ArticleNature biotechnology2026
Genome editing of phylogenetically distinct bacteria using cross-species retron-mediated recombineering.
Article in Nature biotechnology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Engineering the Gut Microbiome: Emerging Genome-Editing Strategies and Therapeutic Applications.Microorganisms · 2026Review
- Structurally related phage helicases trigger type III-A3 retron-mediated anti-phage defense across diverse tailed phage families.Nucleic acids research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Advanced genome editing technologies have enabled rapid, flexible rewriting of the Escherichia coli genome, but most have not been tested in other bacterial species. Recombitrons-a genome editing tool created by pairing modified, donor-producing bacterial retrons with single-stranded binding and annealing proteins-have increased the efficiency of recombineering to install flexible, precise edits in the prokaryotic chromosome. Here, to extend their utility outside of E. coli, we surveyed the portability and versatility of retron-mediated recombineering across three different bacterial phyla (Proteobacteria, Bacillota and Actinomycetota) and a total of 15 different species. We found that retron recombineering is variable across the species tested but functional in all of them, reaching editing efficiencies >20% in six of them, >40% in three and >90% in two. Efficiencies in the remaining nine species ranged from 0.015% to 7.4%. We also tested the extension of the recombitron architecture, operon and strain modifications in a subset of hosts in which species-specific modifications were required to increase editing rates.
Identifiers
42026131What 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.