Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33313574›Full record

ArticleMarine life science & technology2020

Delivery methods for CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing in crustaceans.

Sen Xu, Thinh Pham, Swatantra Neupane

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Marine life science & technology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Infectious transgenesis in arthropods.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  2. The Period (Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Elimination of blaBMC microbiology · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. CRISPR/Cas9-mediated gene mutation ofFrontiers in endocrinology · 2023
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. CRISPR: The Multidrug Resistance Endgame?Molecular biotechnology · 2021
    Review
  18. 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.

Sen XuDepartment of Biology, University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, Texas 76019, USA.
Thinh PhamDepartment of Biology, University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, Texas 76019, USA.
Swatantra NeupaneDepartment of Biology, University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, Texas 76019, USA.
The University of Texas at Arlington · US

Funding

Understanding the origin of parthenogenesisR35GM133730 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS ARLINGTON · PI Sen Xu · 2019 to 2026
$2.7M
NIGMS NIH HHS R35 GM133730
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this mini-review we provide an up-to-date overview of the delivery methods that have been used for CRISPR/Cas9 genomic editing in crustacean species. With embryonic microinjection as the main workforce for delivering CRISPR/Cas9 reagents, biologists working with crustacean species have to tackle the technical challenges involved in microinjection. We use examples of three crustacean species (the branchiopod

Indexed as

DaphniaelectroporationExopalaemon carinicaudamicroinjectionParhyale hawaiensisvitellogenesis

Identifiers

PMID33313574
PMCPMC7731668
OpenAlexW2988851782

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.