Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32188556›Full record

ReviewReproduction, fertility, and development2019

Application of genome-editing systems to enhance available pig resources for agriculture and biomedicine.

Kiho Lee, Kayla Farrell, Kyungjun Uh

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Reproduction, fertility, and development, 2019. 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
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 30% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. The making of cells and organs in xenogeneic animal bioreactor.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. One-Step In Vitro Generation of ETV2-Null Pig Embryos.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022
    Article
  4. Improvements in pig agriculture through gene editing.CABI agriculture and bioscience · 2022
    Review
  5. Histotripsy Ablation in Preclinical Animal Models of Cancer and Spontaneous Tumors in Veterinary Patients: A Review.IEEE transactions on ultrasonics, ferroelectrics, and frequency control · 2022
    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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Kiho LeeDepartment of Animal and Poultry Sciences, Litton-Reaves Hall, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virgina 24061, USA; and Corresponding author. Email: kiholee@vt.edu.
Kayla FarrellDepartment of Animal and Poultry Sciences, Litton-Reaves Hall, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virgina 24061, USA.
Kyungjun UhDepartment of Animal and Poultry Sciences, Litton-Reaves Hall, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virgina 24061, USA.
Schlumberger (Ireland) · IE

Funding

Germ cell preservation of immunodeficient pigs utilizing embryo complementation approachR21OD027062 · OD · VIRGINIA POLYTECHNIC INST AND ST UNIV · PI LEE, KIHO · 2019 to 2020
$443k
NIH HHS R21 OD027062
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Traditionally, genetic engineering in the pig was a challenging task. Genetic engineering of somatic cells followed by somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT) could produce genetically engineered (GE) pigs carrying site-specific modifications. However, due to difficulties in engineering the genome of somatic cells and developmental defects associated with SCNT, a limited number of GE pig models were reported. Recent developments in genome-editing tools, such as zinc finger nucleases (ZFNs), transcription activator-like effector nucleases (TALENs) and the clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeat (CRISPR)/CRISPR-associated (Cas) 9 system, have markedly changed the effort and time required to produce GE pig models. The frequency of genetic engineering in somatic cells is now practical. In addition, SCNT is no longer essential in producing GE pigs carrying site-specific modifications, because direct injection of genome-editing systems into developing embryos introduces targeted modifications. To date, the CRISPR/Cas9 system is the most convenient, cost-effective, timely and commonly used genome-editing technology. Several applicable biomedical and agricultural pig models have been generated using the CRISPR/Cas9 system. Although the efficiency of genetic engineering has been markedly enhanced with the use of genome-editing systems, improvements are still needed to optimally use the emerging technology. Current and future advances in genome-editing strategies will have a monumental effect on pig models used in agriculture and biomedicine.

Indexed as

AgricultureAnimalsAnimals, Genetically ModifiedBiomedical ResearchCRISPR-Cas SystemsGene EditingGenetic EngineeringGenetic EnhancementSwine

Identifiers

PMID32188556
PMCPMC7780696
OpenAlexW2991362106

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.