Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39163906›Full record

ReviewJournal of advanced research2025

CRISPR/Cas genome editing in soybean: challenges and new insights to overcome existing bottlenecks.

Nayara Sabrina Freitas-Alves, Clidia E Moreira-Pinto, Fabiano T P K Távora, Bruno Paes-de-Melo, Fabricio B M Arraes, Isabela T Lourenço-Tessutti, Stéfanie M Moura, Antonio C Oliveira, Carolina V Morgante, Yiping Qi and 1 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of advanced research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Genome Editing Approaches in Flax (International journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Improved rapid and efficient hairy root transformation usingPlant biotechnology (Tokyo, Japan) · 2025
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Genome editing, an opportunity to revive soybean cultivation in Europe.The Plant journal : for cell and molecular biology · 2025
    Review
  18. Advances in Soybean Genetic Improvement.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Nayara Sabrina Freitas-AlvesEmbrapa Genetic Resources and Biotechnology, Brasília, DF, Brazil; Bioprocess Engineering and Biotechnology Graduate Program, Federal University of Paraná (UFPR), Curitiba, PR, Brazil.
Clidia E Moreira-PintoEmbrapa Genetic Resources and Biotechnology, Brasília, DF, Brazil; National Institute of Science and Technology, INCT PlantStress Biotech, EMBRAPA, Brasília, DF, Brazil.
Fabiano T P K TávoraEmbrapa Genetic Resources and Biotechnology, Brasília, DF, Brazil; National Institute of Science and Technology, INCT PlantStress Biotech, EMBRAPA, Brasília, DF, Brazil.
Bruno Paes-de-MeloEmbrapa Genetic Resources and Biotechnology, Brasília, DF, Brazil; National Institute of Science and Technology, INCT PlantStress Biotech, EMBRAPA, Brasília, DF, Brazil.
Fabricio B M ArraesEmbrapa Genetic Resources and Biotechnology, Brasília, DF, Brazil; National Institute of Science and Technology, INCT PlantStress Biotech, EMBRAPA, Brasília, DF, Brazil.
Isabela T Lourenço-TessuttiEmbrapa Genetic Resources and Biotechnology, Brasília, DF, Brazil; National Institute of Science and Technology, INCT PlantStress Biotech, EMBRAPA, Brasília, DF, Brazil.
Stéfanie M MouraEmbrapa Genetic Resources and Biotechnology, Brasília, DF, Brazil; National Institute of Science and Technology, INCT PlantStress Biotech, EMBRAPA, Brasília, DF, Brazil.
Antonio C OliveiraNational Institute of Science and Technology, INCT PlantStress Biotech, EMBRAPA, Brasília, DF, Brazil; Federal University of Pelotas (UFPEL), Pelotas, RS, Brazil.
Carolina V MorganteEmbrapa Genetic Resources and Biotechnology, Brasília, DF, Brazil; National Institute of Science and Technology, INCT PlantStress Biotech, EMBRAPA, Brasília, DF, Brazil; Embrapa Semi-Arid, Petrolina, PE, Brazil.
Yiping QiDepartment of Plant Science and Landscape Architecture, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA.
Maria Fatima Grossi-de-SaEmbrapa Genetic Resources and Biotechnology, Brasília, DF, Brazil; Bioprocess Engineering and Biotechnology Graduate Program, Federal University of Paraná (UFPR), Curitiba, PR, Brazil; National Institute of Science and Technology, INCT PlantStress Biotech, EMBRAPA, Brasília, DF, Brazil; Catholic University of Brasília, Graduate Program in Genomic Sciences and Biotechnology, Brasília, DF, Brazil; Catholic University Dom Bosco, Graduate Program in Biotechnology, Campo Grande, MS, Brazil. Electronic address: fatima.grossi@embrapa.br.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSoybean is a worldwide-cultivated crop due to its applications in the food, feed, and biodiesel industries. Genome editing in soybean began with ZFN and TALEN technologies; however, CRISPR/Cas has emerged and shortly became the preferable approach for soybean genome manipulation since it is more precise, easy to handle, and cost-effective. Recent reports have focused on the conventional Cas9 nuclease, Cas9 nickase (nCas9) derived base editors, and Cas12a (formally Cpf1) as the most commonly used genome editors in soybean. Nonetheless, several challenges in the complex plant genetic engineering pipeline need to be overcome to effectively edit the genome of an elite soybean cultivar. These challenges include (1) optimizing CRISPR cassette design (i.e., gRNA and Cas promoters, gRNA design and testing, number of gRNAs, and binary vector), (2) improving transformation frequency, (3) increasing the editing efficiency ratio of targeted plant cells, and (4) improving soybean crop production. AIM OF REVIEW: This review provides an overview of soybean genome editing using CRISPR/Cas technology, discusses current challenges, and highlights theoretical (insights) and practical suggestions to overcome the existing bottlenecks. KEY SCIENTIFIC CONCEPTS OF REVIEW: The CRISPR/Cas system was discovered as part of the bacterial innate immune system. It has been used as a biotechnological tool for genome editing and efficiently applied in soybean to unveil gene function, improve agronomic traits such as yield and nutritional grain quality, and enhance biotic and abiotic stress tolerance. To date, the efficiency of gRNAs has been validated using protoplasts and hairy root assays, while stable plant transformation relies on Agrobacterium-mediated and particle bombardment methods. Nevertheless, most steps of the CRISPR/Cas workflow require optimizations to achieve a more effective genome editing in soybean plants.

Indexed as

CRISPR-Cas SystemsGene EditingGenome, PlantGlycine maxPlants, Genetically ModifiedBase editorsCas12aCRISPR/Cas9CropsGenetic transformationGlycine max

Identifiers

PMID39163906
PMCPMC12225954

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.