Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26400270›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2015

Targeted mutations in myostatin by zinc-finger nucleases result in double-muscled phenotype in Meishan pigs.

Lili Qian, Maoxue Tang, Jinzeng Yang, Qingqing Wang, Chunbo Cai, Shengwang Jiang, Hegang Li, Ke Jiang, Pengfei Gao, Dezun Ma and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 89 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
89citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

89 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. The ethics of genome editing in non-human animals: a systematic review of reasons reported in the academic literature.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2019
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Pig Genome Editing for Agriculture: Achievements and Challenges.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. AeLife · 2024
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

29 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

14 authors.

Lili QianInstitute of Animal Sciences, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, P.R. China.
Maoxue TangInstitute of Animal Sciences, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, P.R. China.
Jinzeng YangDept of Human Nutrition, Food and Animal Sciences, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Honolulu, Hawaii 96822, USA.
Qingqing WangInstitute of Animal Sciences, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, P.R. China.
Chunbo CaiInstitute of Animal Sciences, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, P.R. China.
Shengwang JiangInstitute of Animal Sciences, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, P.R. China.
Hegang LiInstitute of Animal Sciences, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, P.R. China.
Ke JiangInstitute of Animal Sciences, Qingdao, 266100, P.R. China.
Pengfei GaoInstitute of Animal Sciences, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, P.R. China.
Dezun MaInstitute of Animal Sciences, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, P.R. China.
Yaoxing ChenCollege of Animal Medicine, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, P.R. China.
Xiaorong AnState Key Laboratory of Agrobiotechnology, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100193, P.R. China.
Kui LiInstitute of Animal Sciences, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, P.R. China.
Wentao CuiInstitute of Animal Sciences, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, P.R. China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Myostatin (MSTN) is a dominant inhibitor of skeletal muscle development and growth. Mutations in MSTN gene can lead to muscle hypertrophy or double-muscled (DM) phenotype in cattle, sheep, dog and human. However, there has not been reported significant muscle phenotypes in pigs in association with MSTN mutations. Pigs are an important source of meat production, as well as serve as a preferred animal model for the studies of human disease. To study the impacts of MSTN mutations on skeletal muscle growth in pigs, we generated MSTN-mutant Meishan pigs with no marker gene via zinc finger nucleases (ZFN) technology. The MSTN-mutant pigs developed and grew normally, had increased muscle mass with decreased fat accumulation compared with wild type pigs, and homozygote MSTN mutant (MSTN(-/-)) pigs had apparent DM phenotype, and individual muscle mass increased by 100% over their wild-type controls (MSTN(+/+)) at eight months of age as a result of myofiber hyperplasia. Interestingly, 20% MSTN-mutant pigs had one extra thoracic vertebra. The MSTN-mutant pigs will not only offer a way of fast genetic improvement of lean meat for local fat-type indigenous pig breeds, but also serve as an important large animal model for biomedical studies of musculoskeletal formation, development and diseases.

Indexed as

Gene TargetingGenetic Association StudiesMutationPhenotypeZinc FingersAnimalsAnimals, Genetically ModifiedBase SequenceDNA Mutational AnalysisEndonucleasesFood QualityGene ExpressionGene Knockout TechniquesGenotypeHypertrophyMuscle, SkeletalEndonucleasesMyostatinRNA, Messenger

Identifiers

PMID26400270
PMCPMC4585837

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.