b788a707887a79434941ee37b1c5f5c496995c70 kuhn Thu Jan 20 07:14:25 2022 -0800 added definition of CFD score diff --git src/hg/makeDb/trackDb/crisprAll.html src/hg/makeDb/trackDb/crisprAll.html index 154f5e0..7db918b 100644 --- src/hg/makeDb/trackDb/crisprAll.html +++ src/hg/makeDb/trackDb/crisprAll.html @@ -55,31 +55,32 @@ also shown in parentheses after the percentile.

The Moreno-Mateos 2015 Efficiency score should be used instead of the Doench 2016 score when transcribing the guide in vitro with a T7 promoter, e.g. for injections in mouse, zebrafish or Xenopus embryos. The Moreno-Mateos score is given in percentiles and the raw value in parentheses, see the note above.

Click onto features to show all scores and predicted off-targets with up to four mismatches. The Out-of-Frame score by Bae et al. 2014 is correlated with the probability that mutations induced by the guide RNA will disrupt the open reading frame. The authors recommend out-of-frame scores > 66 to create knock-outs with a single guide efficiently.

Off-target sites are sorted by the CFD score (Off-target sites are sorted by the CFD (Cutting Frequency Determination) +score (Doench et al. 2016). The higher the CFD score, the more likely there is off-target cleavage at that site. Off-targets with a CFD score < 0.023 are not shown on this page, but are available when following the link to the external CRISPOR tool. When compared against experimentally validated off-targets by Haeussler et al. 2016, the large majority of predicted off-targets with CFD scores < 0.023 were false-positives. For storage and performance reasons, on the level of individual off-targets, only CFD scores are available.

Methods

Relationship between predictions and experimental data

Like most algorithms, the MIT specificity score is not always a perfect