4.8 Article

EENdb: a database and knowledge base of ZFNs and TALENs for endonuclease engineering

期刊

NUCLEIC ACIDS RESEARCH
卷 41, 期 D1, 页码 D415-D422

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/nar/gks1144

关键词

-

资金

  1. 973 program [2012CB945101, 2011CBA01000, 2011CBA01102]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) [31110103904, 30730056]
  3. National Science and Technology Infrastructure Program [2009FY120100]
  4. 111 Project [B06001]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We report here the construction of engineered endonuclease database (EENdb) (http://eendb.zfgenetics.org/), a searchable database and knowledge base for customizable engineered endonucleases (EENs), including zinc finger nucleases (ZFNs) and transcription activator-like effector nucleases (TALENs). EENs are artificial nucleases designed to target and cleave specific DNA sequences. EENs have been shown to be a very useful genetic tool for targeted genome modification and have shown great potentials in the applications in basic research, clinical therapies and agricultural utilities, and they are specifically essential for reverse genetics research in species where no other gene targeting techniques are available. EENdb contains over 700 records of all the reported ZFNs and TALENs and related information, such as their target sequences, the peptide components [zinc finger protein-/transcription activator-like effector (TALE)-binding domains, FokI variants and linker peptide/framework], the efficiency and specificity of their activities. The database also lists EEN engineering tools and resources as well as information about forms and types of EENs, EEN screening and construction methods, detection methods for targeting efficiency and many other utilities. The aim of EENdb is to represent a central hub for EEN information and an integrated solution for EEN engineering. These studies may help to extract in-depth properties and common rules regarding ZFN or TALEN efficiency through comparison of the known ZFNs or TALENs.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据