ArticlePlant cell reports2025
Transgene-free genome editing in citrus and poplar trees using positive and negative selection markers.
Article in Plant cell reports, 2025. 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.
- Boosting genome editing in perennial plants by CRISPR-Combo mediated morphogenic gene activation.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Nanotechnology-Enabled CRISPR Delivery: Emerging Opportunities in Agriculture and Forest Biotechnology.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Overcoming breeding barriers with genome editing in autopolyploid crops.BMC plant biology · 2026Review
- Beyond GMOs: transgene-free gene-edited crops for global food security.Frontiers in plant science · 2026Review
- Cas9/sgRNA-mediated genome editing of citrus via mature tissue transformation enables both high-efficacy genome editing and early flowering.Frontiers in plant science · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
key messageTransgene-free genome editing of the gene of interest in citrus and poplar has been achieved by co-editing the ALS gene via transient transgene expression of an efficient cytosine base editor. CRISPR-Cas genome editing systems have been widely used in plants. However, such genome-edited plants are nearly always transgenic in the first generation when Agrobacterium-mediated transformation is used. Transgene-free genome-edited plants are valuable for genetic analysis and breeding as well as simplifying regulatory approval. It can be challenging to generate transgene-free genome-edited plants in vegetatively propagated or perennial plants. To advance transgene-free genome editing in citrus and poplar, we investigated a co-editing strategy using an efficient cytosine base editor (CBE) to edit the ALS gene to confer herbicide resistance combined with transient transgene expression and potential mobile RNA-based movement of CBE transcripts to neighboring, non-transgenic cells. An FCY-UPP based cytotoxin system was used to select non-transgenic plants that survive after culturing on 5-FC containing medium. While the editing efficiency is higher in poplar than in citrus, our results show that the CBE-based co-editing strategy works in both citrus and poplar, albeit with low efficiency for biallelic edits. Unexpectedly, the addition of the TLS mobile RNA sequence reduced genome editing efficiency in both transgenic and non-transgenic plants. Although a small fraction of escaping plants is detected in both positive and negative selection processes, our data demonstrate a promising approach for generating transgene-free base-edited plants.
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.