| Literature DB >> 35836569 |
Mehmet Cengiz Baloglu1, Yasemin Celik Altunoglu1, Pinar Baloglu2, Ali Burak Yildiz3, Nil Türkölmez3, Yelda Özden Çiftçi3,4.
Abstract
Legumes are rich in protein and phytochemicals and have provided a healthy diet for human beings for thousands of years. In recognition of the important role they play in human nutrition and agricultural production, the researchers have made great efforts to gain new genetic traits in legumes such as yield, stress tolerance, and nutritional quality. In recent years, the significant increase in genomic resources for legume plants has prepared the groundwork for applying cutting-edge breeding technologies, such as transgenic technologies, genome editing, and genomic selection for crop improvement. In addition to the different genome editing technologies including the CRISPR/Cas9-based genome editing system, this review article discusses the recent advances in plant-specific gene-editing methods, as well as problems and potential benefits associated with the improvement of legume crops with important agronomic properties. The genome editing technologies have been effectively used in different legume plants including model legumes like alfalfa and lotus, as well as crops like soybean, cowpea, and chickpea. We also discussed gene-editing methods used in legumes and the improvements of agronomic traits in model and recalcitrant legumes. Despite the immense opportunities genome editing can offer to the breeding of legumes, governmental regulatory restrictions present a major concern. In this context, the comparison of the regulatory framework of genome editing strategies in the European Union and the United States of America was also discussed. Gene-editing technologies have opened up new possibilities for the improvement of significant agronomic traits in legume breeding.Entities:
Keywords: CRISPR/Cas9; TALEN; ZFN; genome-editing methods; legumes
Year: 2022 PMID: 35836569 PMCID: PMC9275826 DOI: 10.3389/fgene.2022.859437
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Genet ISSN: 1664-8021 Impact factor: 4.772
FIGURE 1Mechanism of CRISPR-Cas9 genome editing. (A) CRISPR-Cas9 system is composed of the Cas9 protein and gRNA and Cas9/gRNA complex occur. (B) Cas9/gRNA complex cleave targets DNA in a binary complex, causing a double-stranded DNA break. (C) DNA breaks are repaired by non-homologous end joining (NHEJ) and homology-directed repair (HDR). In the process, short insertion deletions, nucleotide substitutions, or gene insertion may occur.
FIGURE 2Overview of the TALEN structure (Joung and Sander, 2013). (A) Schematic view of the TALEN structure. Colored discs with two letters inside represent the RVD. (B) Schematic view of TALEN pair binding to target site. Cleave of Fokl occurs on the spacer domain on the target site. (C) Schematic diagram of the TALEN binding domain with an amino acid sequence. Two amino acids that represent RVD are shown in bold. (D) Amino acid sequence of a TALEN binding domain with a nucleotide representation of each RVD.
Gene-editing technology in different legume crops.
| Legume | Technique | Target (gene and function) | Result | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| CRISPR/Cas 9 |
| MtSUP was found to be orthologous of |
|
| CRISPR/Cas 9 |
| 51 |
| |
| CRISPR/Cas 9 |
| 70% mutation efficiency |
| |
|
| Homozygous and biallelic mutants |
| ||
| CRISPR/Cas 9 |
| Smaller nodules, earlier onset of nodule senescence, ineffective nodules |
| |
| CRISPR/Cas 9 |
| Efficient mutation |
| |
| CRISPR/Cas 9 |
| Statistically significant effects on nodule production |
| |
| CRISPR/Cas 9 |
| Albino plants |
| |
| CRISPR/Cas 9 |
| Mutated genes |
| |
|
| CRISPR/Cas 9 |
| Early nodule senescence |
|
| CRISPR/Cas 9 |
| Non-production of triterpenoids |
| |
| CRISPR/Cas 9 |
| Decrease in nodule formation |
| |
| CRISPR/Cas 9 |
| CRISPR/Cas9 system can effectively induce mutations in SNF related genes |
| |
|
| CRISPR/Cas 9 |
| Changes in flowering time |
|
| CRISPR/Cas 9 |
| Loss of lipoxygenase activity |
| |
| CRISPR/Cas 9 |
| Inherited mutation until T2 lines |
| |
|
| CRISPR/Cas 9 |
| ft2a, ft5a, and ft2aft5a mutants |
|
| CRISPR/Cas 9 | Pooled platform-102 candidate genes | Multiplex mutations |
| |
| CRISPR/Cas 9 |
| Deletion and insertion mutations |
| |
| CRISPR/Cas 9 |
| Increased oleic acid content |
| |
| CRISPR/Cas 9 |
| Altered plant architecture |
| |
| CRISPR/Cas 9 |
| Increased oleic acid content |
| |
| CRISPR/Cas 9 |
| Insertion and deletion mutations |
| |
| CRISPR/Cas 9 |
| Insertion and deletion mutations |
| |
| CRISPR/Cas 9 |
| Insertion and deletion mutations |
| |
| CRISPR/Cas 9 |
| Increased oleic acid content |
| |
| CRISPR/Cas 9 |
| Mutations in three of nine genes |
| |
| CRISPR/Cas 9 |
| Early flowering |
| |
| CRISPR/Cas 9 |
| Biallelic double mutant |
| |
| TALEN |
|
|
| |
| CRISPR/Cas 9 |
| Deletion mutations |
| |
| CRISPR/Cas 9 TALEN |
| Albino and dwarf buds |
| |
| CRISPR/Cas 9 |
| Mutations |
| |
| CRISPR/Cas 9 |
| Mutations |
| |
| CRISPR/Cas 9 |
| Mutations |
| |
| CRISPR/Cas 9 |
| Mutations |
| |
| CRISPR/Cas 9 |
| Mutations |
| |
| CRISPR/Cas 9 |
| Mutations |
| |
| TALEN |
| Increased oleic acid content, reduced linolenic acid content |
| |
| TALEN |
| Reduced linolenic acid content |
| |
| TALEN |
| Combinatorial mutant plants |
| |
| ZFN |
| 2 bp differences on target genes |
| |
| ZFN |
| Defective miRNA precursor transcript processing |
| |
| ZFN |
| Increased lateral root growth |
| |
| Cowpea ( | CRISPR/Cas 9 |
| Mutations |
|
| CRISPR/Cas 9 |
| Male and female sterilities |
| |
| CRISPR/Cas 9 |
| Blocked nodule formation |
| |
| Chickpea ( | CRISPR/Cas 9 |
| High efficiency in editing |
|
| Peanut ( | CRISPR/Cas 9 |
| Successfully edited genes |
|
| CRISPR/Cas 9 |
| G448A, 441_442insA, G451T mutations |
| |
| TALEN |
| Increase in the oleic acid content |
|
FIGURE 3Strategies for improving legume breeding.