Cited by 158CRISPR and Genetic EngineeringGenetically Modified Organisms ResearchPlant Molecular Biology Research

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 63 of the 63 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Which Factors Affect the Occurrence of Off-Target Effects Caused by the Use of CRISPR/Cas: A Systematic Review in Plants

Open access

Abstract

CRISPR/Cas enables a targeted modification of DNA sequences. Despite their ease and efficient use, one limitation is the potential occurrence of associated off-target effects. This systematic review aims to answer the following research question: Which factors affect the occurrence of off-target effects caused by the use of CRISPR/Cas in plants? Literature published until March 2019 was considered for this review. Articles were screened for relevance based on pre-defined inclusion criteria. Relevant studies were subject to critical appraisal. All studies included in the systematic review were synthesized in a narrative report, but studies rated as high and medium/high validity were reported separately from studies rated as low and medium/low or unclear validity . In addition, we ran a binary logistic regression analysis to verify five factors that may affect the occurrence of off-target effects: (1) Number of mismatches (2) Position of mismatches (3) GC-content of the targeting sequence (4) Altered nuclease variants (5) Delivery methods. In total, 180 relevant articles were included in this review containing 468 studies therein. Seventy nine percentage of these studies were rated as having high or medium/high validity . Within these studies, 6,416 potential off-target sequences were assessed for the occurrence of off-target effects. Results clearly indicate that an increased number of mismatches between the on-target and potential off-target sequence steeply decreases the likelihood of off-target effects. The observed rate of off-target effects decreased from 59% when there is one mismatch between the on-target and off-target sequences toward 0% when four or more mismatches exist. In addition, mismatch/es located within the first eight nucleotides proximal to the PAM significantly decreased the occurrence of off-target effects. There is no evidence that the GC-content significantly affects off-target effects. The database regarding the impact of the nuclease variant and the delivery method is very poor as the majority of studies applied the standard nuclease SpCas9 and the CRISPR/Cas system was stably delivered in the genome. Hence, a general significant impact of these two factors on the occurrence of off-target effects cannot be proved. This identified evidence gap needs to be filled by systematic studies exploring these individual factors in sufficient numbers.

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/fpls.2020.574959

Cites

63 of 63 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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?

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 63 references

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. 2019, JMP®. Version 14
  2. 2018, JMP® 14 Fitting Linear Models, Chu ban:
  3. Binary logistic regression – what, when, and how, WalshS. JMP Discovery Conference 20162016

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–158 of 158

Metadata

Authors
Modrzejewski, D., Hartung, F., Lehnert, H., Sprink, T., Kohl, C., Keilwagen, J., & Wilhelm, R.
Affiliations
Julius Kühn-Institut (DE)
Corresponding author
  • Modrzejewski, Dominik
  • Hartung, Frank
Venue
Frontiers in Plant Science
Published
2020-11-23
Volume
11
Pages
574959-574959
ISSN
1664-462X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3106735065
Cited by
151
References
63
Citations by year
2026: 22 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 27 · 2023: 30 · 2022: 32 · 2021: 14
FWCI
1.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Plant Science (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • OpenAgrar (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › CRISPR and Genetic Engineering
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Genetically Modified Organisms Research
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Plant Molecular Biology Research
Keywords
CRISPR-Cas, off-target effects, genome editing, plants, GC content, nuclease variant, SpCas9, PAM, delivery methods

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