Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32995508›Full record

ArticleSynthetic biology (Oxford, England)2017

Tailor-made exopolysaccharides-CRISPR-Cas9 mediated genome editing in

Marius Rütering, Brady F Cress, Martin Schilling, Broder Rühmann, Mattheos A G Koffas, Volker Sieber, Jochen Schmid

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Synthetic biology (Oxford, England), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. CRISPR-Cas9-driven genome editing inFrontiers in microbiology · 2025
    Article
  7. Advancing sustainable practices withAIMS microbiology · 2025
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Promising non-model microbial cell factories obtained by genome reduction.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Analysis of Xylose Operon fromInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

7 authors.

Marius RüteringChair of Chemistry of Biogenic Resources, Technical University of Munich, Straubing, Germany.
Brady F CressCenter for Biotechnology and Interdisciplinary Studies, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY, USA.
Martin SchillingEvonik Nutrition and Care GmbH, Kirschenallee, Darmstadt, Germany.
Broder RühmannChair of Chemistry of Biogenic Resources, Technical University of Munich, Straubing, Germany.
Mattheos A G KoffasCenter for Biotechnology and Interdisciplinary Studies, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY, USA.
Volker SieberChair of Chemistry of Biogenic Resources, Technical University of Munich, Straubing, Germany.
Jochen SchmidChair of Chemistry of Biogenic Resources, Technical University of Munich, Straubing, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-2557-5532

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Application of state-of-the-art genome editing tools like CRISPR-Cas9 drastically increase the number of undomesticated micro-organisms amenable to highly efficient and rapid genetic engineering. Adaptation of these tools to new bacterial families can open up entirely new possibilities for these organisms to accelerate as biotechnologically relevant microbial factories, also making new products economically competitive. Here, we report the implementation of a CRISPR-Cas9 based vector system in

Indexed as

CRISPR-Cas9exopolysaccharidesgenome editingPaenibacillus polymyxa

Identifiers

PMID32995508
PMCPMC7445874

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.