ArticleProtoplasma2023
Development of an Agrobacterium-delivered codon-optimized CRISPR/Cas9 system for chickpea genome editing.
Article in Protoplasma, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Efficient in-vitro regeneration and transformation for CRISPR/Cas9-mediated genome editing of phytoene desaturase (PDS) gene in pea (Pisum sativum L.).Plant cell reports · 2026Article
- CRISPR/Cas9 in soybean research: a measured leap toward genetic refinement.Frontiers in genome editing · 2026Review
- Advances in gene editing for legume improvement: technologies, progress, and prospects.Frontiers in genome editing · 2026Review
- Multi-omics reveals DEAD-box RNA helicase 20 as key protein enhancing wilt resistance in transgenic chickpea.Plant cell reports · 2025Article
- CRISPR-Based genome editing in pulses: current approaches, challenges, and future prospects.Plant molecular biology · 2025Review
- A novel recombinant CRISPR/Cas9 vector system for genome editing in plants.Transgenic research · 2025Article
- Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) battling against heat stress: plant breeding and genomics advances.Plant molecular biology · 2025Review
- Multiplex CRISPR-Cas9 editing of chlorophyll biosynthesis genes in chickpea via protoplast and Agrobacterium-mediated transformation.Functional & integrative genomics · 2025Article
- Genome editing research initiatives and regulatory landscape of genome edited crops in India.Transgenic research · 2025Review
- Genome editing in grain legumes for food security.Frontiers in genome editing · 2025Review
- Lupins in the genome editing era: advances in plant cell culture, double haploid technology and genetic transformation for crop improvement.Frontiers in plant science · 2025Review
- CRISPR/Cas9 based genome editing of Phytoene desaturase (PDS) gene in chilli pepper (Capsicum annuum L.).Journal, genetic engineering & biotechnology · 2024Article
- Article
- Unlocking the nutritional potential of chickpea: strategies for biofortification and enhanced multinutrient quality.Frontiers in plant science · 2024Review
- Recalcitrance to transformation, a hindrance for genome editing of legumes.Frontiers in genome editing · 2023Review
- The challenge of breeding for reduced off-flavor in faba bean ingredients.Frontiers in plant science · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Chickpea is considered recalcitrant to in vitro tissue culture amongst all edible legumes. The clustered, regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats/CRISPR-associated protein 9 (CRISPR/Cas9)-based genome editing in chickpea can remove the bottleneck of limited genetic variation in this cash crop, which is rich in nutrients and protein. However, generating stable mutant lines using CRISPR/Cas9 requires efficient and highly reproducible transformation protocols. As an attempt to solve this problem, we developed a modified and optimized protocol for chickpea transformation. This study transformed the single cotyledon half-embryo explants using CaMV35S promoter to drive two marker genes (β-glucuronidase gene; GUS and green fluorescent protein; GFP) through binary vectors pBI101.2 and modified pGWB2, respectively. These vectors were delivered in the explants through three different strains of Agrobacterium tumefaciens, viz., GV3101, EHA105, and LBA4404. We found better efficiency with the strain GV3101 (17.56%) compared with two other strains, i.e., 8.54 and 5.43%, respectively. We recorded better regeneration frequencies in plant tissue culture for the constructs GUS and GFP, i.e., 20.54% and 18.09%, respectively. The GV3101 was further used for the transformation of the genome editing construct. For the development of genome-edited plants, we used this modified protocol. We also used a modified binary vector pPZP200 by introducing a CaMV35S-driven chickpea codon-optimized SpCas9 gene. The promoter of the Medicago truncatula U6.1 snRNA gene was used to drive the guide RNA cassettes. This cassette targeted and edited the chickpea phytoene desaturase (CaPDS) gene. A single gRNA was found sufficient to achieve high efficiency (42%) editing with the generation of PDS mutants with albino phenotypes. A simple, rapid, highly reproducible, stable transformation and CRISPR/Cas9-based genome editing system for chickpea was established. This study aimed to demonstrate this system's applicability by performing a gene knockout of the chickpea PDS gene using an improved chickpea transformation protocol for the first time.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37131068What 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.