ArticleTransgenic research2023
Usefulness of current sgRNA design guidelines and in vitro cleavage assays for plant CRISPR/Cas genome editing: a case targeting the polyphenol oxidase gene family in eggplant (Solanum melongena L.).
Article in Transgenic research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Genetic transformation and CRISPR/Cas12a-mediated gene editing of European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) employing a transient protoplast system.Communications biology · 2026Article
- Optimization of functional genetics tools for a model tetraploid Capsella bursa-pastoris, with focus on homoeolog-aware gene editing.Transgenic research · 2026Article
- Highly efficient Agrobacterium rhizogenes-mediated gene editing system in Salvia miltiorrhiza inbred line bh2-7.Plant biotechnology journal · 2025Article
- Impact of predictive selection of LbCas12a CRISPR RNAs upon on- and off-target editing rates in soybean.Plant direct · 2024Article
- CrnnCrispr: An Interpretable Deep Learning Method for CRISPR/Cas9 sgRNA On-Target Activity Prediction.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The advent of genome editing platforms such as the CRISPR/Cas9 system ushers an unprecedented speed in the development of new crop varieties that can withstand the agricultural challenges of the 21st century. The CRISPR/Cas9 system depends on the specificity of engineered single guide RNAs (sgRNAs). However, sgRNA design in plants can be challenging due to the multitude of design tools to choose from, many of which use guidelines that are based on animal experiments yet allow the use of plant genomes. Upon choosing sgRNAs, it is also unclear whether an in vitro assay is needed to validate the targeting efficiency of a particular sgRNA before in vivo delivery of the CRISPR/Cas9 system. Here, we demonstrate the in vitro and in vivo activity of four different sgRNAs that we selected based on their ability to target multiple members of the eggplant polyphenol oxidase gene family. Some sgRNAs that have high in vitro cleavage activity did not produce edits in vivo, suggesting that an in vitro assay may not be a reliable basis to predict sgRNAs with highly efficient in vivo cleavage activity. Further analysis of our sgRNAs using other design algorithms suggest that plant-validated criteria such as the presence of necessary secondary structures and appropriate base-pairing may be the reason for the discrepancy between our observed in vitro and in vivo cleavage efficiencies. However, recent reports and our data suggests that there is no guaranteed way to ensure the in vivo cleavage of chosen sgRNAs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37874448What 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.