MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409031076 · doi:10.3389/fgeed.2025.1565297

Cas9 endonuclease: a molecular tool for in vitro cloning and CRISPR edit detection

2025· article· en· W4409031076 on OpenAlexafffund
Xingliang Ma, Dhouha Kthiri, Manpartik S. Gill, Curtis Pozniak, Sateesh Kagale

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Genome Editing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCRISPR and Genetic Engineering
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of SaskatchewanSaskatchewan Research Council (Canada)
FundersSaskatchewan Wheat Development CommissionGenome PrairieAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaWestern Grains Research FoundationGenome CanadaAlberta Wheat CommissionMinistry of Agriculture - Saskatchewan
KeywordsCRISPREndonucleaseComputational biologyCloning (programming)Cas9BiologyGeneticsGenome editingMolecular biologyDNAComputer scienceGeneProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Large genetic engineering constructs often face limitations in DNA element addition or replacement due to lack of unique endonuclease recognition sites. Traditional restriction resistance methods can identify CRISPR-induced mutants efficiently, but CRISPR target sites rarely contain suitable restriction motifs. Here, we demonstrate the use of Sp Cas9 combined with custom synthesised sgRNAs to linearize large plasmid constructs, enabling DNA element incorporation via seamless cloning methods. Additionally, Sp Cas9 and custom sgRNAs were used to digest target gene amplicons for effective genotyping of CRISPR-edited mutants, allowing us to distinguish between wild-type, heterozygous, and biallelic variants. This approach provides a straightforward, highly flexible method for modifying large plasmid constructs and screening CRISPR-induced edits.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.399
Threshold uncertainty score0.633

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Genome EditingSame topicCRISPR and Genetic EngineeringFrench-language works237,207