Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31993780›Full record

ArticleRice (New York, N.Y.)2020

Beyond Seek and Destroy: how to Generate Allelic Series Using Genome Editing Tools.

Leo Herbert, Anne-Cécile Meunier, Martine Bes, Aurore Vernet, Murielle Portefaix, Franz Durandet, Remy Michel, Christian Chaine, Patrice This, Emmanuel Guiderdoni and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Rice (New York, N.Y.), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. CRISPR/Cas9-Mediated Knockout ofBiotech (Basel (Switzerland)) · 2026
    Article
  3. An EfficientInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
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

11 authors.

Leo HerbertCIRAD, UMR-AGAP, F-34398, Montpellier, France.
Anne-Cécile MeunierCIRAD, UMR-AGAP, F-34398, Montpellier, France.
Martine BesCIRAD, UMR-AGAP, F-34398, Montpellier, France.
Aurore VernetCIRAD, UMR-AGAP, F-34398, Montpellier, France.
Murielle PortefaixCIRAD, UMR-AGAP, F-34398, Montpellier, France.
Franz DurandetCIRAD, UMR-AGAP, F-34398, Montpellier, France.
Remy MichelCIRAD, UMR-AGAP, F-34398, Montpellier, France.
Christian ChaineCIRAD, UMR-AGAP, F-34398, Montpellier, France.
Patrice ThisCIRAD, UMR-AGAP, F-34398, Montpellier, France.
Emmanuel GuiderdoniCIRAD, UMR-AGAP, F-34398, Montpellier, France.
Christophe PérinCIRAD, UMR-AGAP, F-34398, Montpellier, France. perin@cirad.fr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2469-310X

Funding

Agropolis Fondation ANR 10-LABX-0001CRP CRP RICE
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genome editing tools have greatly facilitated the functional analysis of genes of interest by targeted mutagenesis. Many usable genome editing tools, including different site-specific nucleases and editor databases that allow single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) to be introduced at a given site, are now available. These tools can be used to generate high allelic diversity at a given locus to facilitate gene function studies, including examining the role of a specific protein domain or a single amino acid. We compared the effects, efficiencies and mutation types generated by our LbCPF1, SpCAS9 and base editor (BECAS9) constructs for the OsCAO1 gene. SpCAS9 and LbCPF1 have similar efficiencies in generating mutations but differ in the types of mutations induced, with the majority of changes being single-nucleotide insertions and short deletions for SpCAS9 and LbCPF1, respectively. The proportions of heterozygotes also differed, representing a majority in our LbCPF1, while with SpCAS9, we obtained a large number of biallelic mutants. Finally, we demonstrated that it is possible to specifically introduce stop codons using the BECAS9 with an acceptable efficiency of approximately 20%. Based on these results, a rational choice among these three alternatives may be made depending on the type of mutation that one wishes to introduce, the three systems being complementary. SpCAS9 remains the best choice to generate KO mutations in primary transformants, while if the desired gene mutation interferes with regeneration or viability, the use of our LbCPF1 construction will be preferred, because it produces mainly heterozygotes. LbCPF1 has been described in other studies as being as effective as SpCAS9 in generating homozygous and biallelic mutations. It will remain to be clarified in the future, whether the different LbCFP1 constructions have different efficiencies and determine the origin of these differences. Finally, if one wishes to specifically introduce stop codons, BECAS9 is a viable and efficient alternative, although it has a lower efficiency than SpCAS9 and LbCPF1 for creating KO mutations.

Identifiers

PMID31993780
PMCPMC6987269

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.