ReviewVeterinary world2017
Advances in genome editing for improved animal breeding: A review.
Review in Veterinary world, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.
- The ethics of genome editing in non-human animals: a systematic review of reasons reported in the academic literature.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2019Pooled it
- Application of CRISPR/Cas gene editing for infectious disease control in poultry.Open life sciences · 2025Review
- Whole-genome methylation analysis reveals epigenetic variation between wild-type and nontransgenic cloned, ASMT transgenic cloned dairy goats generated by the somatic cell nuclear transfer.Journal of animal science and biotechnology · 2022Article
- Aspects of histocompatibility testing in xenotransplantation.Transplant immunology · 2021Review
- Edition of Prostaglandin E2 Receptors EP2 and EP4 by CRISPR/Cas9 Technology in Equine Adipose Mesenchymal Stem Cells.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2020Article
- Leveraging Available Resources and Stakeholder Involvement for Improved Productivity of African Livestock in the Era of Genomic Breeding.Frontiers in genetics · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Since centuries, the traits for production and disease resistance are being targeted while improving the genetic merit of domestic animals, using conventional breeding programs such as inbreeding, outbreeding, or introduction of marker-assisted selection. The arrival of new scientific concepts, such as cloning and genome engineering, has added a new and promising research dimension to the existing animal breeding programs. Development of genome editing technologies such as transcription activator-like effector nuclease, zinc finger nuclease, and clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats systems begun a fresh era of genome editing, through which any change in the genome, including specific DNA sequence or indels, can be made with unprecedented precision and specificity. Furthermore, it offers an opportunity of intensification in the frequency of desirable alleles in an animal population through gene-edited individuals more rapidly than conventional breeding. The specific research is evolving swiftly with a focus on improvement of economically important animal species or their traits all of which form an important subject of this review. It also discusses the hurdles to commercialization of these techniques despite several patent applications owing to the ambiguous legal status of genome-editing methods on account of their disputed classification. Nonetheless, barring ethical concerns gene-editing entailing economically important genes offers a tremendous potential for breeding animals with desirable traits.
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.