Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26685665›Full record

ArticlePlant cell reports2016

Development of a rapid, low-cost protoplast transfection system for switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L.).

Kellie P Burris, Elizabeth M Dlugosz, A Grace Collins, C Neal Stewart, Scott C Lenaghan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Plant cell reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed
–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

30 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Beyond a few bases: methods for large DNA insertion and gene targeting in plants.The Plant journal : for cell and molecular biology · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Advances inFrontiers in plant science · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. ZCTs knockdown using antisense LNA GapmeR in specialized photomixotrophic cell suspensions ofPhysiology and molecular biology of plants : an international journal of functional plant biology · 2021
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

5 authors.

Kellie P BurrisDepartment of Plant Sciences, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN, 37996, USA.
Elizabeth M DlugoszDepartment of Plant Sciences, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN, 37996, USA.
A Grace CollinsDepartment of Plant Sciences, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN, 37996, USA.
C Neal StewartDepartment of Plant Sciences, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN, 37996, USA.
Scott C LenaghanCenter for Renewable Carbon, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN, 37996, USA. slenagha@utk.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

key messageA switchgrass protoplast system was developed, achieving a cost reduction of ~1000-fold, a threefold increase in transformation efficiency, and a fourfold reduction in required DNA quantity compared to previous methods. In recent years, there has been a resurgence in the use of protoplast systems for rapid screening of gene silencing and genome-editing targets for siRNA, miRNA, and CRISPR technologies. In the case of switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L.), to achieve economic feasibility for biofuel production, it is necessary to develop plants with decreased cell wall recalcitrance to reduce processing costs. To achieve this goal, transgenic plants have been generated with altered cell wall chemistry; however, with limited success owing to the complexity of cell walls. Because of the considerable cost, time, and effort required to screen transgenic plants, a protoplast system that can provide data at an early stage has potential to eliminate low performing candidate genes/targets prior to the creation of transgenic plants. Despite the advantages of protoplast systems, protoplast isolation in switchgrass has proven costly, requiring expensive lab-grade enzymes and high DNA quantities. In this paper, we describe a low-cost protoplast isolation system using a mesophyll culture approach and a cell suspension culture. Results from this work show a cost reduction of ~1000-fold compared to previous methods of protoplast isolation in switchgrass, with a cost of $0.003 (USD) per reaction for mesophyll protoplasts and $0.018 for axenic cell culture-derived protoplasts. Further, the efficiency of protoplast transformation was optimized threefold over previous methods, despite a fourfold reduction in DNA quantity. The methods developed in this work remove the cost barrier previously limiting high-throughput screening of genome-editing and gene silencing targets in switchgrass, paving the way for more efficient development of transgenic plants.

Indexed as

BiofuelsCell Culture TechniquesCell WallCost-Benefit AnalysisLuminescent ProteinsMicroscopy, FluorescencePanicumPlant LeavesPlant ProteinsPlants, Genetically ModifiedPlasmidsPromoter Regions, GeneticProtoplastsReproducibility of ResultsTransfectionBiofuelsLuminescent ProteinsPlant ProteinsEnzymatic digestionProtoplastsSwitchgrassTransformation

Identifiers

PMID26685665
PMCPMC4757626

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.