Synth Biol 6(3):428–438. https://doi.org/10.
1021/acssynbio.5b00299
36. Uusi-M€ akel€ a MIE, Barker HR, B€ auerlein CA
et al (2018) Chromatin accessibility is associated with CRISPR-Cas9 efficiency in the zebrafish (Danio rerio). PLoS One 13(4):
e0196238. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.
pone.0196238
37. Jensen KT, Fløe L, Petersen TS et al (2017)
Chromatin accessibility and guide sequence
secondary structure affect CRISPR-Cas9 gene
editing
efficiency.
FEBS
Lett
591
(13):1892–1901. https://doi.org/10.1002/
1873-3468.12707
38. Zuker M (2003) Mfold web server for nucleic
acid folding and hybridization prediction.
Nucleic Acids Res 31(13):3406–3415.
https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkg595
39. Hofacker IL (2003) Vienna RNA secondary
structure server. Nucleic Acids Res 31
(13):3429–3431. https://doi.org/10.1093/
nar/gkg599
40. Liu H, Ding Y, Zhou Y et al (2017) CRISPR-P
2.0: an improved CRISPR-Cas9 tool for
genome editing in plants. Mol Plant 10
(3):530–532.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
molp.2017.01.003
41. Stemmer M, Thumberger T, Del Sol KM et al
(2015) CCTop: an intuitive, flexible and reliable CRISPR/Cas9 target prediction tool.
PLoS One 10(4):e0124633. https://doi.org/
10.1371/journal.pone.0124633
42. Bae S, Park J, Kim J-S (2014) Cas-OFFinder: a
fast and versatile algorithm that searches for
potential off-target sites of Cas9 RNA-guided
endonucleases.
Bioinformatics
30
(10):1473–1475. https://doi.org/10.1093/
bioinformatics/btu048
43. Park J, Bae S, Kim J-S (2015) Cas-Designer: a
web-based tool for choice of CRISPR-Cas9
target
sites.
Bioinformatics
31
(24):4014–4016. https://doi.org/10.1093/
bioinformatics/btv537
44. Lee CM, Davis TH, Bao G (2018) Examination of CRISPR/Cas9 design tools and the
effect of target site accessibility on Cas9 activity. Exp Physiol 103(4):456–460. https://doi.
org/10.1113/EP086043
342
Patrick Schindele et al.