The DOI matches its Crossref record; 17 of the 17 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Genome editing of the disease susceptibility gene Cs LOB 1 in citrus confers resistance to citrus canker
Open accessAbstract
Citrus is a highly valued tree crop worldwide, while, at the same time, citrus production faces many biotic challenges, including bacterial canker and Huanglongbing (HLB). Breeding for disease‐resistant varieties is the most efficient and sustainable approach to control plant diseases. Traditional breeding of citrus varieties is challenging due to multiple limitations, including polyploidy, polyembryony, extended juvenility and long crossing cycles. Targeted genome editing technology has the potential to shorten varietal development for some traits, including disease resistance. Here, we used CRISPR/Cas9/sg RNA technology to modify the canker susceptibility gene Cs LOB 1 in Duncan grapefruit. Six independent lines, D LOB2, D LOB3, D LOB9, D LOB10, D LOB11 and D LOB12, were generated. Targeted next‐generation sequencing of the six lines showed the mutation rate was 31.58%, 23.80%, 89.36%, 88.79%, 46.91% and 51.12% for D LOB2, D LOB3, D LOB9, D LOB10, D LOB11 and D LOB12, respectively, of the cells in each line. D LOB2 and D LOB3 showed canker symptoms similar to wild‐type grapefruit, when inoculated with the pathogen Xanthomonas citri subsp. citri (Xcc). No canker symptoms were observed on D LOB9, D LOB10, D LOB11 and D LOB12 at 4 days postinoculation (DPI) with Xcc. Pustules caused by Xcc were observed on D LOB9, D LOB10, D LOB11 and D LOB12 in later stages, which were much reduced compared to that on wild‐type grapefruit. The pustules on D LOB9 and D LOB10 did not develop into typical canker symptoms. No side effects and off‐target mutations were detected in the mutated plants. This study indicates that genome editing using CRISPR technology will provide a promising pathway to generate disease‐resistant citrus varieties.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
MEGA6: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis Version 6.0
Tamura, K., Stecher, G., Peterson, D., Filipski, A., & Kumar, S. (2013) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/molbev/mst197 · Cited by 47,205
Search and clustering orders of magnitude faster than BLAST
Edgar, R. C. (2010) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btq461 · Cited by 20,826
A Programmable Dual-RNA–Guided DNA Endonuclease in Adaptive Bacterial Immunity
Jinek, M., Chylinski, K., Fonfara, I., Hauer, M., Doudna, J. A., & Charpentier, E. (2012) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1225829 · Cited by 17,116
The new frontier of genome engineering with CRISPR-Cas9
Doudna, J. A., & Charpentier, E. (2014) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1258096 · Cited by 7,062
High-efficiency TALEN-based gene editing produces disease-resistant rice
Li, T., Liu, B., Spalding, M. H., Weeks, D. P., & Yang, B. (2012) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt.2199 · Cited by 1,148
Zhou, J., Peng, Z., Long, J., Sosso, D., Liu, B., Eom, J., Huang, S., Liu, S., Vera Cruz, C., Frommer, W. B., et al. (2015) · The Plant Journal · doi:10.1111/tpj.12838 · Cited by 561
Self-citationGene-edited CRISPR mushroom escapes US regulation
Waltz, E. (2016) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature.2016.19754 · Cited by 532
Plant protoplasts: status and biotechnological perspectives
Davey, M. R., Anthony, P., Power, J. B., & Lowe, K. C. (2004) · Biotechnology Advances · doi:10.1016/j.biotechadv.2004.09.008 · Cited by 431
Lateral organ boundaries 1 is a disease susceptibility gene for citrus bacterial canker disease
Hu, Y., Zhang, J., Jia, H., Sosso, D., Li, T., Frommer, W. B., Yang, B., White, F. F., Wang, N., & Jones, J. B. (2014) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1313271111 · Cited by 356
Self-citationJia, H., Orbovic, V., Jones, J. B., & Wang, N. (2016) · Plant Biotechnology Journal · doi:10.1111/pbi.12495 · Cited by 309
Self-citation
Cited by
CRISPR for Crop Improvement: An Update Review
Jaganathan, D., Ramasamy, K., Sellamuthu, G., Jayabalan, S., & Venkataraman, G. (2018) · Frontiers in Plant Science · doi:10.3389/fpls.2018.00985 · Cited by 619
Zhang, Y., Bai, Y., Wu, G., Zou, S., Chen, Y., Gao, C., & Tang, D. (2017) · The Plant Journal · doi:10.1111/tpj.13599 · Cited by 525
Self-citationThe emerging and uncultivated potential of CRISPR technology in plant science
Zhang, Y., Malzahn, A. A., Sretenovic, S., & Qi, Y. (2019) · Nature Plants · doi:10.1038/s41477-019-0461-5 · Cited by 394
Self-citationEfficient Targeted Mutagenesis in Apple and First Time Edition of Pear Using the CRISPR-Cas9 System
Charrier, A., Vergne, E., Dousset, N., Richer, A., Petiteau, A., & Chevreau, E. (2019) · Frontiers in Plant Science · doi:10.3389/fpls.2019.00040 · Cited by 253
Zaidi, S. S.-E.-A., Mahas, A., Vanderschuren, H., & Mahfouz, M. M. (2020) · Genome Biology · doi:10.1186/s13059-020-02204-y · Cited by 221
Metadata
- Authors
- Jia, H., Zhang, Y., Orbović, V., Xu, J., White, F. F., Jones, J. B., & Wang, N.
- Venue
- Plant Biotechnology Journal
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2017-01-04
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 817-823
- ISSN
- 1467-7644 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-7652
- OpenAlex
- W2559846411
- Cited by
- 486
- References
- 17
- FWCI
- 15.05
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Genome editing of the disease susceptibility gene Cs LOB 1 in citrus confers resistance to citrus canker. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/pbi.12677
- The paper
- Jia, H., Zhang, Y., Orbović, V., Xu, J., White, F. F., Jones, J. B., & Wang, N. (2017). Genome editing of the disease susceptibility gene Cs LOB 1 in citrus confers resistance to citrus canker. Plant Biotechnology Journal. https://doi.org/10.1111/pbi.12677
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.