Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32170801›Full record

ArticlePlant biotechnology journal2020

First-generation genome editing in potato using hairy root transformation.

Nathaniel M Butler, Shelley H Jansky, Jiming Jiang

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Plant biotechnology journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 58 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. CRISPR-Cas Gene Editing Technology in Potato.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Nathaniel M ButlerUnited States Department of Agriculture-Agricultural Research Service, Vegetable Crops Research Unit, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9235-7626
Shelley H JanskyUnited States Department of Agriculture-Agricultural Research Service, Vegetable Crops Research Unit, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9113-3620
Jiming JiangDepartment of Plant Biology, Department of Horticulture, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6435-6140
Agricultural Research Service · USMichigan State University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genome editing and cis-gene breeding have rapidly accelerated crop improvement efforts, but their impacts are limited by the number of species capable of being genetically transformed. Many dicot species, including some vital potato relatives being used to accelerate breeding and genetics efforts, remain recalcitrant to standard Agrobacterium tumefaciens-based transformation. Hairy root transformation using Agrobacterium rhizogenes (A. rhizogenes) provides an accelerated approach to generating transgenic material but has been limited to analysis of hairy root clones. In this study, strains of A. rhizogenes were tested in the wild diploid potato relative Solanum chacoense, which is recalcitrant to infection by Agrobacterium tumefaciens. One strain of A. rhizogenes MSU440 emerged as being capable of delivering a T-DNA carrying the GUS marker and generating transgenic hairy root clones capable of GUS expression and regeneration to whole plants. CRISPR/Cas9 reagents targeting the potato PHYTOENE DESATURASE (StPDS) gene were expressed in hairy root clones and regenerated. We found that 64%-98% of transgenic hairy root clones expressing CRISPR/Cas9 reagents carried targeted mutations, while only 14%-30% of mutations were chimeric. The mutations were maintained in regenerated lines as stable mutations at rates averaging at 38% and were capable of germ-line transmission to progeny. This novel approach broadens the numbers of genotypes amenable to Agrobacterium-mediated transformation while reducing chimerism in primary events and accelerating the generation of edited materials.

Indexed as

RhizobiumSolanum tuberosumAgrobacterium tumefaciensGene EditingPlant RootsPlants, Genetically ModifiedTransformation, GeneticAgrobacterium rhizogenesCasCRISPRcropCsy4gene editinggerm-lineplant transformationreagent deliverytargeted mutagenesisTrex2

Identifiers

PMID32170801
PMCPMC7589382
OpenAlexW3011272188

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.