Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2017 Sep 1.
Published in final edited form as: Hum Genet. 2016 Jul 7;135(9):971–976. doi: 10.1007/s00439-016-1704-4

Figure 1. Comparison of traditional and CRISPR-based genome editing technologies for inserting a point mutation.

Figure 1

The ES cell-based traditional methods (shown on left) require the use of a targeting vector that contains additional elements (such as a positive selection marker) which get inserted and leave a footprint in the genome. Alternatively, the CRISPR approach (shown on right) enables scarless genome editing. The Cas9 protein and guide RNA help insert the mutation (provided as a repair oligo) at the target site.