ReviewTransgenic research2021
Sequence modification on demand: search and replace tools for precise gene editing in plants.
Review in Transgenic research, 2021. 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, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Single-stranded DNA (ssDNA) donor repair templates and CRISPR/Cas9 enable a high-frequency of targeted insertions in potato.Frontiers in genome editing · 2025Article
- Plant eIF4E isoforms as factors of susceptibility and resistance to potyviruses.Frontiers in plant science · 2023Review
- Functional Allele Validation by Gene Editing to Leverage the Wealth of Genetic Resources for Crop Improvement.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- Pathways to de novo domestication of crop wild relatives.Plant physiology · 2022Article
- Improvement of base editors and prime editors advances precision genome engineering in plants.Plant physiology · 2022Review
- Preface: Genome editing in plants.Transgenic research · 2021Article
- Potato improvement through genetic engineering.GM crops & food · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Until recently, our ability to generate allelic diversity in plants was limited to introduction of variants from domesticated and wild species by breeding via uncontrolled recombination or the use of chemical and physical mutagens-processes that are lengthy and costly or lack specificity, respectively. Gene editing provides a faster and more precise way to create new variation, although its application in plants has been dominated by the creation of short insertion and deletion mutations leading to loss of gene function, mostly due to the dependence of editing outcomes on DNA repair pathway choices intrinsic to higher eukaryotes. Other types of edits such as point mutations and precise and pre-designed targeted sequence insertions have rarely been implemented, despite providing means to modulate the expression of target genes or to engineer the function and stability of their protein products. Several advancements have been developed in recent years to facilitate custom editing by regulation of repair pathway choices or by taking advantage of alternative types of DNA repair. We have seen the advent of novel gene editing tools that are independent of DNA double-strand break repair, and methods completely independent of host DNA repair processes are being increasingly explored. With the aim to provide a comprehensive review of the state-of-the-art methodology for allele replacement in plants, I discuss the adoption of these improvements for plant genome engineering.
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.