Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32179472›Full record

ArticleiScience2020

High-Efficiency Multi-site Genomic Editing of Pseudomonas putida through Thermoinducible ssDNA Recombineering.

Tomas Aparicio, Akos Nyerges, Esteban Martínez-García, Víctor de Lorenzo

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in iScience, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. GenoMine: a CRISPR-Cas9-based kill switch for biocontainment ofFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Recombineering in Non-Model Bacteria.Current protocols · 2022
    Article
  11. Tuning a high performing multiplexed-CRISPRiMetabolic engineering communications · 2022
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Engineering Tropism ofACS synthetic biology · 2021
    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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Tomas AparicioSystems and Synthetic Biology Program, Centro Nacional de Biotecnología (CNB-CSIC), Campus de Cantoblanco, Madrid 28049, Spain.
Akos NyergesSynthetic and Systems Biology Unit, Institute of Biochemistry, Biological Research Centre, Szeged 6726, Hungary.
Esteban Martínez-GarcíaSystems and Synthetic Biology Program, Centro Nacional de Biotecnología (CNB-CSIC), Campus de Cantoblanco, Madrid 28049, Spain. Electronic address: emartinez@cnb.csic.es.
Víctor de LorenzoSystems and Synthetic Biology Program, Centro Nacional de Biotecnología (CNB-CSIC), Campus de Cantoblanco, Madrid 28049, Spain. Electronic address: vdlorenzo@cnb.csic.es.
Centro Nacional de Biotecnología · ESHUN-REN Szegedi Biológiai Kutatóközpont · HU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Application of single-stranded DNA recombineering for genome editing of species other than enterobacteria is limited by the efficiency of the recombinase and the action of endogenous mismatch repair (MMR) systems. In this work we have set up a genetic system for entering multiple changes in the chromosome of the biotechnologically relevant strain EM42 of Pseudomononas putida. To this end high-level heat-inducible co-transcription of the rec2 recombinase and P. putida's allele mutL

Indexed as

BioengineeringBiotechnologyMetabolic EngineeringMicrobial Biotechnology

Identifiers

PMID32179472
PMCPMC7068128
OpenAlexW3007899443

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.