ReviewBMC biotechnology2013
Less is more: strategies to remove marker genes from transgenic plants.
Review in BMC biotechnology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
53 citing papers in PubMed, 120 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evolution and implementation of EU regulation on new genomic techniques.Nature plants · 2026Article
- Risk assessment of plant-to-bacterium transgene flow associated with novel small synthetic genome (minisynplastome) platforms for plastid genetic engineering.FEMS microbiology ecology · 2026Article
- Recent advances in site-specific transgene insertion into the maize genome using recombinases and genome editing endonucleases.Frontiers in plant science · 2025Review
- Next-generation marker-free transplastomic plants: engineering the chloroplast genome without integration of marker genes in Solanum tuberosum (potato).Plant cell reports · 2024Article
- Overview on Current Selectable Marker Systems and Novel Marker Free Approaches in Fruit Tree Genetic Engineering.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Transgene Bioconfinement: Don't Flow There.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Strategies for delivery of CRISPR/Cas-mediated genome editing to obtain edited plants directly without transgene integration.Frontiers in genome editing · 2023Review
- A CRISPR/Cas9-Based System with Controllable Auto-Excision Feature Serving Cisgenic Plant Breeding and Beyond.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
- Clean gene technology to develop selectable marker-free pod borer-resistant transgenic pigeon pea events involving the constitutive expression of Cry1Ac.Applied microbiology and biotechnology · 2022Article
- Chili PepperPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- I-SceI and customized meganucleases-mediated genome editing in tomato and oilseed rape.Transgenic research · 2022Article
- A Prospective Review on Selectable Marker-Free Genome Engineered Rice: Past, Present and Future Scientific Realm.Frontiers in genetics · 2022Review
- CRISPR/Cas9 and Nanotechnology Pertinence in Agricultural Crop Refinement.Frontiers in plant science · 2022Review
- Multigene Transformation Through Cre-lox Mediated Site-Specific Integration in Rice.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2022Article
- Selection of transgenic citrus plants based on glyphosate tolerance conferred by a citrus 5-enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate synthase variant.Plant cell reports · 2021Article
- Development of marker-free insect resistant transgenic okra (Physiology and molecular biology of plants : an international journal of functional plant biology · 2021Article
- Inducible Selectable Marker Genes to ImproveJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Targeted DNA insertion in plants.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021Review
- Fruit crops in the era of genome editing: closing the regulatory gap.Plant cell reports · 2021Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Selectable marker genes (SMGs) and selection agents are useful tools in the production of transgenic plants by selecting transformed cells from a matrix consisting of mostly untransformed cells. Most SMGs express protein products that confer antibiotic- or herbicide resistance traits, and typically reside in the end product of genetically-modified (GM) plants. The presence of these genes in GM plants, and subsequently in food, feed and the environment, are of concern and subject to special government regulation in many countries. The presence of SMGs in GM plants might also, in some cases, result in a metabolic burden for the host plants. Their use also prevents the re-use of the same SMG when a second transformation scheme is needed to be performed on the transgenic host. In recent years, several strategies have been developed to remove SMGs from GM products while retaining the transgenes of interest. This review describes the existing strategies for SMG removal, including the implementation of site specific recombination systems, TALENs and ZFNs. This review discusses the advantages and disadvantages of existing SMG-removal strategies and explores possible future research directions for SMG removal including emerging technologies for increased precision for genome modification.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.