Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42411453›Full record

ArticleeLife2026

Optimised genome editing for precise DNA insertion and substitution using prime editors in zebrafish.

Yosuke Ono, Martin Peterka, Michael Love, Amir Khan, Felix Bowers, Ashish Bhandari, Euan Gordon, Jonathan S Ball, Chrissy Hammond, Charles R Tyler and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in eLife, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
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

14 authors.

Yosuke OnoLiving Systems Institute, Biosciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-7257-0120
Martin PeterkaDiscovery Sciences, BioPharmaceuticals R&D, AstraZeneca, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Michael LoveBiosciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, United Kingdom.
Amir KhanSchool of Physiology, Pharmacology, and Neuroscience, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.
Felix BowersSchool of Physiology, Pharmacology, and Neuroscience, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.
Ashish BhandariLiving Systems Institute, Biosciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, United Kingdom.
Euan GordonDiscovery Sciences, BioPharmaceuticals R&D, AstraZeneca, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Jonathan S BallBiosciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, United Kingdom.
Chrissy HammondSchool of Physiology, Pharmacology, and Neuroscience, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.
Charles R TylerBiosciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, United Kingdom.
Steve ReesDiscovery Sciences, BioPharmaceuticals R&D, AstraZeneca, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Mohammad Bohlooly-YDiscovery Sciences, BioPharmaceuticals R&D, AstraZeneca, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Marcello MarescaDiscovery Sciences, BioPharmaceuticals R&D, AstraZeneca, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Steffen ScholppLiving Systems Institute, Biosciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-4903-9657

Funding

National Centre for the Replacement, Refinement and Reduction of Animals in Research (NC3Rs) NC/X001407/1UK Research and Innovation BB/X001458/1UK Research and Innovation BB/X008401/1Versus Arthritis Senior fellowship 29317Wellcome Trust DA 8438235
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

CRISPR/Cas9-mediated genome editing has rapidly become a popular tool for studying gene functions and generating genetically modified organisms. However, using this system, stochastic integration of random insertions and deletions restricts precise genome manipulation. Advanced CRISPR/Cas9 technologies using Prime Editors (PEs), Cas9 proteins fused with reverse transcriptase, enable programmed integration of short DNA modifications into the genome. However, its application in precise genome editing in animal models is challenging. Here, we utilise a nickase- and a nuclease-based PE to perform programmed short DNA substitutions and insertions at various loci in the zebrafish genome. Whereas nickase-based PE2 mediated a higher ratio of precise prime edits to the total edits, nuclease-based PEn was more efficient for short DNA modifications, achieving up to 27.3% precise insertion. To further evaluate our approach, we inserted a nuclear localisation signal into a reporter transgene to incorporate longer fragments by prime editing. These gene modifications were transmitted to the next generation. We show that PE-mediated prime editing can efficiently manipulate genome information in zebrafish without using exogenous donor DNA.

Indexed as

CRISPR-Cas SystemsDNAGene EditingGenomeMutagenesis, InsertionalZebrafishAnimalsDeoxyribonuclease IDeoxyribonuclease IDNACRISPR/Cas9geneticsgenomicsPE2PEnprecise genome editingprime editingzebrafish

Identifiers

PMID42411453
PMCPMC13341114

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.