Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29094286›Full record

ReviewTransgenic research2017

Genome editing in livestock: Are we ready for a revolution in animal breeding industry?

Jinxue Ruan, Jie Xu, Ruby Yanru Chen-Tsai, Kui Li

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Transgenic research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

41 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Impacts of heat stress on growth performance and its mitigation in small ruminants.Animal frontiers : the review magazine of animal agriculture · 2025
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. CRISPR/Cas9 systems: Delivery technologies and biomedical applications.Asian journal of pharmaceutical sciences · 2023
    Review
  16. Imagined futures for livestock gene editing: Public engagement in the Netherlands.Public understanding of science (Bristol, England) · 2023
    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

4 authors.

Jinxue RuanCollege of Life Science, Foshan University, Xianhu University Road, Nanhai, Foshan, 528231, Guangdong, China.
Jie XuCenter for Advanced Models for Translational Sciences and Therapeutics, University of Michigan Medical Center, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA.
Ruby Yanru Chen-TsaiApplied StemCell, Inc, Milpitas, CA, 95035, USA. ruby.tsai@appliedstemcell.com.
Kui LiCollege of Life Science, Foshan University, Xianhu University Road, Nanhai, Foshan, 528231, Guangdong, China. likui@caas.cn.

Funding

National Key Basic Research Program of China 2015CB943101The National Transgenic Project of China 2016ZX08006-001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genome editing is a powerful technology that can efficiently alter the genome of organisms to achieve targeted modification of endogenous genes and targeted integration of exogenous genes. Current genome-editing tools mainly include ZFN, TALEN and CRISPR/Cas9, which have been successfully applied to all species tested including zebrafish, humans, mice, rats, monkeys, pigs, cattle, sheep, goats and others. The application of genome editing has quickly swept through the entire biomedical field, including livestock breeding. Traditional livestock breeding is associated with rate limiting issues such as long breeding cycle and limitations of genetic resources. Genome editing tools offer solutions to these problems at affordable costs. Generation of gene-edited livestock with improved traits has proven feasible and valuable. For example, the CD163 gene-edited pig is resistant to porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome (PRRS, also referred to as "blue ear disease"), and a SP110 gene knock-in cow less susceptible to tuberculosis. Given the high efficiency and low cost of genome editing tools, particularly CRISPR/Cas9, it is foreseeable that a significant number of genome edited livestock animals will be produced in the near future; hence it is imperative to comprehensively evaluate the pros and cons they will bring to the livestock breeding industry. Only with these considerations in mind, we will be able to fully take the advantage of the genome editing era in livestock breeding.

Indexed as

Animals, Genetically ModifiedGene EditingAnimalsChinaEuropean UnionGenetic EngineeringGenomeHousing, AnimalLivestockSelective BreedingUnited StatesBreedingGenome editingIndustryLivestock

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.