ArticleScientific reports2026
Simulation of CRISPR/Cas9-mediated gene editing for the Vitellogenin gene in Apis mellifera.
Article in Scientific 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.
- The serotonin receptor AmFrontiers in physiology · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing provides a powerful framework for interrogating gene function in Apis mellifera. Yet, empirical application remains challenging due to biological constraints, including haplodiploid genetics, narrow embryonic injection window, and the social rearing requirements that complicate functional validation. These constraints necessitate in silico pre-screening to maximize editing success before resource-intensive wet-lab implementation. Within the omnigenic framework, which distinguishes core regulatory genes from peripheral loci buffered by network effects, vitellogenin (Vg) represents an optimal target which is ancestrally dedicated to yolk provisioning; it has been co-opted to orchestrate diverse non-reproductive functions including longevity, stress resistance, immunity, and social behavior. We developed a computational pipeline to design a list of 57 and 56 candidate guide RNAs (gRNA) for targeted Vg knockout, evaluating candidate sites in both functional exons 2 and 3 based on structural accessibility and frameshift efficiency. Comparative analysis revealed complementary strengths in two top-best candidates from initial target pool of predicted gRNAs. The gRNA targeting exon 2 exhibits weaker secondary structure (ΔG = -0.25 kcal/mol versus -2.10 kcal/mol for exon 3), aligning with empirical evidence that sites with ΔG > -1.0 kcal/mol achieve 2-5 × higher Cas9 binding efficiency. This site yielded moderate frameshift frequency (77.8%; 61.9 percentile). Conversely, the predicted editing outcome for the gRNA targeting exon 3, despite stronger structural constraints, demonstrated superior functional disruption metrics demonstrating very high frameshift frequency (88.3%; 95.2 percentile), high in silico editing precision, minimal microhomology-mediated repair bias, and reproducible outcomes wherein nearly all predicted indels disrupt the coding sequence. Protein structure and domain analyses further predict that frameshift edits will generate a truncated protein missing all downstream functional domains. We recommend parallel empirical validation of both exon 2 and exon 3 targets to resolve the trade-off between structural accessibility (favoring higher editing rates) and frameshift efficacy (favoring complete loss-of-function). This dual-target strategy accommodates uncertainty in in vivo performance while maximizing the probability of generating informative phenotypes. Our in silico framework enables rational CRISPR design in non-model organisms by computationally balancing biophysical accessibility with functional impact, accelerating functional genomics in species where empirical optimization faces substantial biological constraints.
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.