ReviewPlant cell reports2016
Genome editing: intellectual property and product development in plant biotechnology.
Review 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 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- CRISPR-Cas technology in corn: a new key to unlock genetic knowledge and create novel products.Molecular breeding : new strategies in plant improvement · 2021Article
- Genome Editing in Cereals: Approaches, Applications and Challenges.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020Review
- Genetic Transformation and Genomic Resources for Next-Generation Precise Genome Engineering in Vegetable Crops.Frontiers in plant science · 2017Review
- Patterns of CRISPR/Cas9 activity in plants, animals and microbes.Plant biotechnology journal · 2016Review
- Next-generation precision genome engineering and plant biotechnology.Plant cell reports · 2016Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Genome editing is a revolutionary technology in molecular biology. While scientists are fascinated with the unlimited possibilities provided by directed and controlled changes in DNA in eukaryotes and have eagerly adopted such tools for their own experiments, an understanding of the intellectual property (IP) implications involved in bringing genome editing-derived products to market is often lacking. Due to the ingenuity of genome editing, the time between new product conception and its actual existence can be relatively short; therefore knowledge about IP of the various genome editing methods is relevant. This point must be regarded in a national framework as patents are instituted nationally. Therefore, when designing scientific work that could lead to a product, it is worthwhile to consider the different methods used for genome editing not only for their scientific merits but also for their compatibility with a speedy and reliable launch into the desired market.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27146974What 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.