Targeted Gene Editing in Porcine Spermatogonia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To study the pathophysiology of human diseases, develop innovative treatments, and refine approaches for regenerative medicine require appropriate preclinical models. Pigs share physiologic and anatomic characteristics with humans and are genetically more similar to humans than are mice. Genetically modified pigs are essential where rodent models do not mimic the human disease phenotype. The male germline stem cell or spermatogonial stem cell (SSC) is unique; it is the only cell type in an adult male that divides and contributes genes to future generations, making it an ideal target for genetic modification. Here we report that CRISPR/Cas9 ribonucleoprotein (RNP)-mediated gene editing in porcine spermatogonia that include SSCs is significantly more efficient than previously reported editing with TALENs and allows precise gene editing by homology directed repair (HDR). We also established homology-mediated end joining (HMEJ) as a second approach to targeted gene editing to enable introduction of larger transgenes and/or humanizing parts of the pig genome for disease modeling or regenerative medicine. In summary, the approaches established in the current study result in efficient targeted genome editing in porcine germ cells for precise replication of human disease alleles.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".