ArticlePloS one2015
Redesigning Recombinase Specificity for Safe Harbor Sites in the Human Genome.
Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Design and in silico validation of donor DNA for RNA-guided recombinase-mediated knockout of mstnb gene in Labeo rohita.PloS one · 2026Article
- Recent advances in CRISPR-Cas9-based genome insertion technologies.Molecular therapy. Nucleic acids · 2024Review
- RNA-Guided Recombinase-Cas9 Fusion Targets Genomic DNA Deletion and Integration.The CRISPR journal · 2019Article
- (Epi)genetic Modifications in Myogenic Stem Cells: From Novel Insights to Therapeutic Perspectives.Cells · 2019Review
- Uniform Expression and Relatively Small Position Effects Characterize Sister Transformants in Maize and Soybean.Frontiers in plant science · 2019Article
- Patient-Specific iPSC-Derived Endothelial Cells Provide Long-Term Phenotypic Correction of Hemophilia A.Stem cell reports · 2018Article
- Engineering altered protein-DNA recognition specificity.Nucleic acids research · 2018Review
- Beyond editing to writing large genomes.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2017Article
- Multiple expression cassette exchange via TP901-1, R4, and Bxb1 integrase systems on a mouse artificial chromosome.FEBS open bio · 2017Article
- Genome-Editing Technologies: Principles and Applications.Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in biology · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Site-specific recombinases (SSRs) are valuable tools for genetic engineering due to their ability to manipulate DNA in a highly specific manner. Engineered zinc-finger and TAL effector recombinases, in particular, are two classes of SSRs composed of custom-designed DNA-binding domains fused to a catalytic domain derived from the resolvase/invertase family of serine recombinases. While TAL effector and zinc-finger proteins can be assembled to recognize a wide range of possible DNA sequences, recombinase catalytic specificity has been constrained by inherent base requirements present within each enzyme. In order to further expand the targeted recombinase repertoire, we used a genetic screen to isolate enhanced mutants of the Bin and Tn21 recombinases that recognize target sites outside the scope of other engineered recombinases. We determined the specific base requirements for recombination by these enzymes and demonstrate their potential for genome engineering by selecting for variants capable of specifically recombining target sites present in the human CCR5 gene and the AAVS1 safe harbor locus. Taken together, these findings demonstrate that complementing functional characterization with protein engineering is a potentially powerful approach for generating recombinases with expanded targeting capabilities.
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.