Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30856357›Full record

ReviewRNA biology2019

CRISPR-Cas in Streptococcus pyogenes.

Anaïs Le Rhun, Andrés Escalera-Maurer, Majda Bratovič, Emmanuelle Charpentier

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in RNA biology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 75 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
75citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

75 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 126 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review

15 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Anaïs Le Rhuna Max Planck Unit for the Science of Pathogens , Berlin , Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-2211-2153
Andrés Escalera-Maurera Max Planck Unit for the Science of Pathogens , Berlin , Germany.
Majda Bratoviča Max Planck Unit for the Science of Pathogens , Berlin , Germany.
Emmanuelle Charpentiera Max Planck Unit for the Science of Pathogens , Berlin , Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-0254-0778
Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin · DEMax Planck Unit for the Science of Pathogens · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The discovery and characterization of the prokaryotic CRISPR-Cas immune system has led to a revolution in genome editing and engineering technologies. Despite the fact that most applications emerged after the discovery of the type II-A CRISPR-Cas9 system of Streptococcus pyogenes, its biological importance in this organism has received little attention. Here, we provide a comprehensive overview of the current knowledge about CRISPR-Cas systems from S. pyogenes. We discuss how the interplay between CRISPR-mediated immunity and horizontal gene transfer might have modeled the evolution of this pathogen. We review the current literature about the CRISPR-Cas systems present in S. pyogenes (types I-C and II-A), and describe their distinctive biochemical and functional features. Finally, we summarize the main biotechnological applications that have arisen from the discovery of the CRISPR-Cas9 system in S. pyogenes.

Indexed as

Adaptation, PhysiologicalCRISPR-Cas SystemsGenetic LociRNARNA InterferenceStreptococcus pyogenesRNAadaptive immune systemCas9CRISPRgenome editingmobile genetic elementsphagesStreptococcus pyogenes

Identifiers

PMID30856357
PMCPMC6546361
OpenAlexW2922087211

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.