Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27698470›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2016

Exome sequencing in the knockin mice generated using the CRISPR/Cas system.

Kazuo Nakajima, An-A Kazuno, John Kelsoe, Moe Nakanishi, Toru Takumi, Tadafumi Kato

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Efficient Genome Editing of Mice by CRISPR Electroporation of Zygotes.Journal of visualized experiments : JoVE · 2022
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Variability in Genome Editing Outcomes: Challenges for Research Reproducibility and Clinical Safety.Molecular therapy : the journal of the American Society of Gene Therapy · 2020
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. eLife · 2019
    Article
  16. Off- and on-target effects of genome editing in mouse embryos.The Journal of reproduction and development · 2019
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Kazuo NakajimaLaboratory for Molecular Dynamics of Mental Disorders, RIKEN Brain Science Institute, Wako, Saitama 351-0198, Japan.
An-A KazunoLaboratory for Molecular Dynamics of Mental Disorders, RIKEN Brain Science Institute, Wako, Saitama 351-0198, Japan.
John KelsoeDepartment of Psychiatry, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093, USA.
Moe NakanishiLaboratory for Mind Biology, RIKEN Brain Science Institute, Wako, Saitama 351-0198, Japan.
Toru TakumiLaboratory for Mind Biology, RIKEN Brain Science Institute, Wako, Saitama 351-0198, Japan.
Tadafumi KatoLaboratory for Molecular Dynamics of Mental Disorders, RIKEN Brain Science Institute, Wako, Saitama 351-0198, Japan.
RIKEN Center for Brain Science · JPUniversity of California, San Diego · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Knockin (KI) mouse carrying a point mutation has been an invaluable tool for disease modeling and analysis. Genome editing technologies using the CRISPR/Cas system has emerged as an alternative way to create KI mice. However, if the mice carry nucleotide insertions and/or deletions (InDels) in other genes, which could have unintentionally occurred during the establishment of the KI mouse line and potentially have larger impact than a point mutation, it would confound phenotyping of the KI mice. In this study, we performed whole exome sequencing of multiple lines of F1 heterozygous Ntrk1 KI mice generated using the CRISPR/Cas system in comparison to that of a wild-type mouse used as a control. We found three InDels in four KI mice but not in a control mouse. In vitro digestion assay suggested that each InDel occurred as a de novo mutation, was carried-over from the parental mice, or was incorporated through the Cas9 nuclease mediated off-target cleavage. These results suggest that frequency of InDels found in KI mice generated by the CRISPR/Cas technology is not high, but cannot be neglected and careful assessment of these mutations is warranted.

Indexed as

CRISPR-Cas SystemsExomeINDEL MutationAnimalsBase SequenceClustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic RepeatsEndonucleasesExome SequencingFemaleFounder EffectGene EditingGene ExpressionGene Knock-In TechniquesMaleMiceMice, TransgenicEndonucleasesReceptor, trkARNA, Guide, CRISPR-Cas Systems

Identifiers

PMID27698470
PMCPMC5048150
OpenAlexW2528045206

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.