ArticleMethods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.)2023
Genome Editing in Pigs.
Article in Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pig Genome Editing for Agriculture: Achievements and Challenges.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- The pig as a medical model for gynecological diseases: an applied perspective.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025Review
- Perspectives in Genome-Editing Techniques for Livestock.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 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
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The generation of genetically engineered (GE) pigs for disease modeling and xenotransplantation has been massively facilitated by the discovery of the CRISPR/Cas9 system. For livestock, genome editing is a powerful tool when used in combination with either somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT) or microinjection (MI) into fertilized oocytes. To generate either knockout or knock-in animals using SCNT, genome editing is carried out in vitro. This has the advantage that fully characterized cells are being employed to generate cloned pigs, predetermining their genetic makeups. However, this technique is labor-intensive and, hence, SCNT is better suited for more challenging projects such as the generation of multi-knockout- and knock-in pigs. Alternatively, CRISPR/Cas9 is introduced directly into fertilized zygotes via microinjection to produce knockout pigs more rapidly. Finally, the embryos are each transferred into recipient sows to deliver GE piglets.Both techniques, SCNT and MI, are technically challenging and therefore require skilled expertise, especially when applied for porcine embryos. Here, we present a detailed laboratory protocol for the generation of knockout and knock-in porcine somatic donor cells for SCNT and knockout pigs via microinjection. We describe the state-of-the-art method for isolation, cultivation, and manipulation of porcine somatic cells, which can then be used for SCNT. Moreover, we describe the isolation and maturation of porcine oocytes, their manipulation by microinjection, and the embryo transfer into surrogate sows.
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.