Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31578377›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2019

Time origin and structural analysis of the induced CRISPR/cas9 megabase-sized deletions and duplications involving the Cntn6 gene in mice.

Inna E Pristyazhnyuk, Julia Minina, Alexey Korablev, Irina Serova, Veniamin Fishman, Maria Gridina, Timofey S Rozhdestvensky, Leonid Gubar, Boris V Skryabin, Oleg L Serov

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

10 authors.

Inna E PristyazhnyukInstitute of Cytology and Genetics, Novosibirsk, 630090, Russia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0226-4213
Julia MininaInstitute of Cytology and Genetics, Novosibirsk, 630090, Russia.
Alexey KorablevInstitute of Cytology and Genetics, Novosibirsk, 630090, Russia.
Irina SerovaInstitute of Cytology and Genetics, Novosibirsk, 630090, Russia.
Veniamin FishmanInstitute of Cytology and Genetics, Novosibirsk, 630090, Russia.
Maria GridinaInstitute of Cytology and Genetics, Novosibirsk, 630090, Russia.
Timofey S RozhdestvenskyMedical Faculty, Core Facility of Transgenic Animal and Genetic Engineering Models (TRAM), University of Münster, Münster, 48149, Germany.
Leonid GubarMedical Faculty, Core Facility of Transgenic Animal and Genetic Engineering Models (TRAM), University of Münster, Münster, 48149, Germany.
Boris V SkryabinMedical Faculty, Core Facility of Transgenic Animal and Genetic Engineering Models (TRAM), University of Münster, Münster, 48149, Germany.
Oleg L SerovInstitute of Cytology and Genetics, Novosibirsk, 630090, Russia. serov@bionet.nsc.ru.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In a previous study using one-step CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing in mouse zygotes, we created five founders carrying a 1,137 kb deletion and two founders carrying the same deletion, plus a 2,274 kb duplication involving the Cntn6 gene (encoding contactin-6). Using these mice, the present study had the following aims: (i) to establish stage of origin of these rearrangements; (ii) to determine the fate of the deleted DNA fragments; and (iii) to estimate the scale of unpredicted DNA changes accompanying the rearrangements. The present study demonstrated that all targeted deletions and duplications occurred at the one-cell stage and more often in one pronucleus only. FISH analysis revealed that there were no traces of the deleted DNA fragments either within chromosome 6 or on other chromosomes. These data were consistent with the Southern blot analysis showing that chromosomes with deletion often had close to expected sizes of removed DNA fragments. High-throughput DNA sequencing of two homozygotes for duplication demonstrated that there were no unexpected significant or scale DNA changes either at the gRNA and joint sites or other genome sites. Thus, our data suggested that CRISPR/Cas9 technology could generate megabase-sized deletions and duplications in mouse gametes at a reasonably specific level.

Indexed as

Gene DeletionGene DuplicationAnimalsCell Adhesion Molecules, NeuronalCells, CulturedChromosomesCRISPR-Cas SystemsGerm CellsHomozygoteMiceMice, Inbred C57BLCell Adhesion Molecules, Neuronalcontactin 6 protein, mouse

Identifiers

PMID31578377
PMCPMC6775113

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.