Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34189671›Full record

ArticleBiotechnology letters2021

Application of the modified cytosine base-editing in the cultured cells of bama minipig.

Jia-Sheng Pan, Zi-Sheng Lin, Jian-Cong Wen, Jian-Feng Guo, Xia-Hui Wu, Ying-Ying Liu, Wen-Jun Lai, Qi-Ying Liang, Yong-Shi Xie, Yi-Rou Chen and 8 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Biotechnology letters, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 39% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Efficient and Safe Knockout ofVeterinary sciences · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. 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

18 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Jia-Sheng Pan *Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Animal Molecular Design and Precise Breeding, School of Life Science and Engineering, Foshan University, 528225, Foshan, China.
Zi-Sheng Lin *Guangdong Provincial Engineering and Technology Research Center for Gene Editing, School of Medicine, Foshan University, 528225, Foshan, China.
Jian-Cong Wen *Guangdong Provincial Engineering and Technology Research Center for Gene Editing, School of Medicine, Foshan University, 528225, Foshan, China.
Jian-Feng GuoGuangdong Provincial Engineering and Technology Research Center for Gene Editing, School of Medicine, Foshan University, 528225, Foshan, China.
Xia-Hui WuGuangdong Provincial Engineering and Technology Research Center for Gene Editing, School of Medicine, Foshan University, 528225, Foshan, China.
Ying-Ying LiuGuangdong Provincial Engineering and Technology Research Center for Gene Editing, School of Medicine, Foshan University, 528225, Foshan, China.
Wen-Jun LaiGuangdong Provincial Engineering and Technology Research Center for Gene Editing, School of Medicine, Foshan University, 528225, Foshan, China.
Qi-Ying LiangGuangdong Provincial Engineering and Technology Research Center for Gene Editing, School of Medicine, Foshan University, 528225, Foshan, China.
Yong-Shi XieGuangdong Provincial Engineering and Technology Research Center for Gene Editing, School of Medicine, Foshan University, 528225, Foshan, China.
Yi-Rou ChenGuangdong Provincial Engineering and Technology Research Center for Gene Editing, School of Medicine, Foshan University, 528225, Foshan, China.
Yi-Hong ChenGuangdong Provincial Engineering and Technology Research Center for Gene Editing, School of Medicine, Foshan University, 528225, Foshan, China.
Ai-Fen YanGuangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Animal Molecular Design and Precise Breeding, School of Life Science and Engineering, Foshan University, 528225, Foshan, China.
Juan FengGuangdong Provincial Engineering and Technology Research Center for Gene Editing, School of Medicine, Foshan University, 528225, Foshan, China.
Lian LiuGuangdong Provincial Engineering and Technology Research Center for Gene Editing, School of Medicine, Foshan University, 528225, Foshan, China.
Dao-Yuan GongGuangdong Provincial Engineering and Technology Research Center for Gene Editing, School of Medicine, Foshan University, 528225, Foshan, China.
Xiang-Xing ZhuGuangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Animal Molecular Design and Precise Breeding, School of Life Science and Engineering, Foshan University, 528225, Foshan, China. zhu_xiangxing@126.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5265-2620
Jia-Hong LuState Key Laboratory of Quality Research in Chinese Medicine, Institute of Chinese Medical Sciences, University of Macau, 9999078, Macau SAR, China. jiahonglu@um.edu.mo.
Dong-Sheng TangGuangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Animal Molecular Design and Precise Breeding, School of Life Science and Engineering, Foshan University, 528225, Foshan, China. tangdsh@163.com.
Foshan University · CNUniversity of Macau · MO

Funding

Applied Basic Research Foundation of Yunnan Province (CN) 2019A1515110280Foshan Science and Technology Innovation Project 1920001001203Guangdong Science and Technology Innovation Strategy Fund (The Special Fund for "Climbing Plan") pdjh2020a0616Key Research and Development Project of Hainan Province (CN) 2018B020203003National Natural Science Foundation of China 82070199
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bama minipig is a unique miniature swine bred from China. Their favorable characteristics include delicious meat, strong adaptability, tolerance to rough feed, and high levels of stress tolerance. Unfavorable characteristics are their low lean meat percentage, high fat content, slow growth rate, and low feed conversion ratio. Genome-editing technology using CRISPR/Cas9 efficiently knocked out the myostatin gene (MSTN) that has a negative regulatory effect on muscle production, effectively promoting pig muscle growth and increasing lean meat percentage of the pigs. However, CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing technology is based on random mutations implemented by DNA double-strand breaks, which may trigger genomic off-target effects and chromosomal rearrangements. The application of CRISPR/Cas9 to improve economic traits in pigs has raised biosafety concerns. Base editor (BE) developed based on CRISPR/Cas9 such as cytosine base editor (CBE) effectively achieve targeted modification of a single base without relying on DNA double-strand breaks. Hence, the method has greater safety in the genetic improvement of pigs. The aim of the present study is to utilize a modified CBE to generate MSTN-knockout cells of Bama minipigs. Our results showed that the constructed "all-in-one"-modified CBE plasmid achieved directional conversion of a single C·G base pair to a T·A base pair of the MSTN target in Bama miniature pig fibroblast cells. We successfully constructed multiple single-cell colonies of Bama minipigs fibroblast cells carrying the MSTN premature termination and verified that there were no genomic off-target effects detected. This study provides a foundation for further application of somatic cell cloning to construct MSTN-edited Bama minipigs that carry only a single-base mutation and avoids biosafety risks to a large extent, thereby providing experience and a reference for the base editing of other genetic loci in Bama minipigs.

Indexed as

AnimalsCells, CulturedCodon, TerminatorCRISPR-Associated Protein 9CRISPR-Cas SystemsCytosineFibroblastsGene EditingMyostatinPlasmidsSwineSwine, MiniatureTransfectionCodon, TerminatorCRISPR-Associated Protein 9CytosineMyostatinBama minipigCytosine base editorGenetic modificationGenome-editingMyostatin

Identifiers

PMID34189671
OpenAlexW3162223676

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.