ArticleThe EMBO journal2026
Assessing target genes for homing suppression gene drive.
Article in The EMBO journal, 2026. 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.
- Split suppression gene drives reveal a design tradeoff between inheritance and reproductive load inbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- A simulation-based deep learning framework for spatially explicit malaria modeling of CRISPR suppression gene drive mosquitoes.iScience · 2026Article
- Experimental and modeling demonstration of stronger population suppression by gene drive targeting doublesex from dominant female-sterile resistance alleles.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Strategies to improve the efficiency of homing gene drives with multiplexed gRNAs.BMC biology · 2025Article
- Modeling Control of Invasive Fire Ants by Gene Drive.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Gene drives are engineered alleles that bias their own inheritance in offspring, enabling the spread of specific traits throughout a population. Targeting female fertility genes in a gene drive can be an efficient strategy for population suppression. In this study, we investigated nine female fertility genes in Drosophila melanogaster using CRISPR-based homing gene drives. Employing a multiplexed gRNA approach to prevent the formation of functional resistance alleles, we aimed to maintain high drive-conversion efficiency with low fitness costs in female drive-carriers. Drive efficiency was assessed in individual crosses and had varied performance across different target genes. Notably, drives targeting the octopamine β2 receptor (oct) and stall (stl) genes exhibited the highest drive-conversion rates and were further tested in cages. A drive targeting stl successfully suppressed a cage population with a high release frequency, though suppression failed in another replicate cage with a lower initial release frequency. Fitness costs in female drive carriers were observed in test cages, impacting the overall efficiency of population suppression. Further tests on the fertility of these lines using individual crosses indicated that some fitness costs were due to maternal deposition of Cas9 combined with new gRNA expression, which would only occur in progeny of drive males when testing split drives with separate Cas9 (when mimicking cages with complete drives) but not for complete drive systems. This could enable success in complete drives with higher maternal Cas9 deposition, even if cage experiments in split drives fail. Overall, our findings identify oct and stl as promising fertility targets and demonstrate both the potential and the constraints of fertility-based suppression drives, providing empirical evidence to guide the design and assessment of more efficient population control strategies.
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.