ArticleTransgenic research2019
Sequence-specific nucleases as tools for enhancing disease resistance in crops.
Article in Transgenic research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Targeting effector proteins of plant pathogens as a strategy for durable plant disease resistance.Frontiers in microbiology · 2025Article
- Genome Editing in Crop Plant Research-Alignment of Expectations and Current Developments.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Meeting report of the OECD conference on "Genome Editing: Applications in Agriculture-Implications for Health, Environment and Regulation".Transgenic research · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Genome editing technologies, such as CRISPR/Cas, have recently become valuable tools for plant reverse genetics as well as crop improvement, including enhancement of disease resistance. Targeting susceptibility (S) genes by genome editing has proven to be a viable strategy for generating resistance to both bacterial and fungal pathogens in various crops. Examples include generating loss-of-function mutations in promoter elements of the SWEET S genes, which are targeted by transcription activator-like effectors secreted by many phytopathogenic Xanthomonas bacteria, as well as in the conserved MLO locus that confers susceptibility to powdery mildew fungal pathogens in many monocots and dicots. In addition to genome editing applications, CRISPR/Cas systems can be used as means of defending plants against viruses via targeting viral genomic DNA or RNA. Genome editing is therefore a highly promising approach that enables engineering disease resistance to various plant pathogens directly in elite cultivar background in a highly precise manner. Unlike conventional crop breeding, genome editing approaches are not relying on lengthy and laborious crosses/back-crosses involving parental and progeny lines and can significantly shorten the breeding timeline. Taking into account the high potential of genome editing technologies for both basic and applied plant science, the recent decision of the European Court of Justice to define transgene-free genetically edited crops as GMOs is, clearly, a backward step for the EU.
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.