ReviewCurrent opinion in microbiology2020
Targeted mutagenesis of multiple chromosomal regions in microbes.
Review in Current opinion in microbiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Gabija restricts phage circularization and DNA replication.Cell host & microbe · 2026Article
- Gabija restricts phages that antagonize a conserved host DNA repair complex.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Investigation of cefiderocol resistance prevalence and resistance mechanisms in carbapenem-resistantJAC-antimicrobial resistance · 2024Article
- ReaL-MGE is a tool for enhanced multiplex genome engineering and application to malonyl-CoA anabolism.Nature communications · 2024Article
- ShinyBioHEAT: an interactive shiny app to identify phenotype driver genes in E.coli and B.subtilis.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2023Article
- Reporting off-target effects of recombinant engineering using the pORTMAGE system.Journal of microbiological methods · 2023Article
- Modular (de)construction of complex bacterial phenotypes by CRISPR/nCas9-assisted, multiplex cytidine base-editing.Nature communications · 2022Article
- Improved dsDNA recombineering enables versatile multiplex genome engineering of kilobase-scale sequences in diverse bacteria.Nucleic acids research · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Directed evolution allows the effective engineering of proteins, biosynthetic pathways, and cellular functions. Traditional plasmid-based methods generally subject one or occasionally multiple genes-of-interest to mutagenesis, require time-consuming manual interventions, and the genes that are subjected to mutagenesis are outside of their native genomic context. Other methods mutagenize the whole genome unselectively which may distort the outcome. Recent recombineering- and CRISPR-based technologies radically change this field by allowing exceedingly high mutation rates at multiple, predefined loci in their native genomic context. In this review, we focus on recent technologies that potentially allow accelerated tunable mutagenesis at multiple genomic loci in the native genomic context of these target sequences. These technologies will be compared by four main criteria, including the scale of mutagenesis, portability to multiple microbial species, off-target mutagenesis, and cost-effectiveness. Finally, we discuss how these technical advances open new avenues in basic research and biotechnology.
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.