The DOI matches its Crossref record; 70 of the 70 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
CRISPR/Cas9‐mediated efficient targeted mutagenesis in grape in the first generation
Open accessAbstract
Summary: The clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats‐associated protein 9 (CRISPR/Cas9) system is a powerful tool for editing plant genomes. Efficient genome editing of grape (Vitis vinifera) suspension cells using the type II CRISPR/Cas9 system has been demonstrated; however, it has not been established whether this system can be applied to get biallelic mutations in the first generation of grape. In this current study, we designed four guide RNA s for the Vv WRKY 52 transcription factor gene for using with the CRISPR/Cas9 system, and obtained transgenic plants via Agrobacterium‐mediated transformation, using somatic embryos of the Thompson Seedless cultivar. Analysis of the first‐generation transgenic plants verified 22 mutant plants of the 72 T‐DNA‐inserted plants. Of these, 15 lines carried biallelic mutations and seven were heterozygous. A range of RNA‐guided editing events, including large deletions, were found in the mutant plants, while smaller deletions comprised the majority of the detected mutations. Sequencing of potential off‐target sites for all four targets revealed no off‐target events. In addition, knockout of Vv WRKY 52 in grape increased the resistance to Botrytis cinerea. We conclude that the CRISPR/Cas9 system allows precise genome editing in the first generation of grape and represents a useful tool for gene functional analysis and grape molecular breeding.
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
Ma, X., Zhang, Q., Zhu, Q., Liu, W., Chen, Y., Qiu, R., Wang, B., Yang, Z., Li, H., Lin, Y., et al. (2015) · Molecular Plant · doi:10.1016/j.molp.2015.04.007 · Cited by 2,369
Wang, Y., Cheng, X., Shan, Q., Zhang, Y., Liu, J., Gao, C., & Qiu, J.-L. (2014) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt.2969 · Cited by 2,072
Self-citationTargeted genome modification of crop plants using a CRISPR-Cas system
Shan, Q., Wang, Y., Li, J., Zhang, Y., Chen, K., Liang, Z., Zhang, K., Liu, J., Xi, J. J., Qiu, J.-L., et al. (2013) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt.2650 · Cited by 1,810
Self-citationA CRISPR/Cas9 toolkit for multiplex genome editing in plants
Xing, H.-L., Dong, L., Wang, Z.-P., Zhang, H.-Y., Han, C.-Y., Liu, B., Wang, X.-C., & Chen, Q.-J. (2014) · BMC Plant Biology · doi:10.1186/s12870-014-0327-y · Cited by 1,684
Self-citationLi, J.-F., Norville, J. E., Aach, J., McCormack, M., Zhang, D., Bush, J., Church, G. M., & Sheen, J. (2013) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt.2654 · Cited by 1,510
Jiang, W., Zhou, H., Bi, H., Fromm, M., Yang, B., & Weeks, D. P. (2013) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/gkt780 · Cited by 1,247
Wang, Z.-P., Xing, H.-L., Dong, L., Zhang, H.-Y., Han, C.-Y., Wang, X.-C., & Chen, Q.-J. (2015) · Genome Biology · doi:10.1186/s13059-015-0715-0 · Cited by 1,057
Self-citationShi, J., Gao, H., Wang, H., Lafitte, H. R., Archibald, R. L., Yang, M., Hakimi, S. M., Mo, H., & Habben, J. E. (2017) · Plant Biotechnology Journal · doi:10.1111/pbi.12603 · Cited by 1,029
Efficient DNA-free genome editing of bread wheat using CRISPR/Cas9 ribonucleoprotein complexes
Liang, Z., Chen, K., Li, T., Zhang, Y., Wang, Y., Zhao, Q., Liu, J., Zhang, H., Liu, C., Ran, Y., et al. (2017) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms14261 · Cited by 955
Self-citationZhang, Y., Liang, Z., Zong, Y., Wang, Y., Liu, J., Chen, K., Qiu, J.-L., & Gao, C. (2016) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms12617 · Cited by 898
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
CRISPR/Cas system: recent advances and future prospects for genome editing
Manghwar, H., Lindsey, K., Zhang, X., & Jin, S. (2019) · Trends in Plant Science · doi:10.1016/j.tplants.2019.09.006 · Cited by 529
“) [73], apple (Malus pumila) [74], tropical staple cassava (Manihot esculenta) [75], watermelon (Citrullus lanatus) [76], and others (Table 2).”
Efficient 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
The CRISPR/Cas9 system and its applications in crop genome editing
Bao, A., Burritt, D. J., Chen, H., Zhou, X., Cao, D., & Tran, L.-S. P. (2019) · Critical Reviews in Biotechnology · doi:10.1080/07388551.2018.1554621 · Cited by 185
Metadata
- Authors
- Wang, X., Tu, M., Wang, D., Liu, J., Li, Y., Li, Z., Wang, Y., & Wang, X.
- Venue
- Plant Biotechnology Journal
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2017-11-10
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 844-855
- ISSN
- 1467-7644 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-7652
- OpenAlex
- W2754665164
- Cited by
- 367
- References
- 70
- FWCI
- 8.54
- 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: CRISPR/Cas9‐mediated efficient targeted mutagenesis in grape in the first generation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/pbi.12832
- The paper
- Wang, X., Tu, M., Wang, D., Liu, J., Li, Y., Li, Z., Wang, Y., & Wang, X. (2018). CRISPR/Cas9‐mediated efficient targeted mutagenesis in grape in the first generation. Plant Biotechnology Journal. https://doi.org/10.1111/pbi.12832
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.
