MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2901672380 · doi:10.1534/g3.118.200778

CRISPR/Cas9 Methodology for the Generation of Knockout Deletions in <i>Caenorhabditis elegans</i>

2018· article· en· W2901672380 on OpenAlexafffund
Vinci Au, Erica Li-Leger, Greta Raymant, Stéphane Flibotte, George Chen, Kiana Martin, Lisa Fernando, Claudia Doell, Federico I. Rosell, Su Wang, Mark L. Edgley, Ann E. Rougvie, Harald Hutter, Donald G. Moerman

Bibliographic record

VenueG3 Genes Genomes Genetics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCRISPR and Genetic Engineering
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsCRISPRBiologyORFSGeneticsCas9Caenorhabditis elegansGeneComputational biologyGenomeNull alleleOpen reading frameAllele

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Caenorhabditis elegans Gene Knockout Consortium is tasked with obtaining null mutations in each of the more than 20,000 open reading frames (ORFs) of this organism. To date, approximately 15,000 ORFs have associated putative null alleles. As there has been substantial success in using CRISPR/Cas9 in C. elegans, this appears to be the most promising technique to complete the task. To enhance the efficiency of using CRISPR/Cas9 to generate gene deletions in C. elegans we provide a web-based interface to access our database of guide RNAs (http://genome.sfu.ca/crispr). When coupled with previously developed selection vectors, optimization for homology arm length, and the use of purified Cas9 protein, we demonstrate a robust and effective protocol for generating deletions for this large-scale project. Debate and speculation in the larger scientific community concerning off-target effects due to non-specific Cas9 cutting has prompted us to investigate through whole genome sequencing the occurrence of single nucleotide variants and indels accompanying targeted deletions. We did not detect any off-site variants above the natural spontaneous mutation rate and therefore conclude that this modified protocol does not generate off-target events to any significant degree in C. elegans. We did, however, observe a number of non-specific alterations at the target site itself following the Cas9-induced double-strand break and offer a protocol for best practice quality control for such events.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.306 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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

Citations113
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueG3 Genes Genomes GeneticsSame topicCRISPR and Genetic EngineeringFrench-language works237,207