The DOI matches its Crossref record; 22 of the 22 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Genome editing in potato via CRISPR‐Cas9 ribonucleoprotein delivery
Open accessAbstract
Clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats and CRISPR‐associated protein‐9 (CRISPR‐Cas9) can be used as an efficient tool for genome editing in potato (Solanum tuberosum). From both a scientific and a regulatory perspective, it is beneficial if integration of DNA in the potato genome is avoided. We have implemented a DNA‐free genome editing method, using delivery of CRISPR‐Cas9 ribonucleoproteins (RNPs) to potato protoplasts, by targeting the gene encoding a granule bound starch synthase (GBSS, EC 2.4.1.242). The RNP method was directly implemented using previously developed protoplast isolation, transfection and regeneration protocols without further adjustments. Cas9 protein was preassembled with RNA produced either synthetically or by in vitro transcription. RNP with synthetically produced RNA (cr‐RNP) induced mutations, i.e. indels, at a frequency of up to 9%, with all mutated lines being transgene‐free. A mutagenesis frequency of 25% of all regenerated shoots was found when using RNP with in vitro transcriptionally produced RNA (IVT–RNP). However, more than 80% of the shoots with confirmed mutations had unintended inserts in the cut site, which was in the same range as when using DNA delivery. The inserts originated both from DNA template remnants from the in vitro transcription, and from chromosomal potato DNA. In 2–3% of the regenerated shoots from the RNP‐experiments, mutations were induced in all four alleles resulting in a complete knockout of the GBSS enzyme function.
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
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
Somaclonal variation — a novel source of variability from cell cultures for plant improvement
Larkin, P. J., & Scowcroft, W. R. (1981) · Theoretical and Applied Genetics · doi:10.1007/bf02342540 · Cited by 3,001
Genome sequence and analysis of the tuber crop potato
The Potato Genome Sequencing Consortium (2011) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature10158 · Cited by 2,065
Kim, S., Kim, D., Cho, S. W., Kim, J., & Kim, J.-S. (2014) · Genome Research · doi:10.1101/gr.171322.113 · Cited by 1,856
DNA-free genome editing in plants with preassembled CRISPR-Cas9 ribonucleoproteins
Woo, J. W., Kim, J., Kwon, S. I., Corvalán, C., Cho, S. W., Kim, H., Kim, S.-G., Kim, S.-T., Choe, S., & Kim, J.-S. (2015) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt.3389 · Cited by 1,219
In vivo genome editing improves muscle function in a mouse model of Duchenne muscular dystrophy
Nelson, C. E., Hakim, C. H., Ousterout, D. G., Thakore, P. I., Moreb, E. A., Rivera, R. M. C., Madhavan, S., Pan, X., Ran, F. A., Yan, W. X., et al. (2016) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aad5143 · Cited by 1,144
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
Zhang, 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
Genome editing in maize directed by CRISPR–Cas9 ribonucleoprotein complexes
Svitashev, S., Schwartz, C., Lenderts, B., Young, J. K., & Mark Cigan, A. (2016) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms13274 · Cited by 824
Andersson, M., Turesson, H., Nicolia, A., Fält, A.-S., Samuelsson, M., & Hofvander, P. (2017) · Plant Cell Reports · doi:10.1007/s00299-016-2062-3 · Cited by 535
Self-citation
Cited by
Breeding crops to feed 10 billion
Hickey, L. T., N. Hafeez, A., Robinson, H., Jackson, S. A., Leal-Bertioli, S. C. M., Tester, M., Gao, C., Godwin, I. D., Hayes, B. J., & Wulff, B. B. H. (2019) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/s41587-019-0152-9 · Cited by 1,046
Strategies in the delivery of Cas9 ribonucleoprotein for CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing
Zhang, S., Shen, J., Li, D., & Cheng, Y. (2021) · Theranostics · doi:10.7150/thno.47007 · Cited by 430
CRISPR/Cas: A powerful tool for gene function study and crop improvement
Zhang, D., Zhang, Z., Unver, T., & Zhang, B. (2021) · Journal of Advanced Research · doi:10.1016/j.jare.2020.10.003 · Cited by 373
The Solanum tuberosum GBSSI gene: a target for assessing gene and base editing in tetraploid potato
Veillet, F., Chauvin, L., Kermarrec, M.-P., Sevestre, F., Merrer, M., Terret, Z., Szydlowski, N., Devaux, P., Gallois, J.-L., & Chauvin, J.-E. (2019) · Plant Cell Reports · doi:10.1007/s00299-019-02426-w · Cited by 124
Advances in Delivery Mechanisms of CRISPR Gene-Editing Reagents in Plants
Laforest, L. C., & Nadakuduti, S. S. (2022) · Frontiers in Genome Editing · doi:10.3389/fgeed.2022.830178 · Cited by 101
Metadata
- Authors
- Andersson, M., Turesson, H., Olsson, N., Fält, A., Ohlsson, P., Gonzalez, M. N., Samuelsson, M., & Hofvander, P.
- Venue
- Physiologia Plantarum
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2018-04-27
- Volume
- 164
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 378-384
- ISSN
- 0031-9317 (ISSN-L)
- 1399-3054
- OpenAlex
- W2793762852
- Cited by
- 432
- References
- 22
- FWCI
- 14.13
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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 in potato via CRISPR‐Cas9 ribonucleoprotein delivery. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/ppl.12731
- The paper
- Andersson, M., Turesson, H., Olsson, N., Fält, A., Ohlsson, P., Gonzalez, M. N., Samuelsson, M., & Hofvander, P. (2018). Genome editing in potato via CRISPR‐Cas9 ribonucleoprotein delivery. Physiologia Plantarum. https://doi.org/10.1111/ppl.12731
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.
