ArticleFrontiers in genome editing2021
Exploring C-To-G Base Editing in Rice, Tomato, and Poplar.
Article in Frontiers in genome editing, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 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
26 citing papers in PubMed, 54 citations in OpenAlex.
- Genome Editing in Solanaceae: Harnessing CRISPR-Cas Technology for Precision Crop Improvement.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Enhancing CRISPR-Cas12a base editing in plants with LbCas12a variants and introns.Journal of integrative plant biology · 2026Article
- Genome Editing Approaches in Flax (International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Review
- From Lab to Field: CRISPRing Major CultivatedInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- CRISPR-Cas9: Unraveling Genetic Secrets to Enhance Floral and Fruit Traits in Tomato.Molecular biotechnology · 2025Review
- Advances and Applications of Plant Base Editing Technologies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- CRISPR/Cas genome editing in soybean: challenges and new insights to overcome existing bottlenecks.Journal of advanced research · 2025Review
- CRISPR-Cas applications in agriculture and plant research.Nature reviews. Molecular cell biology · 2025Review
- A long journey towards genome editing technologies in plants: a technical and critical review of genome editing technologies.Frontiers in genome editing · 2025Review
- Efficient and heritable A-to-K base editing in rice and tomato.Horticulture research · 2024Article
- Adenine base editor incorporating the N-methylpurine DNA glycosylase MPGv3 enables efficient A-to-K base editing in rice.Plant communications · 2023Article
- Developing a highly efficient CGBE base editor in watermelon.Horticulture research · 2023Article
- Recent advances in therapeutic CRISPR-Cas9 genome editing: mechanisms and applications.Molecular biomedicine · 2023Review
- Applications of CRISPR/Cas genome editing in economically important fruit crops: recent advances and future directions.Molecular horticulture · 2023Review
- Applications and Prospects of CRISPR/Cas9-Mediated Base Editing in Plant Breeding.Current issues in molecular biology · 2023Review
- Genome editing in maize: Toward improving complex traits in a global crop.Genetics and molecular biology · 2023Article
- CRISPR/Cas genome editing in tomato improvement: Advances and applications.Frontiers in plant science · 2023Review
- Exploring C-to-G and A-to-Y Base Editing in Rice by Using New Vector Tools.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
- Efficient C-to-G editing in rice using an optimized base editor.Plant biotechnology journal · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As a precise genome editing technology, base editing is broadly used in both basic and applied plant research. Cytosine base editors (CBEs) and adenine base editors (ABEs) represent the two commonly used base editor types that mediate C-to-T and A-to-G base transition changes at the target sites, respectively. To date, no transversion base editors have been described in plants. Here, we assessed three C-to-G base editors (CGBEs) for targeting sequences with SpCas9's canonical NGG protospacer adjacent motifs (PAMs) as well as three PAM-less SpRY-based CGBEs for targeting sequences with relaxed PAM requirements. The analyses in rice and tomato protoplasts showed that these CGBEs could make C-to-G conversions at the target sites, and they preferentially edited the C6 position in the 20-nucleotide target sequence. C-to-T edits, insertions and deletions (indels) were major byproducts induced by these CGBEs in the protoplast systems. Further assessment of these CGBEs in stably transformed rice and poplar plants revealed the preference for editing of non-GC sites, and C-to-T edits are major byproducts. Successful C-to-G editing in stably transgenic rice plants was achieved by rXRCC1-based CGBEs with monoallelic editing efficiencies up to 38% in T0 lines. The UNG-rAPOBEC1 (R33A)-based CGBE resulted in successful C-to-G editing in polar, with monoallelic editing efficiencies up to 6.25% in T0 lines. Overall, this study revealed that different CGBEs have different preference on preferred editing sequence context, which could be influenced by cell cycles, DNA repair pathways, and plant species.
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.