Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34376154›Full record

ArticleBMC plant biology2021

Genome editing with CRISPR/Cas9 in Pinus radiata (D. Don).

Charleson Poovaiah, Lorelle Phillips, Barbara Geddes, Cathie Reeves, Mathias Sorieul, Glenn Thorlby

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC plant biology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

30 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Development ofFrontiers in genome editing · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. NGATHA carpel development genes evolved in the common ancestor of seed plants.The Plant journal : for cell and molecular biology · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. A transcriptome atlas of zygotic and somatic embryogenesis in Norway spruce.The Plant journal : for cell and molecular biology · 2024
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Advances inFrontiers in plant science · 2024
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. BreedingFrontiers in plant science · 2024
    Review
  19. 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

6 authors.

Charleson PoovaiahScion, Rotorua, 3010, New Zealand. Charleson.Poovaiah@scionresearch.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7157-5176
Lorelle PhillipsScion, Rotorua, 3010, New Zealand.
Barbara GeddesScion, Rotorua, 3010, New Zealand.
Cathie ReevesScion, Rotorua, 3010, New Zealand.
Mathias SorieulScion, Rotorua, 3010, New Zealand.
Glenn ThorlbyScion, Rotorua, 3010, New Zealand.

Funding

Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment C04X1703Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment C04X1707Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment C11X1602
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo meet increasing demand for forest-based products and protect natural forests from further deforestation requires increased productivity from planted forests. Genetic improvement of conifers by traditional breeding is time consuming due to the long juvenile phase and genome complexity. Genetic modification (GM) offers the opportunity to make transformational changes in shorter time frames but is challenged by current genetically modified organism (GMO) regulations. Genome editing, which can be used to generate site-specific mutations, offers the opportunity to rapidly implement targeted improvements and is globally regulated in a less restrictive way than GM technologies.

resultsWe have demonstrated CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing in P. radiata targeting a single-copy cell wall gene GUX1 in somatic embryogenic tissue and produced plantlets from the edited tissue. We generated biallelic INDELs with an efficiency of 15 % using a single gRNA. 12 % of the transgenic embryogenic tissue was edited when two gRNAs were used and deletions of up to 1.3 kb were identified. However, the regenerated plants did not contain large deletions but had single nucleotide insertions at one of the target sites. We assessed the use of CRISPR/Cas9 ribonucleoproteins (RNPs) for their ability to accomplish DNA-free genome editing in P. radiata. We chose a hybrid approach, with RNPs co-delivered with a plasmid-based selectable marker. A two-gRNA strategy was used which produced an editing efficiency of 33 %, and generated INDELs, including large deletions. Using the RNP approach, deletions found in embryogenic tissue were also present in the plantlets. But, all plants produced using the RNP strategy were monoallelic.

conclusionsWe have demonstrated the generation of biallelic and monoallelic INDELs in the coniferous tree P. radiata with the CRISPR/Cas9 system using plasmid expressed Cas9 gRNA and RNPs respectively. This opens the opportunity to apply genome editing in conifers to rapidly modify key traits of interest.

Indexed as

CRISPR-Cas SystemsGenome, PlantDNA, PlantGene EditingINDEL MutationPinusRibonucleoproteinsRNA, Guide, CRISPR-Cas SystemsDNA, PlantRibonucleoproteinsRNA, Guide, CRISPR-Cas SystemsConifersCRISPRGenome editingPinus radiataSomatic embryogenesis

Identifiers

PMID34376154
PMCPMC8353756

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.