ArticleThe Journal of reproduction and development2020
Suppression of mosaic mutation by co-delivery of CRISPR associated protein 9 and three-prime repair exonuclease 2 into porcine zygotes via electroporation.
Article in The Journal of reproduction and development, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Swine clones: potential application for animal production and animal models.Animal reproduction · 2025Review
- Generation of germ cell-deficient pigs by NANOS3 knockout.The Journal of reproduction and development · 2022Article
- Amount of Cas9 protein introduced into mouse embryos via electroporation affects the genome-editing rate.The Journal of reproduction and development · 2022Article
- Effect of Aphidicolin, a Reversible Inhibitor of Eukaryotic Nuclear DNA Replication, on the Production of Genetically Modified Porcine Embryos by CRISPR/Cas9.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
- Electroporation-Mediated Genome Editing of Livestock Zygotes.Frontiers in genetics · 2021Review
- Production of genome-edited mice by visualization of nucleases introduced into the embryos using electroporation.The Journal of reproduction and development · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Gene-modified animals, including pigs, can be generated efficiently by introducing CRISPR associated protein 9 (CRISPR/Cas9) into zygotes. However, in many cases, these zygotes tend to become mosaic mutants with various different mutant cell types, making it difficult to analyze the phenotype of gene-modified founder animals. To reduce the mosaic mutations, we introduced three-prime repair exonuclease 2 (Trex2), an exonuclease that improves gene editing efficiency, into porcine zygotes along with CRISPR/Cas9 via electroporation. Although the rate of porcine blastocyst formation decreased due to electroporation (25.9 ± 4.6% vs. 41.2 ± 2.0%), co-delivery of murine Trex2 (mTrex2) mRNA with CRISPR/Cas9 did not affect it any further (25.9 ± 4.6% vs. 31.0 ± 4.6%). In addition, there was no significant difference in the diameter of blastocysts carrying CRISPR/Cas9 (164.7 ± 10.2 μm), and those with CRISPR/Cas9 + mTrex2 (151.9 ± 5.1 μm) as compared to those from the control group (178.9 ± 9.0 μm). These results revealed that mTrex2 did not affect the development of pre-implantation embryo. We also found bi-allelic, as well as mono-allelic, non-mosaic homozygous mutations in the blastocysts. Most importantly, co-delivery of mTrex2 mRNA with CRISPR/Cas9 increased non-mosaic mutant blastocysts (29.3 ± 4.5%) and reduced mosaic mutant blastocysts (70.7 ± 4.5%) as compared to CRISPR/Cas9 alone (5.6 ± 6.4% and 92.6 ± 8.6%, respectively). These data suggest that the co-delivery of CRISPR/Cas9 and mTrex2 is a useful method to suppress mosaic mutation.
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.