Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30233645›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in genetics2018

Genome Editing of Pigs for Agriculture and Biomedicine.

Huaqiang Yang, Zhenfang Wu

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in genetics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
42citing papers in PubMed
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

42 citing papers in PubMed, 103 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Male germ cell technologies in large animals.The Journal of reproduction and development · 2026
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Huaqiang YangNational Engineering Research Center for Breeding Swine Industry, College of Animal Science, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, China.
Zhenfang WuNational Engineering Research Center for Breeding Swine Industry, College of Animal Science, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, China.
South China Agricultural University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pigs serve as an important agricultural resource and animal model in biomedical studies. Efficient and precise modification of pig genome by using recently developed gene editing tools has significantly broadened the application of pig models in various research areas. The three types of site-specific nucleases, namely, zinc-finger nucleases, transcription activator-like effector nucleases, and clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR)/CRISPR-associated protein, are the main gene editing tools that can efficiently introduce predetermined modifications, including knockouts and knockins, into the pig genome. These modifications can confer desired phenotypes to pigs to improve production traits, such as optimal meat production, enhanced feed digestibility, and disease resistance. Besides, given their genetic, anatomic, and physiologic similarities to humans, pigs can also be modified to model human diseases or to serve as an organ source for xenotransplantation to save human lives. To date, many genetically modified pig models with agricultural or biomedical values have been established by using gene editing tools. These pig models are expected to accelerate research progress in related fields and benefit humans.

Indexed as

breedingCRISPR/Cas9disease modelgenome editingpigTALENxenotransplantationZFN

Identifiers

PMID30233645
PMCPMC6131568
OpenAlexW2890356017

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.