MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2340776849 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0153901

A Digital PCR-Based Method for Efficient and Highly Specific Screening of Genome Edited Cells

2016· article· en· W2340776849 on OpenAlexafffund
Scott D. Findlay, Krista M. Vincent, Jennifer R. Berman, Lynne‐Marie Postovit

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCRISPR and Genetic Engineering
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAlberta Cancer FoundationAlberta InnovatesAlberta Innovates - Health SolutionsWomen and Children's Health Research InstituteChildren's Health Research Institute
KeywordsTranscription activator-like effector nucleaseCRISPRGenome editingAmpliconComputational biologyBiologyDigital polymerase chain reactionGeneticsCas9Genome engineeringFalse positive paradoxTrans-activating crRNAGenePolymerase chain reactionComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rapid adoption of gene editing tools such as CRISPRs and TALENs for research and eventually therapeutics necessitates assays that can rapidly detect and quantitate the desired alterations. Currently, the most commonly used assay employs "mismatch nucleases" T7E1 or "Surveyor" that recognize and cleave heteroduplexed DNA amplicons containing mismatched base-pairs. However, this assay is prone to false positives due to cancer-associated mutations and/or SNPs and requires large amounts of starting material. Here we describe a powerful alternative wherein droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) can be used to decipher homozygous from heterozygous mutations with superior levels of both precision and sensitivity. We use this assay to detect knockout inducing alterations to stem cell associated proteins, NODAL and SFRP1, generated using either TALENs or an "all-in-one" CRISPR/Cas plasmid that we have modified for one-step cloning and blue/white screening of transformants. Moreover, we highlight how ddPCR can be used to assess the efficiency of varying TALEN-based strategies. Collectively, this work highlights how ddPCR-based screening can be paired with CRISPR and TALEN technologies to enable sensitive, specific, and streamlined approaches to gene editing and validation.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.480
Threshold uncertainty score0.281

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.233 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations70
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicCRISPR and Genetic EngineeringFrench-language works237,207