ArticleBiology direct2024
Efficient DNA-free co-targeting of nuclear genes in Chlamydomonas reinhardtii.
Article in Biology direct, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Insights into transcriptomics and metabolic engineering of microalgal systems for enhancing industrial and environmental applications.World journal of microbiology & biotechnology · 2026Review
- Phyto-Algal Consortia as a Complementary System for Wastewater Treatment and Biorefinery.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Progress and challenges in CRISPR/Cas applications in microalgae.Journal of microbiology (Seoul, Korea) · 2025Review
- Marine Phytoplankton Bioactive Lipids and Their Perspectives in Clinical Inflammation.Marine drugs · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Chlamydomonas reinhardtii, a model organism for unicellular green microalgae, is widely used in basic and applied research. Nonetheless, proceeding towards synthetic biology requires a full set of manipulation techniques for inserting, removing, or editing genes. Despite recent advancements in CRISPR/Cas9, still significant limitations in producing gene knock-outs are standing, including (i) unsatisfactory genome editing (GE) efficiency and (ii) uncontrolled DNA random insertion of antibiotic resistance markers. Thus, obtaining efficient gene targeting without using marker genes is instrumental in developing a pipeline for efficient engineering of strains for biotechnological applications. We developed an efficient DNA-free gene disruption strategy, relying on phenotypical identification of mutants, to (i) precisely determine its efficiency compared to marker-relying approaches and (ii) establish a new DNA-free editing tool. This study found that classical CRISPR Cas9-based GE for gene disruption in Chlamydomonas reinhardtii is mainly limited by DNA integration. With respect to previous results achieved on synchronized cell populations, we succeeded in increasing the GE efficiency of single gene targeting by about 200 times and up to 270 times by applying phosphate starvation. Moreover, we determined the efficiency of multiplex simultaneous gene disruption by using an additional gene target whose knock-out did not lead to a visible phenotype, achieving a co-targeting efficiency of 22%. These results expand the toolset of GE techniques and, additionally, lead the way to future strategies to generate complex genotypes or to functionally investigate gene families. Furthermore, the approach provides new perspectives on how GE can be applied to (non-) model microalgae species, targeting groups of candidate genes of high interest for basic research and biotechnological applications.
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.