ArticleNucleic acids research2024
Expanding the flexibility of base editing for high-throughput genetic screens in bacteria.
Article in Nucleic acids research, 2024. 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Base Editors for Engineering Industrial Microorganisms: Types, Applications, and Future Perspectives.Biotechnology journal · 2026Review
- The rise and future of CRISPR-based approaches for high-throughput genomics.FEMS microbiology reviews · 2024Review
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 at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Genome-wide screens have become powerful tools for elucidating genotype-to-phenotype relationships in bacteria. Of the varying techniques to achieve knockout and knockdown, CRISPR base editors are emerging as promising options. However, the limited number of available, efficient target sites hampers their use for high-throughput screening. Here, we make multiple advances to enable flexible base editing as part of high-throughput genetic screening in bacteria. We first co-opt the Streptococcus canis Cas9 that exhibits more flexible protospacer-adjacent motif recognition than the traditional Streptococcus pyogenes Cas9. We then expand beyond introducing premature stop codons by mutating start codons. Next, we derive guide design rules by applying machine learning to an essentiality screen conducted in Escherichia coli. Finally, we rescue poorly edited sites by combining base editing with Cas9-induced cleavage of unedited cells, thereby enriching for intended edits. The efficiency of this dual system was validated through a conditional essentiality screen based on growth in minimal media. Overall, expanding the scope of genome-wide knockout screens with base editors could further facilitate the investigation of new gene functions and interactions in bacteria.
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.