↓ Skip to main content

Site-specific genome editing in Plasmodium falciparum using engineered zinc-finger nucleases

Overview of attention for article published in Nature Methods, August 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (89th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
147 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
252 Mendeley
citeulike
5 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Site-specific genome editing in Plasmodium falciparum using engineered zinc-finger nucleases
Published in
Nature Methods, August 2012
DOI 10.1038/nmeth.2143
Pubmed ID
Authors

Judith Straimer, Marcus C S Lee, Andrew H Lee, Bryan Zeitler, April E Williams, Jocelynn R Pearl, Lei Zhang, Edward J Rebar, Philip D Gregory, Manuel Llinás, Fyodor D Urnov, David A Fidock

Abstract

Malaria afflicts over 200 million people worldwide, and its most lethal etiologic agent, Plasmodium falciparum, is evolving to resist even the latest-generation therapeutics. Efficient tools for genome-directed investigations of P. falciparum-induced pathogenesis, including drug-resistance mechanisms, are clearly required. Here we report rapid and targeted genetic engineering of this parasite using zinc-finger nucleases (ZFNs) that produce a double-strand break in a user-defined locus and trigger homology-directed repair. Targeting an integrated egfp locus, we obtained gene-deletion parasites with unprecedented speed (2 weeks), both with and without direct selection. ZFNs engineered against the parasite gene pfcrt, responsible for escape under chloroquine treatment, rapidly produced parasites that carried either an allelic replacement or a panel of specified point mutations. This method will enable a diverse array of genome-editing approaches to interrogate this human pathogen.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 252 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 <1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Burkina Faso 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Peru 1 <1%
Unknown 244 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 72 29%
Researcher 67 27%
Student > Master 27 11%
Student > Bachelor 22 9%
Student > Postgraduate 11 4%
Other 34 13%
Unknown 19 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 131 52%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 58 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 6 2%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 2%
Other 11 4%
Unknown 28 11%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 August 2020.
All research outputs
#1,201,641
of 22,675,759 outputs
Outputs from Nature Methods
#1,501
of 4,889 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,331
of 169,484 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Methods
#6
of 55 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,675,759 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,889 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 34.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 169,484 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 55 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.