» Articles » PMID: 32040758

Gene Editing in Plants: Assessing the Variables Through a Simplified Case Study

Overview
Journal Plant Mol Biol
Date 2020 Feb 11
PMID 32040758
Citations 5
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Multiple variables that control the relative levels of successful heritable plant genome editing were addressed using simple case studies in Arabidopsis thaliana. The recent advent of genome editing technologies (especially CRISPR, Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats) has revolutionized various fields of scientific research. The process is much more specific than previous mutagenic processes and allows for targeting of nearly any gene of interest for the creation of loss-of-function mutations and many other types of editing, including gene-replacement and gene activation. However, not all CRISPR construct designs are successful, due to several factors, including differences in the strength and cell- or tissue-type specificity of the regulatory elements used to express the Cas9 (CRISPR Associated protein 9) DNA nuclease and single guide RNA components, and differences in the relative editing efficiency at different target areas within a given gene. Here we compare the levels of editing created in Arabidopsis thaliana by CRISPR constructs containing either different promoters, or altered target sites with varied levels of guanine-cytosine base content. Additionally, nuclease activity at sites targeted by imperfectly matched single guide RNAs was observed, suggesting that while the primary goal of most CRISPR construct designs is to achieve rapid, robust, heritable gene editing, the formation of unintended mutations at other genomic loci must be carefully monitored.

Citing Articles

RNA Pol III promoters-key players in precisely targeted plant genome editing.

Kor S, Chowdhury N, Keot A, Yogendra K, Chikkaputtaiah C, Reddy P Front Genet. 2023; 13:989199.

PMID: 36685866 PMC: 9845283. DOI: 10.3389/fgene.2022.989199.


Spatiotemporal Regulation of CRISPR/Cas9 Enables Efficient, Precise, and Heritable Edits in Plant Genomes.

Rahman F, Mishra A, Gupta A, Sharma R Front Genome Ed. 2022; 4:870108.

PMID: 35558825 PMC: 9087570. DOI: 10.3389/fgeed.2022.870108.


Functional Validation of /guideRNA Constructs for Site-Directed Mutagenesis of Triticale .

Michalski K, Hertig C, Mankowski D, Kumlehn J, Zimny J, Linkiewicz A Int J Mol Sci. 2021; 22(13).

PMID: 34210100 PMC: 8269138. DOI: 10.3390/ijms22137038.


The efficacy of CRISPR-mediated cytosine base editing with the RPS5a promoter in Arabidopsis thaliana.

Choi M, Yun J, Kim J, Kim J, Kim S Sci Rep. 2021; 11(1):8087.

PMID: 33850267 PMC: 8044221. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-87669-y.


Optimizing the CRISPR/Cas9 system for genome editing in grape by using grape promoters.

Ren C, Liu Y, Guo Y, Duan W, Fan P, Li S Hortic Res. 2021; 8(1):52.

PMID: 33642575 PMC: 7917103. DOI: 10.1038/s41438-021-00489-z.

References
1.
Shrager J, Hauser C, Chang C, Harris E, Davies J, McDermott J . Chlamydomonas reinhardtii genome project. A guide to the generation and use of the cDNA information. Plant Physiol. 2003; 131(2):401-8. PMC: 166817. DOI: 10.1104/pp.016899. View

2.
Zabinyakov N, Bullivant G, Cao F, Fernandez Ojeda M, Jia Z, Wen X . Characterization of the first knock-out aldh7a1 zebrafish model for pyridoxine-dependent epilepsy using CRISPR-Cas9 technology. PLoS One. 2017; 12(10):e0186645. PMC: 5650160. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0186645. View

3.
Wang T, Zhang H, Zhu H . CRISPR technology is revolutionizing the improvement of tomato and other fruit crops. Hortic Res. 2019; 6:77. PMC: 6570646. DOI: 10.1038/s41438-019-0159-x. View

4.
Castel B, Tomlinson L, Locci F, Yang Y, Jones J . Optimization of T-DNA architecture for Cas9-mediated mutagenesis in Arabidopsis. PLoS One. 2019; 14(1):e0204778. PMC: 6326418. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0204778. View

5.
Wilson L, OBrien A, Bauer D . The Current State and Future of CRISPR-Cas9 gRNA Design Tools. Front Pharmacol. 2018; 9:749. PMC: 6052051. DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2018.00749. View