Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34139989›Full record

ArticleBMC genomics2021

The genomes of precision edited cloned calves show no evidence for off-target events or increased de novo mutagenesis.

Swati Jivanji, Chad Harland, Sally Cole, Brigid Brophy, Dorian Garrick, Russell Snell, Mathew Littlejohn, Götz Laible

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC genomics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 31% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Endangered Przewalski's Horse,Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Swati JivanjiSchool of Agriculture and Environment, Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand. swati.jivanji.1@uni.massey.ac.nz.
Chad HarlandLivestock Improvement Corporation, Newstead, New Zealand.
Sally ColeAgResearch, Ruakura Research Centre, Hamilton, New Zealand.
Brigid BrophyAgResearch, Ruakura Research Centre, Hamilton, New Zealand.
Dorian GarrickSchool of Agriculture and Environment, Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand.
Russell SnellSchool of Biological Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Mathew LittlejohnSchool of Agriculture and Environment, Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand.
Götz LaibleAgResearch, Ruakura Research Centre, Hamilton, New Zealand.
Massey University · NZAgResearch · NZLivestock Improvement Corporation · NZMaurice Wilkins Centre · NZUniversity of Auckland · NZ

Funding

Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment CONT-57639-ENDRP-LICMinistry of Business, Innovation and Employment CONT-62639-ENDRP-AGR
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAnimal health and welfare are at the forefront of public concern and the agricultural sector is responding by prioritising the selection of welfare-relevant traits in their breeding schemes. In some cases, welfare-enhancing traits such as horn-status (i.e., polled) or diluted coat colour, which could enhance heat tolerance, may not segregate in breeds of primary interest, highlighting gene-editing tools such as the CRISPR-Cas9 technology as an approach to rapidly introduce variation into these populations. A major limitation preventing the acceptance of CRISPR-Cas9 mediated gene-editing, however, is the potential for off-target mutagenesis, which has raised concerns about the safety and ultimate applicability of this technology. Here, we present a clone-based study design that has allowed a detailed investigation of off-target and de novo mutagenesis in a cattle line bearing edits in the PMEL gene for diluted coat-colour.

resultsNo off-target events were detected from high depth whole genome sequencing performed in precursor cell-lines and resultant calves cloned from those edited and non-edited cell lines. Long molecule sequencing at the edited site and plasmid-specific PCRs did not reveal structural variations and/or plasmid integration events in edited samples. Furthermore, an in-depth analysis of de novo mutations across the edited and non-edited cloned calves revealed that the mutation frequency and spectra were unaffected by editing status. Cells in culture, however, appeared to have a distinct mutation signature where de novo mutations were predominantly C > A mutations, and in cloned calves they were predominantly T > G mutations, deviating from the expected excess of C > T mutations.

conclusionsWe found no detectable CRISPR-Cas9 associated off-target mutations in the gene-edited cells or calves derived from the gene-edited cell line. Comparison of de novo mutation in two gene-edited calves and three non-edited control calves did not reveal a higher mutation load in any one group, gene-edited or control, beyond those anticipated from spontaneous mutagenesis. Cell culture and somatic cell nuclear transfer cloning processes contributed the major source of contrast in mutational profile between samples.

Indexed as

CRISPR-Cas SystemsGene EditingAnimalsCattleClustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic RepeatsGenomeMutagenesisMutation

Identifiers

PMID34139989
PMCPMC8212539
OpenAlexW3167820080

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.