Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29453254›Full record

ArticleApplied and environmental microbiology2018

Versatile Cas9-Driven Subpopulation Selection Toolbox for Lactococcus lactis.

Simon van der Els, Jennelle K James, Michiel Kleerebezem, Peter A Bron

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Applied and environmental microbiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 56 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. A Plasmid-Encoded Surface Polysaccharide Partly BlocksInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Precision Genome Engineering inACS synthetic biology · 2023
    Article
  11. Advances in Genetic Tools and Their Application inFoods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. EngineeredExperimental and therapeutic medicine · 2020
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Barriers to genome editing with CRISPR in bacteria.Journal of industrial microbiology & biotechnology · 2019
    Review
  20. Article
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Simon van der ElsHost-Microbe Interactomics Group, Animal Sciences, Wageningen University & Research, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Jennelle K JamesNIZO B.V., Ede, The Netherlands.
Michiel KleerebezemHost-Microbe Interactomics Group, Animal Sciences, Wageningen University & Research, Wageningen, The Netherlands michiel.kleerebezem@wur.nl.
Peter A BronNIZO B.V., Ede, The Netherlands.
BE-Basic FoundationNederlands Instituut Voor Zuivel Oonderzoek · NLNierstichting · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

CRISPR-Cas9 technology has been exploited for the removal or replacement of genetic elements in a wide range of prokaryotes and eukaryotes. Here, we describe the extension of the Cas9 application toolbox to the industrially important dairy species

Indexed as

Bacterial ProteinsCRISPR-Associated Protein 9CRISPR-Cas SystemsFermentationLactobacillalesLactococcus lactisPlasmidsRNA, BacterialRNA, Guide, CRISPR-Cas SystemsStreptococcus pyogenesBacterial ProteinsCRISPR-Associated Protein 9RNA, BacterialRNA, Guide, CRISPR-Cas SystemsCRISPR-Cas9genetic engineeringLactococcus lactis

Identifiers

PMID29453254
PMCPMC5881059
OpenAlexW2792362063

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.