ReviewMicroorganisms2021
Genome Editing in Bacteria: CRISPR-Cas and Beyond.
Review in Microorganisms, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 71 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
71 citing papers in PubMed.
- Technical limitations of CRISPR-Cas9 genome editing in bacteria: challenges and future directions.Archives of microbiology · 2026Review
- A Dual-Plasmid CRISPR/Cas9-Based Genome Editing System for Efficient Gene Knockout and Large DNA Integration inPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- High-throughput editing boosts the construction of next-generation microbial cell factories.Synthetic and systems biotechnology · 2026Review
- Emerging Frontiers in CRISPR-Based Strategies for the Detection and Degradation of Microplastics.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Genome editing of phylogenetically distinct bacteria using cross-species retron-mediated recombineering.Nature biotechnology · 2026Article
- Enhanced editing ofApplied and environmental microbiology · 2026Article
- CRISPR-Cas based plasmid design for multidrug-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae isolates.FEMS microbiology letters · 2026Article
- Advances in gene editing tools for four typical Gram-positive bacteria.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Review
- Engineered bacteria and bacteria-derived nanomaterials for cancer therapy: Mechanisms, designs and advances.Bioactive materials · 2026Review
- Transient analysis and engineering of bacterial metabolic pathways using cell-penetrating peptide-peptide nucleic acid conjugates.Microbial cell factories · 2025Article
- CRISPR-engineered microbiome: living therapeutics revolutionize blood cancer immunotherapy.NPJ biofilms and microbiomes · 2025Review
- Efficient genome editing in Pseudomonas syringae pv. actinidiae using the CRISPR/FnCas12a system.Molecular horticulture · 2025Article
- Engineered Lactiplantibacillus plantarum and Levilactobacillus brevis utilizing ribonucleoprotein-mediated editing for inactivation of hemolysin gene.World journal of microbiology & biotechnology · 2025Article
- Exploring the Virome of Nile Tilapia (Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- CRISPR-based genetic tools for the study of host-microbe interactions.Infection and immunity · 2025Review
- Systematic, high-throughput characterization of bacteriophage gene essentiality on diverse hosts.Cell host & microbe · 2025Article
- CRISPR/Cas12a-Based One-Tube RT-RAA Assay for PoRV Genotyping.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- The engineering toolbox of Parageobacillus thermoglucosidasius.Applied microbiology and biotechnology · 2025Review
- Alleviation of Plant Abiotic Stress: Mechanistic Insights into Emerging Applications of Phosphate-Solubilizing Microorganisms in Agriculture.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- PlastiCRISPR: Genome Editing-Based Plastic Waste Management with Implications in Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) Degradation.Biomolecules · 2025Review
11 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Genome editing in bacteria encompasses a wide array of laborious and multi-step methods such as suicide plasmids. The discovery and applications of clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR)-Cas based technologies have revolutionized genome editing in eukaryotic organisms due to its simplicity and programmability. Nevertheless, this system has not been as widely favored for bacterial genome editing. In this review, we summarize the main approaches and difficulties associated with CRISPR-Cas-mediated genome editing in bacteria and present some alternatives to circumvent these issues, including CRISPR nickases, Cas12a, base editors, CRISPR-associated transposases, prime-editing, endogenous CRISPR systems, and the use of pre-made ribonucleoprotein complexes of Cas proteins and guide RNAs. Finally, we also address fluorescent-protein-based methods to evaluate the efficacy of CRISPR-based systems for genome editing in bacteria. CRISPR-Cas still holds promise as a generalized genome-editing tool in bacteria and is developing further optimization for an expanded application in these organisms. This review provides a rarely offered comprehensive view of genome editing. It also aims to familiarize the microbiology community with an ever-growing genome-editing toolbox for bacteria.
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.