ArticlePlant cell reports2026
Evaluation of computational tools for the prediction of CRISPR/SpCas9 gRNA activity in plants.
Article in Plant cell reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Genome Editing Approaches in Flax (International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
CRISPR/Cas9 technologies are now routinely used in plant research, with guide RNA (gRNA) design being a critical determinant of genome editing success. However, rational design of highly active gRNAs is challenging due to complex sequence and biochemical factors affecting activity. While numerous computational prediction tools have been developed, they are predominantly trained on animal cell or microbial data and their performance in plants remains controversial or untested. In this study, using two independent Nicotiana benthamiana experimental datasets comprising a total of 52 gRNAs, we systematically evaluated over 20 freely accessible, Web-based in silico tools for predicting gRNA on-target efficiency. We identified several machine learning-based tools that showed strong correlation with experimental editing efficiency across both datasets. Importantly, gRNAs in the top quartile by prediction score produced significantly higher InDel frequencies than those in the lowest quartile for all tools tested. Furthermore, several algorithms available through CRISPOR, a platform containing a large number of non-model plant genomes, also showed good predictive performance. This may enable better integration of on-target and off-target predictions in gRNA design. Our findings provide practical guidance for improving gRNA design in plant genome editing 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.