ArticleScientific reports2016
A simple and efficient method to visualize and quantify the efficiency of chromosomal mutations from genome editing.
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 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Protocol for streamlining genotyping of germline-transmissible mutants from genome editing by using a parallel qPCR-based index and R analysis.STAR protocols · 2026Article
- Simplifying Genotyping of Mutants from Genome Editing with a Parallel qPCR-Based iGenotype Index.Cells · 2024Article
- Competitive PCR with dual fluorescent primers enhances the specificity and reproducibility of genotyping animals generated from genome editing.Cell & bioscience · 2023Article
- A Role of Endogenous Histone Acetyltransferase Steroid Hormone Receptor Coactivator 3 in Thyroid Hormone Signaling DuringThyroid : official journal of the American Thyroid Association · 2021Article
- Functional Studies of Transcriptional Cofactors via Microinjection-Mediated Gene Editing in Xenopus.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2019Article
- Role of Thyroid Hormone Receptor in Amphibian Development.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Genome editing with designer nucleases such as TALEN and CRISPR/Cas enzymes has broad applications. Delivery of these designer nucleases into organisms induces various genetic mutations including deletions, insertions and nucleotide substitutions. Characterizing those mutations is critical for evaluating the efficacy and specificity of targeted genome editing. While a number of methods have been developed to identify the mutations, none other than sequencing allows the identification of the most desired mutations, i.e., out-of-frame insertions/deletions that disrupt genes. Here we report a simple and efficient method to visualize and quantify the efficiency of genomic mutations induced by genome-editing. Our approach is based on the expression of a two-color fusion protein in a vector that allows the insertion of the edited region in the genome in between the two color moieties. We show that our approach not only easily identifies developing animals with desired mutations but also efficiently quantifies the mutation rate in vivo. Furthermore, by using LacZα and GFP as the color moieties, our approach can even eliminate the need for a fluorescent microscope, allowing the analysis with simple bright field visualization. Such an approach will greatly simplify the screen for effective genome-editing enzymes and identify the desired mutant cells/animals.
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.