Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27313592›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in plant science2016

An Overview of CRISPR-Based Tools and Their Improvements: New Opportunities in Understanding Plant-Pathogen Interactions for Better Crop Protection.

Abdellah Barakate, Jennifer Stephens

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in plant science, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
5.0field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 61 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. CRISPR/Cas9-Mediated Multiplex Genome Editing of theInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2018
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Transcriptomes Divergence ofFrontiers in genetics · 2018
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Abdellah BarakateCell and Molecular Sciences, The James Hutton Institute Dundee, UK.
Jennifer StephensCell and Molecular Sciences, The James Hutton Institute Dundee, UK.
James Hutton Institute · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Modern omics platforms have made the determination of susceptible/resistance genes feasible in any species generating huge numbers of potential targets for crop protection. However, the efforts to validate these targets have been hampered by the lack of a fast, precise, and efficient gene targeting system in plants. Now, the repurposing of clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR)/CRISPR-associated protein 9 (Cas9) system has solved this problem. CRISPR/Cas9 is the latest synthetic endonuclease that has revolutionized basic research by allowing facile genome editing in prokaryotes and eukaryotes. Gene knockout is now feasible at an unprecedented efficiency with the possibility of multiplexing several targets and even genome-wide mutagenesis screening. In a short time, this powerful tool has been engineered for an array of applications beyond gene editing. Here, we briefly describe the CRISPR/Cas9 system, its recent improvements and applications in gene manipulation and single DNA/RNA molecule analysis. We summarize a few recent tests targeting plant pathogens and discuss further potential applications in pest control and plant-pathogen interactions that will inform plant breeding for crop protection.

Indexed as

CRISPR/Cas9DNA double-stranded breakgene editinghomologous recombinationnon-homologous end joiningplant–pathogen interactions

Identifiers

PMID27313592
PMCPMC4887484
OpenAlexW2414643134

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.