Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33619312›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2021

Amylose starch with no detectable branching developed through DNA-free CRISPR-Cas9 mediated mutagenesis of two starch branching enzymes in potato.

Xue Zhao, Shishanthi Jayarathna, Helle Turesson, Ann-Sofie Fält, Gustav Nestor, Matías N González, Niklas Olsson, Mirela Beganovic, Per Hofvander, Roger Andersson and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
45citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
8.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

45 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 94 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. From Lab to Field: CRISPRing Major CultivatedInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Review
  8. Tiny but powerful: protoplast isolation inFrontiers in plant science · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Biofortification of potato nutrition.Journal of advanced research · 2025
    Review
  11. CRISPR-Cas Gene Editing Technology in Potato.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. CRISPR-Cas9 mediated editing ofFrontiers in genome editing · 2025
    Article
  20. 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

11 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Xue Zhao *Department of Molecular Sciences, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Box 7015, 750 07, Uppsala, Sweden.
Shishanthi Jayarathna *Department of Molecular Sciences, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Box 7015, 750 07, Uppsala, Sweden.
Helle TuressonDepartment of Plant Breeding, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, P.O. Box 101, 23053, Alnarp, Sweden.
Ann-Sofie FältDepartment of Plant Breeding, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, P.O. Box 101, 23053, Alnarp, Sweden.
Gustav NestorDepartment of Molecular Sciences, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Box 7015, 750 07, Uppsala, Sweden.
Matías N GonzálezConsejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas Y Técnicas, (C1425FQB), Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Niklas OlssonDepartment of Plant Breeding, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, P.O. Box 101, 23053, Alnarp, Sweden.
Mirela BeganovicDepartment of Plant Breeding, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, P.O. Box 101, 23053, Alnarp, Sweden.
Per HofvanderDepartment of Plant Breeding, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, P.O. Box 101, 23053, Alnarp, Sweden.
Roger AnderssonDepartment of Molecular Sciences, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Box 7015, 750 07, Uppsala, Sweden.
Mariette AnderssonDepartment of Plant Breeding, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, P.O. Box 101, 23053, Alnarp, Sweden. mariette.andersson@slu.se.
Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences · SEConsejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas · AR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

DNA-free genome editing was used to induce mutations in one or two branching enzyme genes (Sbe) in tetraploid potato to develop starch with an increased amylose ratio and elongated amylopectin chains. By using ribonucleoprotein (RNP) transfection of potato protoplasts, a mutation frequency up to 72% was achieved. The large variation of mutations was grouped as follows: Group 1 lines with all alleles of Sbe1 mutated, Group 2 lines with all alleles of Sbe1 as well as two to three alleles of Sbe2 mutated and Group 3 lines having all alleles of both genes mutated. Starch from lines in Group 3 was found to be essentially free of amylopectin with no detectable branching and a chain length (CL) distribution where not only the major amylopectin fraction but also the shortest amylose chains were lost. Surprisingly, the starch still formed granules in a low-ordered crystalline structure. Starch from lines of Group 2 had an increased CL with a higher proportion of intermediate-sized chains, an altered granule phenotype but a crystalline structure in the granules similar to wild-type starch. Minor changes in CL could also be detected for the Group 1 starches when studied at a higher resolution.

Indexed as

Mutagenesis1,4-alpha-Glucan Branching EnzymeAllelesAmyloseBiomassCRISPR-Cas SystemsGene EditingGenotypeMagnetic Resonance SpectroscopyMutationPhenotypePlant ProteinsPlants, Genetically ModifiedPolymerizationSolanum tuberosumStarch1,4-alpha-Glucan Branching EnzymeAmylosePlant ProteinsStarch

Identifiers

PMID33619312
PMCPMC7900246
OpenAlexW3132152183

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.