ArticleScientific reports2020
Deletion of morpholino binding sites (DeMOBS) to assess specificity of morphant phenotypes.
Article in Scientific reports, 2020. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Methods for Studying Endocytotic Pathways of Herpesvirus Encoded G Protein-Coupled Receptors.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Two complimentary approaches are widely used to study gene function in zebrafish: induction of genetic mutations, usually using targeted nucleases such as CRISPR/Cas9, and suppression of gene expression, typically using Morpholino oligomers. Neither method is perfect. Morpholinos (MOs) sometimes produce off-target or toxicity-related effects that can be mistaken for true phenotypes. Conversely, genetic mutants can be subject to compensation, or may fail to yield a null phenotype due to leakiness (e.g. use of cryptic splice sites or downstream AUGs). When discrepancy between mutant and morpholino-induced (morphant) phenotypes is observed, experimental validation of such phenotypes becomes very labor intensive. We have developed a simple genetic method to differentiate between genuine morphant phenotypes and those produced due to off-target effects. We speculated that indels within 5' untranslated regions would be unlikely to have a significant negative effect on gene expression. Mutations induced within a MO target site would result in a Morpholino-refractive allele thus suppressing true MO phenotypes whilst non-specific phenotypes would remain. We tested this hypothesis on one gene with an exclusively zygotic function, tbx5a, and one gene with strong maternal effect, ctnnb2. We found that indels within the Morpholino binding site are indeed able to suppress both zygotic and maternal morphant phenotypes. We also observed that the ability of such indels to suppress morpholino phenotypes does depend on the size and the location of the deletion. Nonetheless, mutating the morpholino binding sites in both maternal and zygotic genes can ascertain the specificity of morphant phenotypes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.