ReviewCurrent opinion in chemical biology2017
Modern methods for laboratory diversification of biomolecules.
Review in Current opinion in chemical biology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Updated analysis to reject the laboratory-engineering hypothesis of SARS-CoV-2.Environmental research · 2023Article
- Engineering Proteins Containing Noncanonical Amino Acids on the Yeast Surface.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2022Article
- Directed evolution of rRNA improves translation kinetics and recombinant protein yield.Nature communications · 2021Article
- Genome editor-directed in vivo library diversification.Cell chemical biology · 2021Review
- Roadmap to Building a Cell: An Evolutionary Approach.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2020Article
- Transient AID expression for in situ mutagenesis with improved cellular fitness.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Genetic variation fuels Darwinian evolution, yet spontaneous mutation rates are maintained at low levels to ensure cellular viability. Low mutation rates preclude the exhaustive exploration of sequence space for protein evolution and genome engineering applications, prompting scientists to develop methods for efficient and targeted diversification of nucleic acid sequences. Directed evolution of biomolecules relies upon the generation of unbiased genetic diversity to discover variants with desirable properties, whereas genome-engineering applications require selective modifications on a genomic scale with minimal off-targets. Here, we review the current toolkit of mutagenesis strategies employed in directed evolution and genome engineering. These state-of-the-art methods enable facile modifications and improvements of single genes, multicomponent pathways, and whole genomes for basic and applied research, while simultaneously paving the way for genome editing therapeutic interventions.
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.