Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28533524›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2017

Enhancing the genome editing toolbox: genome wide CRISPR arrayed libraries.

Emmanouil Metzakopian, Alex Strong, Vivek Iyer, Alex Hodgkins, Konstantinos Tzelepis, Liliana Antunes, Mathias J Friedrich, Qiaohua Kang, Teresa Davidson, Jacob Lamberth and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 46 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Science advances · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. De novo assembly and annotation of the CHOZN® GSBiotechnology and bioengineering · 2022
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Can thiol-based redox systems be utilized as parts for synthetic biology applications?Redox report : communications in free radical research · 2021
    Article
  13. Nuisance compounds in cellular assays.Cell chemical biology · 2021
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Chemogenetic interactions in human cancer cells.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2019
    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

15 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Emmanouil MetzakopianWellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Wellcome Trust Genome Campus, Hinxton, Cambridge, CB10 1SA, UK.
Alex StrongWellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Wellcome Trust Genome Campus, Hinxton, Cambridge, CB10 1SA, UK.
Vivek IyerWellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Wellcome Trust Genome Campus, Hinxton, Cambridge, CB10 1SA, UK.
Alex HodgkinsWellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Wellcome Trust Genome Campus, Hinxton, Cambridge, CB10 1SA, UK.
Konstantinos TzelepisWellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Wellcome Trust Genome Campus, Hinxton, Cambridge, CB10 1SA, UK.
Liliana AntunesWellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Wellcome Trust Genome Campus, Hinxton, Cambridge, CB10 1SA, UK.
Mathias J FriedrichWellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Wellcome Trust Genome Campus, Hinxton, Cambridge, CB10 1SA, UK.
Qiaohua KangMilliporeSigma St. Louis, Missouri, 2909 Laclede Ave, USA.
Teresa DavidsonMilliporeSigma St. Louis, Missouri, 2909 Laclede Ave, USA.
Jacob LamberthMilliporeSigma St. Louis, Missouri, 2909 Laclede Ave, USA.
Christina HoffmannMilliporeSigma St. Louis, Missouri, 2909 Laclede Ave, USA.
Gregory D DavisMilliporeSigma St. Louis, Missouri, 2909 Laclede Ave, USA.
George S VassiliouWellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Wellcome Trust Genome Campus, Hinxton, Cambridge, CB10 1SA, UK.
William C SkarnesWellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Wellcome Trust Genome Campus, Hinxton, Cambridge, CB10 1SA, UK.
Allan BradleyWellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Wellcome Trust Genome Campus, Hinxton, Cambridge, CB10 1SA, UK. abradley@sanger.ac.uk.
Wellcome Sanger Institute · GBMerck (Germany) · DE

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_PC_12009Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

CRISPR-Cas9 technology has accelerated biological research becoming routine for many laboratories. It is rapidly replacing conventional gene editing techniques and has high utility for both genome-wide and gene-focussed applications. Here we present the first individually cloned CRISPR-Cas9 genome wide arrayed sgRNA libraries covering 17,166 human and 20,430 mouse genes at a complexity of 34,332 sgRNAs for human and 40,860 sgRNAs for the mouse genome. For flexibility in generating stable cell lines the sgRNAs have been cloned in a lentivirus backbone containing PiggyBac transposase recognition elements together with fluorescent and drug selection markers. Over 95% of tested sgRNA induced specific DNA cleavage as measured by CEL-1 assays. Furthermore, sgRNA targeting GPI anchor protein pathway genes induced loss of function mutations in human and mouse cell lines measured by FLAER labelling. These arrayed libraries offer the prospect for performing screens on individual genes, combinations as well as larger gene sets. They also facilitate rapid deconvolution of signals from genome-wide screens. This set of vectors provide an organized comprehensive gene editing toolbox of considerable scientific value.

Indexed as

CRISPR-Cas SystemsGene EditingGenome-Wide Association StudyAnimalsGene LibraryGenetic VectorsGPI-Linked ProteinsHumansLentivirusMicePhenotypeRNA, Guide, CRISPR-Cas SystemsSignal TransductionGPI-Linked ProteinsRNA, Guide, CRISPR-Cas Systems

Identifiers

PMID28533524
PMCPMC5440395
OpenAlexW2616480345

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.