MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2982054941 · doi:10.1101/815431

A method to estimate the frequency of chromosomal rearrangements induced by CRISPR/Cas9 multiplexing in Drosophila

2019· preprint· en· W2982054941 on OpenAlexaff
William A. Ng, Bruce H. Reed

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2019
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCRISPR and Genetic Engineering
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCRISPRBiologyPolytene chromosomeChromosomal inversionGeneticsBreakpointCas9GermlineChromosomal translocationGenome editingChromosomeKaryotypeComputational biologyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Using CRISPR/Cas9 to simultaneously induce mutations in two or more target genes, commonly referred to as multiplexing, may result in chromosomal rearrangements such as inversions or translocations. While this may be undesirable in some contexts, the ability to recover chromosomal rearrangements targeted to specific sites in the genome is potentially a powerful tool. Before developing such tools, however, it is first important to measure the frequency with which chromosome rearrangements are induced by CRISPR/Cas9 multiplexing. To do this, we have developed a self-selecting screening system using a Drosophila line that carries an autosomal pericentric inversion in what is known as the autosynaptic form. All progeny of normal females crossed to males of this autosynaptic stock are lethal due to excessive aneuploidy. If an inversion is induced within the female germline, and if it is analogous to the inversion in the male autosynaptic line, then it is possible to recover progeny in which aneuploidy is reduced and viability is restored. Using this self-selection method, we screened 130 females and recovered one new autosynaptic element. Salivary gland polytene chromosome analysis, PCR, and sequencing confirmed the recovery of a breakpoint induced precisely between the two sgRNA target sites. Overall, we demonstrate that CRISPR/Cas9 multiplexing can induce chromosomal rearrangements in Drosophila. Also, in using this particular system, the recovery of chromosomal rearrangements was not a high frequency event.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.297 · 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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicCRISPR and Genetic Engineering→French-language works237,207→