Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41663678›Full record

ArticleTransgenic research2026

Application of compact CRISPR/Cas nucleases for citrus genome editing.

Yulong Zhu, Jingyu Zhang, Yunqiang Ruan, Tiangang Lei, Shunxin Li, Li Cao, Xiuping Zou, Yongrui He, Qiang Li, Shanchun Chen and 1 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Transgenic research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Genome Editing Approaches in Flax (International journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    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.

Yulong ZhuCitrus Research Institute, Southwest University, Chongqing, China.
Jingyu ZhangCitrus Research Institute, Southwest University, Chongqing, China.
Yunqiang RuanCitrus Research Institute, Southwest University, Chongqing, China.
Tiangang LeiCitrus Research Institute, Southwest University, Chongqing, China.
Shunxin LiCitrus Research Institute, Southwest University, Chongqing, China.
Li CaoCitrus Research Institute, Southwest University, Chongqing, China.
Xiuping ZouCitrus Research Institute, Southwest University, Chongqing, China.
Yongrui HeCitrus Research Institute, Southwest University, Chongqing, China.
Qiang LiCitrus Research Institute, Southwest University, Chongqing, China.
Shanchun ChenCitrus Research Institute, Southwest University, Chongqing, China.
Aihong PengCitrus Research Institute, Southwest University, Chongqing, China. pengaihong@cric.cn.

Funding

Chongqing Natural Science Foundation Project CSTB2023NSCQ-MSX1085Earmarked Fund for China Agriculture Research System CARS-26Sichuan-Chongqing Science and Technology Innovation Cooperation Program Project CSTB2024TIAD-CYKJCXX0021the Technology Innovation and Application Development Key Project of Chongqing CSTB2023TIAD-KPX0044
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Gene editing technology continues to advance, and the range of available editing tools is steadily expanding. Recently, several compact and ultracompact systems have been developed, gaining considerable attention because their components can be efficiently packaged into viral vectors. To identify compact tools suitable for efficient genome editing in citrus, Casπ, CoCas9, along with their respective single guide RNAs, were synthesized, and CRISPR/Casπ and CRISPR/CoCas9 constructs were designed to assess their editing efficiency in 'Wanjincheng' orange (Citrus sinensis Osbeck). The Casπ was able to mediate genome editing in the citrus genome, although with low efficiency. In comparison, CoCas9 showed a transformation efficiency three times higher than that of the widely used SpCas9. Moreover, while the gene editing efficiency of CoCas9 was comparable to that of SpCas9, the significantly elevated transformation efficiency resulted in a significantly higher overall editing efficiency for CoCas9 relative to SpCas9. Mutation profiles generated by CoCas9 and SpCas9 were highly similar, and both nucleases displayed comparable target specificity at three potential off-target sites. These results indicate that Casπ is not suitable for application in citrus genome editing, whereas CoCas9 represents a promising alternative to SpCas9 for efficient and precise genome modification in citrus.

Indexed as

CitrusCRISPR-Cas SystemsGene EditingGenome, PlantPlants, Genetically ModifiedRNA, Guide, CRISPR-Cas SystemsRNA, Guide, CRISPR-Cas SystemsCasπCitrusCoCas9Compact Cas proteinEditing efficiency

Identifiers

PMID41663678

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.