Erratum to: BATCH-GE: Batch analysis of Next-Generation Sequencing data for genome editing assessment (Scientific Reports, (2016), 6, 1, (30330), 10.1038/srep30330);BATCH-GE: Batch analysis of Next-Generation Sequencing data for genome editing assessment

Scientific Reports

Volumn 6, Issue , 2016, Pages

  Boel, Annekatrien ^a   Steyaert, Woutert ^a   De Rocker, Nina ^a   Menten, Bjorn ^a   Callewaert, Bert ^a   De Paepe, Anne ^a   Coucke, Paul ^a   Willaert, Andy ^a  

^a GHENT UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Belgium)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ANIMAL MODEL; BIOINFORMATICS; CLUSTERED REGULARLY INTERSPACED SHORT PALINDROMIC REPEAT; GENE DISRUPTION; GENETICS; GENOME; IN VITRO STUDY; INDEL MUTATION; KNOCKOUT GENE; MODEL; NEXT GENERATION SEQUENCING; NONHUMAN; SITE DIRECTED MUTAGENESIS; VELOCITY; ZEBRA FISH; ANIMAL; CRISPR CAS SYSTEM; DNA SEQUENCE; GENE EDITING; HIGH THROUGHPUT SEQUENCING; PROCEDURES; SOFTWARE;

ZEBRAFISH PROTEIN;

ANIMALS; CRISPR-CAS SYSTEMS; GENE EDITING; HIGH-THROUGHPUT NUCLEOTIDE SEQUENCING; INDEL MUTATION; SEQUENCE ANALYSIS, DNA; SOFTWARE; ZEBRAFISH; ZEBRAFISH PROTEINS;

EID: 84979776539     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20452322     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-33869-y     Document Type: Erratum

References (36)

1. Urnov, F. D. et al. Highly efficient endogenous human gene correction using designed zinc-finger nucleases. Nature 435, 646-651, doi: 10.1038/Nature03556 (2005).
2. Urnov, F. D., Rebar, E. J., Holmes, M. C., Zhang, H. S., Gregory, P. D. Genome editing with engineered zinc finger nucleases. Nat Rev Genet 11, 636-646, doi: 10.1038/Nrg2842 (2010).
3. Cermak, T. et al. Efficient design and assembly of custom TALEN and other TAL effector-based constructs for DNA targeting. Nucleic Acids Res 39, doi: ARTN e82, doi: 10.1093/nar/gkr218 (2011).
4. Bedell, V. M. et al. In vivo genome editing using a high-efficiency TALEN system. Nature 491, 114-U133, doi: 10.1038/Nature11537 (2012).
5. Cong, L. et al. Multiplex Genome Engineering Using CRISPR/Cas Systems. Science 339, 819-823, doi: 10.1126/science.1231143 (2013).
6. Jinek, M. et al. A Programmable Dual-RNA-Guided DNA Endonuclease in Adaptive Bacterial Immunity. Science 337, 816-821, doi: 10.1126/science.1225829 (2012).
7. Mali, P. et al. RNA-Guided Human Genome Engineering via Cas9. Science 339, 823-826, doi: 10.1126/science.1232033 (2013).
8. Horvath, P., Barrangou, R. CRISPR/Cas, the Immune System of Bacteria and Archaea. Science 327, 167-170, doi: 10.1126/science.1179555 (2010).
9. Terns, M. P., Terns, R. M. CRISPR-based adaptive immune systems. Curr Opin Microbiol 14, 321-327, doi: 10.1016/j. mib.2011.03.005 (2011).
10. Wiedenheft, B., Sternberg, S. H., Doudna, J. A. RNA-guided genetic silencing systems in bacteria and archaea. Nature 482, 331-338, doi: 10.1038/Nature10886 (2012).
11. Betermier, M., Bertrand, P., Lopez, B. S. Is Non-Homologous End-Joining Really an Inherently Error-Prone Process? Plos Genet 10, 1004086, doi: ARTN e1004086, doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1004086 (2014).
12. Iliakis, G. et al. Mechanisms of DNA double strand break repair and chromosome aberration formation. Cytogenet Genome Res 104, 14-20, doi: 10.1159/000077461 (2004).
13. Babon, J. J., McKenzie, M., Cotton, R. G. H. The use of resolvases T4 endonuclease VII and T7 endonuclease I in mutation detection. Mol Biotechnol 23, 73-81, doi: 10.1385/Mb:23:1:73 (2003).
14. Qiu, P. et al. Mutation detection using Surveyor (TM) nuclease. Biotechniques 36, 702-+ (2004).
15. Vouillot, L., Thelie, A., Pollet, N. Comparison of T7E1 and Surveyor Mismatch Cleavage Assays to Detect Mutations Triggered by Engineered Nucleases. G3-Genes Genom Genet 5, 407-415, doi: 10.1534/g3.114.015834 (2015).
16. Huang, M. C., Cheong, W. C., Lim, L. S., Li, M. H. A simple, high sensitivity mutation screening using Ampligase mediated T7 endonuclease I and Surveyor nuclease with microfluidic capillary electrophoresis. Electrophoresis 33, 788-796, doi: 10.1002/elps.201100460 (2012).
17. Tsuji, T., Niida, Y. Development of a simple and highly sensitive mutation screening system by enzyme mismatch cleavage with optimized conditions for standard laboratories. Electrophoresis 29, 1473-1483, doi: 10.1002/elps.200700729 (2008).
18. van Dijk, E. L., Auger, H., Jaszczyszyn, Y., Thermes, C. Ten years of next-generation sequencing technology. Trends Genet 30, 418-426, doi: 10.1016/j.tig.2014.07.001 (2014).
19. Robinson, J. T. et al. Integrative genomics viewer. Nat Biotechnol 29, 24-26, doi: 10.1038/nbt.1754 (2011).
20. Thorvaldsdottir, H., Robinson, J. T., Mesirov, J. P. Integrative Genomics Viewer (IGV): high-performance genomics data visualization and exploration. Brief Bioinform 14, 178-192, doi: 10.1093/bib/bbs017 (2013).
21. Guell, M., Yang, L. H., Church, G. M. Genome editing assessment using CRISPR Genome Analyzer (CRISPR-GA). Bioinformatics 30, 2968-2970, doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btu427 (2014).
22. Kent, W. J. et al. The human genome browser at UCSC. Genome research 12, 996-1006, doi: 10.1101/gr.229102 (2002).
23. Fu, Y. F. et al. High-frequency off-target mutagenesis induced by CRISPR-Cas nucleases in human cells. Nat Biotechnol 31, 822-+, doi: 10.1038/nbt.2623 (2013).
24. Hsu, P. D. et al. DNA targeting specificity of RNA-guided Cas9 nucleases. Nat Biotechnol 31, 827-+, doi: 10.1038/nbt.2647 (2013).
25. Hwang, W. Y. et al. Efficient genome editing in zebrafish using a CRISPR-Cas system. Nat Biotechnol 31, 227-229, doi: 10.1038/Nbt.2501 (2013).
26. Li, M. H. et al. Efficient and Heritable Gene Targeting in Tilapia by CRISPR/Cas9. Genetics 197, 591-U219, doi: 10.1534/genetics.114.163667 (2014).
27. Kim, S., Kim, D., Cho, S. W., Kim, J., Kim, J. S. Highly efficient RNA-guided genome editing in human cells via delivery of purified Cas9 ribonucleoproteins. Genome research 24, 1012-1019, doi: 10.1101/gr.171322.113 (2014).
28. Sung, Y. H. et al. Highly efficient gene knockout in mice and zebrafish with RNA-guided endonucleases. Genome research 24, 125-131, doi: 10.1101/gr.163394.113 (2014).
29. Irion, U., Krauss, J., Nusslein-Volhard, C. Precise and efficient genome editing in zebrafish using the CRISPR/Cas9 system. Development 141, 4827-4830, doi: 10.1242/Dev.115584 (2014).
30. Hruscha, A. et al. Efficient CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing with low off-target effects in zebrafish. Development 140, 4982-4987, doi: 10.1242/dev.099085 (2013).
31. Hwang, W. Y. et al. Heritable and Precise Zebrafish Genome Editing Using a CRISPR-Cas System. Plos One 8, e68708, doi: ARTN e68708, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0068708 (2013).
32. Varshney, G. K. et al. High-throughput gene targeting and phenotyping in zebrafish using CRISPR/Cas9. Genome research 25, 1030-1042, doi: 10.1101/gr.186379.114 (2015).
33. De Leeneer, K. et al. Flexible, Scalable, and Efficient Targeted Resequencing on a Benchtop Sequencer for Variant Detection in Clinical Practice. Hum Mutat 36, 379-387, doi: 10.1002/humu.22739 (2015).
34. Auer, T. O., Del Bene, F. CRISPR/Cas9 and TALEN-mediated knock-in approaches in zebrafish. Methods 69, 142-150, doi: 10.1016/j.ymeth.2014.03.027 (2014).
35. Naito, Y., Hino, K., Bono, H., Ui-Tei, K. CRISPRdirect: software for designing CRISPR/Cas guide RNA with reduced off-target sites. Bioinformatics 31, 1120-1123, doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btu743 (2015).
36. Lawrence, C. The husbandry of zebrafish (Danio rerio): A review. Aquaculture 269, 1-20, doi: 10.1016/j.aquaculture.2007.04.077 (2007).