 74. Maximizing Gene Expression: Strategies and Techniques [https://www.numberanalytics.com/blog/maximizing-gene-expression-strategies-techniques]
• 75. CRISPR/Cas9 Delivery Systems to Enhance Gene Editing ... [https://www.mdpi.com/1422-0067/26/9/4420]
• 76. Protocol for transformation-free genome editing in plants ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666166724006026]
• 77. CRISPR Clinical Trials: A 2025 Update [https://innovativegenomics.org/news/crispr-clinical-trials-2025/]
• 78. Engineered dual selection for directed evolution of SpCas9 PAM ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7807044/]
• 79. Prime editor with rational design and AI-driven optimization for... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-025-60495-w?error=cookies_not_supported&code=626aed9d-2e40-4af5-bbdd-6ae30e113232]
• 80. CRISPR-GPT for agentic automation of gene-editing ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41551-025-01463-z]
• 81. Unlocking crop resilience through CRISPR Cas9 mediated ... [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s44372-025-00408-9]
• 82. DNA damage and repair in plants – from models to crops - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4617055/]
• 83. The Plant DNA Damage Response: Signaling Pathways ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/plant-science/articles/10.3389/fpls.2019.00653/full]
• 84. Optimizing Chemical Reactions: A Guide to Refining Key ... [https://wnynewsnow.com/2025/08/02/optimizing-chemical-reactions-a-guide-to-refining-key-parameters/]
• 85. In-depth assessment of the PAM compatibility and editing ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8421146/]
• 86. Methods for detecting off-target effects of CRISPR/Cas9 [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0734975025002368]
• 87. Off-target Effects in CRISPR/Cas9-mediated Genome ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S216225311630049X]
• 88. Exploring CRISPR-Cas: The transformative impact of gene ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12506487/]
• 89. Off-target effects in CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10034092/]
• 90. CRISPR Off-Target Editing: Prediction, Analysis, and More [https://www.synthego.com/blog/crispr-off-target-editing/]
• 91. The hidden risks of CRISPR/Cas: structural variations and ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-025-62606-z]
• 92. Plant Genome Editing and the Relevance of Off-Target ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7401131/]
• 93. A long journey towards genome editing technologies in ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/genome-editing/articles/10.3389/fgeed.2025.1663352/full]
• 94. Systemic evaluation of various CRISPR/Cas13 orthologs for ... [https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-024-03448-8]
• 95. Improving adenine base editing precision by enlarging the ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-025-57154-5]
• 96. Engineering an optimized hypercompact CRISPR/Cas12j‐8 ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11933828/]
• 97. PAMPHLET: PAM Prediction HomoLogous-Enhancement ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1673852724002881]
• 98. Review Advancing CRISPR with deep learning [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2162253125002458]
• 99. Programmable genome engineering and gene modifications ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12365832/]
• 100. Emerging applications of gene editing technologies for the ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11931038/]
• 101. Precision Breeding Made Real with CRISPR - PubMed Central [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7747970/]
• 102. CRISPR/CAS9: A new paradigm for crop improvement ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666154322002174]
• 103. Viral delivery of an RNA-guided genome editor for ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41477-025-01989-9]
• 104. CRISPR/Cas technology in vegetable crops for improving ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304423825000081]
• 105. Advances in Crop Breeding Through Precision Genome ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/genetics/articles/10.3389/fgene.2022.880195/full]
• 106. Analyses of phenotypic and genomic based genetic ... [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10681-025-03594-5]
• 107. Pan-transcriptome links transcriptional complexity to functional ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12447408/]
• 108. Evolution of agricultural biotechnology is the paradigm shift ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12222179/]