ArticleActa naturae
Simple Recommendations for Improving Efficiency in Generating Genome-Edited Mice.
Article in Acta naturae. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- A familial case of FLAD1 protein deficiency associated with impaired adrenal steroidogenesis.JCI insight · 2026Article
- Novel mouse line with D277N mutation in theFrontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2026Article
- The Telomerase RNA Protein TERP Exerts a New Function in Safeguarding Female Gamete Quality.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Positioning of sperm tail longitudinal columns depends on NSUN7, an RNA-binding protein destabilizing elongated spermatid transcripts.RNA (New York, N.Y.) · 2025Article
- Mitoregulin Contributes to Creatine Shuttling and Cardiolipin Protection in Mice Muscle.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Mitochondrial rRNA Methylation by Mettl15 Contributes to the Exercise and Learning Capability in Mice.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
- Comparative Analysis of Genome Editors Efficiency on a Model of Mice Zygotes Microinjection.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The generation of transgenic model organisms (primarily mice) is an integral part of modern fundamental and applied research. Simple techniques based on the biology of these laboratory rodents can often increase efficiency when generating genome-edited mouse strains. In this study, we share our three years of experience in the optimization of mouse genome editing based on microinjection of CRISPR/Cas9 components into ca. 10,000 zygotes. We tested a number of techniques meant to improve efficiency in generating knockout mice, such as optimization of the superovulation method and choosing the optimal mouse strains to be used as zygote donors and foster mothers. The presented results might be useful to laboratories aiming to quickly and efficiently create new mouse strains with tailored genome editing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.