MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2969520863 · doi:10.1128/msphere.00408-19

Single-Strand Annealing Plays a Major Role in Double-Strand DNA Break Repair following CRISPR-Cas9 Cleavage in <i>Leishmania</i>

2019· article· en· W2969520863 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenuemSphere · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCRISPR and Genetic Engineering
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchGovernment of Canada
KeywordsCRISPRBiologyGenome editingDNA repairCas9DNANon-homologous end joiningGeneticsGeneGuide RNAComputational biologyCell biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Due to differences in double-strand DNA break (DSB) repair mechanisms, CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing efficiency can vary greatly in different organisms. In contrast to mammalian cells, the protozoan parasite Leishmania uses microhomology-mediated end joining (MMEJ) and, occasionally, homology-directed repair (HDR) to repair DSBs but lacks the nonhomologous end-joining pathway. Here, we show that Leishmania predominantly uses single-strand annealing (SSA) instead of MMEJ for DSB repairs (DSBR), resulting in large deletions that can include multiple genes. This strongly indicates that the overall DSBR in Leishmania is inefficient and therefore can influence the outcome of CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing, highlighting the importance of using a donor DNA to improve gene editing fidelity and efficiency in Leishmania .

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.242 · 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