Cited by 22CRISPR and Genetic EngineeringPlant Genetic and Mutation StudiesRNA regulation and disease

Improved prime editing allows for routine predictable gene editing in Physcomitrium patens

Open access
Perroud, Pierre-François, Guyon-Debast, Anouchka, Casacuberta, Josep M, Paul, Wyatt, Pichon, Jean-Philippe, Comeau, David, Nogué, Fabien·2023·Journal of Experimental Botany

Abstract

Efficient and precise gene editing is the gold standard of any reverse genetic study. The recently developed prime editing approach, a modified CRISPR/Cas9 [clustered regularly interspaced palindromic repeats (CRISPR)/CRISPR-associated protein] editing method, has reached the precision goal but its editing rate can be improved. We present an improved methodology that allows for routine prime editing in the model plant Physcomitrium patens, whilst exploring potential new prime editing improvements. Using a standardized protoplast transfection procedure, multiple prime editing guide RNA (pegRNA) structural and prime editor variants were evaluated targeting the APT reporter gene through direct plant selection. Together, enhancements of expression of the prime editor, modifications of the 3' extension of the pegRNA, and the addition of synonymous mutation in the reverse transcriptase template sequence of the pegRNA dramatically improve the editing rate without affecting the quality of the edits. Furthermore, we show that prime editing is amenable to edit a gene of interest through indirect selection, as demonstrated by the generation of a Ppdek10 mutant. Additionally, we determine that a plant retrotransposon reverse transcriptase enables prime editing. Finally, we show for the first time the possibility of performing prime editing with two independently coded peptides.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/jxb/erad189

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Prime editing provides significant improvements in genome editing by enabling precise DNA modifications-including targeted insertions, deletions, and substitutions-without causing double-strand breaks in plants.

    “Prime editing (PE) provides significant improvements in genome editing by enabling precise DNA modifications—including targeted insertions, deletions, and substitutions—without causing double-strand breaks in plants (Kim et al., 2023; Perroud et al., 2023; Xu Y. et al., 2023).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Perroud, P.-F., Guyon-Debast, A., Casacuberta, J. M., Paul, W., Pichon, J.-P., Comeau, D., & Nogué, F.
Affiliations
  • AgroParisTech (FR)
  • Université Paris-Saclay, INRAE, AgroParisTech, Institut Jean-Pierre Bourgin (IJPB) , 78000 Versailles , France
  • Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (ES)
  • Limagrain (France) (FR)
Corresponding author
Perroud, Pierre-François
Venue
Journal of Experimental Botany
Published
2023-05-27
Volume
74
Issue
19
Pages
6176-6187
ISSN
  • 0022-0957 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2431
OpenAlex
W4378533386
Cited by
22
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 2
FWCI
1.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Experimental Botany (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Dipòsit Digital de Documents de la UAB (Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DIGITAL.CSIC (Spanish National Research Council (CSIC)) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Limagrain Europe
  • CRISPLUS
  • The Institut Jean-Pierre Bourgin
  • LabEx Saclay Plant Sciences
  • Agence Nationale de la Recherche ((ANR)-10-LABX-0040-SPS)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › CRISPR and Genetic Engineering
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Plant Genetic and Mutation Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › RNA regulation and disease
Keywords
prime editing, CRISPR/Cas9, Physcomitrella patens, bryophytes, genome editing efficiency, pegRNA design, protoplast transfection, reverse genetics
MeSH terms
Gene Editing, RNA-Directed DNA Polymerase, CRISPR-Cas Systems

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review