Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32040758›Full record

ArticlePlant molecular biology2020

Gene editing in plants: assessing the variables through a simplified case study.

Jay Shockey

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Plant molecular biology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Functional Validation ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2021
    Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jay ShockeyAgricultural Research Service, Southern Regional Research Center, Commodity Utilization Research Unit, United States Department of Agriculture, 1100 Robert E. Lee Blvd., New Orleans, LA, 70124, USA. Jay.Shockey@usda.gov.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5057-5457
Agricultural Research Service · US

Funding

National Science Foundation USM-GR05635-01USDA-Agricultural Research Service (US) 6435-41000-083-00D
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

key messageMultiple variables that control the relative levels of successful heritable plant genome editing were addressed using simple case studies in Arabidopsis thaliana. The recent advent of genome editing technologies (especially CRISPR, Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats) has revolutionized various fields of scientific research. The process is much more specific than previous mutagenic processes and allows for targeting of nearly any gene of interest for the creation of loss-of-function mutations and many other types of editing, including gene-replacement and gene activation. However, not all CRISPR construct designs are successful, due to several factors, including differences in the strength and cell- or tissue-type specificity of the regulatory elements used to express the Cas9 (CRISPR Associated protein 9) DNA nuclease and single guide RNA components, and differences in the relative editing efficiency at different target areas within a given gene. Here we compare the levels of editing created in Arabidopsis thaliana by CRISPR constructs containing either different promoters, or altered target sites with varied levels of guanine-cytosine base content. Additionally, nuclease activity at sites targeted by imperfectly matched single guide RNAs was observed, suggesting that while the primary goal of most CRISPR construct designs is to achieve rapid, robust, heritable gene editing, the formation of unintended mutations at other genomic loci must be carefully monitored.

Indexed as

Gene EditingArabidopsisCRISPR-Cas SystemsCytosineGene Expression Regulation, PlantGenome, PlantGuanosineMutationCytosineGuanosineArabidopsisCas9CRISPRGene editingHydroxy fatty acidsSingle-guide RNA

Identifiers

PMID32040758
PMCPMC7170989
OpenAlexW3004788131

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.