ArticlePLoS genetics2022
In rice splice variants that restore the reading frame after frameshifting indel introduction are common, often induced by the indels and sometimes lead to organism-level rescue.
Article in PLoS genetics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Escaping from CRISPR-Cas-mediated knockout: the facts, mechanisms, and applications.Cellular & molecular biology letters · 2024Review
- A perspective from the EU: unintended genetic changes in plants caused by NGT-their relevance for a comprehensive molecular characterisation and risk assessment.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The introduction of frameshifting non-3n indels enables the identification of gene-trait associations. However, it has been hypothesised that recovery of the original reading frame owing to usage of non-canonical splice forms could cause rescue. To date there is very little evidence for organism-level rescue by such a mechanism and it is unknown how commonly indels induce, or are otherwise associated with, frame-restoring splice forms. We perform CRISPR/Cas9 editing of randomly selected loci in rice to investigate these issues. We find that the majority of loci have a frame-restoring isoform. Importantly, three quarters of these isoforms are not seen in the absence of the indels, consistent with indels commonly inducing novel isoforms. This is supported by analysis in the context of NMD knockdowns. We consider in detail the two top rescue candidates, in wax deficient anther 1 (wda1) and brittle culm (bc10), finding that organismal-level rescue in both cases is strong but owing to different splice modification routes. More generally, however, as frame-restoring isoforms are low abundance and possibly too disruptive, such rescue we suggest to be the rare exception, not the rule. Nonetheless, assuming that indels commonly induce frame-restoring isoforms, these results emphasize the need to examine RNA level effects of non-3n indels and suggest that multiple non-3n indels in any given gene are advisable to probe a gene's trait associations.
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.