ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2025
Genome-Editing Tools for Lactic Acid Bacteria: Past Achievements, Current Platforms, and Future Directions.
Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- An optimized CRISPR/Cas9-based genome editing platform enhances bacteriocin production in Lactiplantibacillus plantarum.Journal of biological engineering · 2026Article
- Genetically Modified Lactic Acid Bacteria in the EU Food Chain: Applications, Benefits, and Risk Assessment.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Advances in gene editing tools for four typical Gram-positive bacteria.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Review
- Development of the Efficient Electroporation Protocol forInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Strain-Dependent Lactic Acid Fermentation ofMicroorganisms · 2025Article
- Advances in Genetic Transformation of Lactic Acid Bacteria: Overcoming Barriers and Enhancing Plasmid Tools.International journal of molecular sciences · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Lactic acid bacteria (LAB) are central to food, feed, and health biotechnology, yet their genomes have long resisted rapid, precise manipulation. This review charts the evolution of LAB genome-editing strategies from labor-intensive RecA-dependent double-crossovers to state-of-the-art CRISPR and CRISPR-associated transposase systems. Native homologous recombination, transposon mutagenesis, and phage-derived recombineering opened the door to targeted gene disruption, but low efficiencies and marker footprints limited throughput. Recent phage RecT/RecE-mediated recombineering and CRISPR/Cas counter-selection now enable scar-less point edits, seamless deletions, and multi-kilobase insertions at efficiencies approaching model organisms. Endogenous Cas9 systems, dCas-based CRISPR interference, and CRISPR-guided transposases further extend the toolbox, allowing multiplex knockouts, precise single-base mutations, conditional knockdowns, and payloads up to 10 kb. The remaining hurdles include strain-specific barriers, reliance on selection markers for large edits, and the limited host-range of recombinases. Nevertheless, convergence of phage enzymes, CRISPR counter-selection and high-throughput oligo recombineering is rapidly transforming LAB into versatile chassis for cell-factory and therapeutic 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.