Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26336798›Full record

ReviewJournal of genetics and genomics = Yi chuan xue bao2015

The application of CRISPR-Cas9 genome editing in Caenorhabditis elegans.

Suhong Xu

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of genetics and genomics = Yi chuan xue bao, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Neuronal IL-17 controlsProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    Article
  3. Article
  4. TheGenetics · 2019
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Suhong XuDivision of Biological Sciences, Section of Cell and Developmental Biology, University of California, San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive, La Jolla, CA 92093, USA. Electronic address: suhongxu@gmail.com.
University of California, San Diego · US

Funding

Mechanisms of Tissue Morphogenesis in C. elegansR01GM054657 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SANTA CRUZ · PI CHISHOLM, ANDREW D · 1997 to 2018
$5.8M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM054657
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genome editing using the Cas9 endonuclease of Streptococcus pyogenes has demonstrated unparalleled efficacy and facility for modifying genomes in a wide variety of organisms. Caenorhabditis elegans is one of the most convenient multicellular organisms for genetic analysis, and the application of this novel genome editing technique to this organism promises to revolutionize analysis of gene function in the future. CRISPR-Cas9 has been successfully used to generate imprecise insertions and deletions via non-homologous end-joining mechanisms and to create precise mutations by homology-directed repair from donor templates. Key variables are the methods used to deliver the Cas9 endonuclease and the efficiency of the single guide RNAs. CRISPR-Cas9-mediated editing appears to be highly specific in C. elegans, with no reported off-target effects. In this review, I briefly summarize recent progress in CRISPR-Cas9-based genome editing in C. elegans, highlighting technical improvements in mutagenesis and mutation detection, and discuss potential future applications of this technique.

Indexed as

CRISPR-Cas SystemsGenetic EngineeringAnimalsCaenorhabditis elegansDNA End-Joining RepairEndonucleasesGenome, HelminthMutagenesis, InsertionalStreptococcus pyogenesEndonucleasesCas9C. elegansCRISPRGenome editingHomology-directed repair (HDR)Non-homologous end-joining (NHEJ)Somatic mutation

Identifiers

PMID26336798
PMCPMC4560834
OpenAlexW2212495537

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.