Towards social acceptance of plant breeding by genome editing

Trends in Plant Science

Volumn 20, Issue 3, 2015, Pages 145-149

  Araki, Motoko ^a   Ishii, Tetsuya ^a  

^a HOKKAIDO UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

Author keywords

Breeding; Crops; Genome editing; GMO; Regulations; Society

Indexed keywords

BREEDING; CROP; GENETIC ENGINEERING; GENETICS; HUMAN; PSYCHOLOGY; PUBLIC OPINION; SOCIAL DISTANCE;

BREEDING; CROPS, AGRICULTURAL; GENETIC ENGINEERING; HUMANS; PUBLIC OPINION; SOCIAL DISTANCE;

EID: 84924057826     PISSN: 13601385     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tplants.2015.01.010     Document Type: Review

References (39)

1. Gaj T., et al. ZFN, TALEN, and CRISPR/Cas-based methods for genome engineering. Trends Biotechnol. 2013, 31:397-405.
2. Joung J.K., Sander J.D. TALENs: a widely applicable technology for targeted genome editing. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2013, 14:49-55.
3. Hsu P.D., et al. Development and applications of CRISPR-Cas9 for genome engineering. Cell 2014, 157:1262-1278.
4. Araki M., et al. Caution required for handling genome editing technology. Trends Biotechnol. 2014, 32:234-237.
5. Kanchiswamy C.N., et al. Looking forward to genetically edited fruit crops. Trends Biotechnol. 2015, 33:62-64.
6. Hartung F., Schiemann J. Precise plant breeding using new genome editing techniques: opportunities, safety and regulation in the EU. Plant J. 2014, 78:742-752.
7. Voytas D.F., Gao C. Precision genome engineering and agriculture: opportunities and regulatory challenges. PLoS Biol. 2014, 12:e1001877.
8. Camacho A., et al. Genetically engineered crops that fly under the US regulatory radar. Nat. Biotechnol. 2014, 32:1087-1091.
9. Holme I.B., et al. Intragenesis and cisgenesis as alternatives to transgenic crop development. Plant Biotechnol. J. 2013, 11:395-407.
10. Ray A., Langer M. Homologous recombination: ends as the means. Trends Plant Sci. 2002, 7:435-440.
11. Britt A.B., May G.D. Re-engineering plant gene targeting. Trends Plant Sci. 2003, 8:90-95.
12. Charles C., et al. Effects of chemopreventive natural products on non-homologous end-joining DNA double-strand break repair. Mutat. Res. Genet. Toxicol. Environ. Mutagen. 2014, 768:33-41.
13. Durai S., et al. Zinc finger nucleases: custom-designed molecular scissors for genome engineering of plant and mammalian cells. Nucleic Acids Res. 2005, 33:5978-5990.
14. Wendt T., et al. TAL effector nucleases induce mutations at a pre-selected location in the genome of primary barley transformants. Plant Mol. Biol. 2013, 83:279-285.
15. Liang Z., et al. Targeted mutagenesis in Zea mays using TALENs and the CRISPR/Cas system. J. Genet. Genomics 2014, 41:63-68.
16. Li T., et al. High-efficiency TALEN-based gene editing produces disease-resistant rice. Nat. Biotechnol. 2012, 30:390-392.
17. Shan Q., et al. Targeted genome modification of crop plants using a CRISPR-Cas system. Nat. Biotechnol. 2013, 8:686-688.
18. Jiang W., et al. Demonstration of CRISPR/Cas9/sgRNA-mediated targeted gene modification in Arabidopsis, tobacco, sorghum and rice. Nucleic Acids Res. 2013, 41:e188.
19. Shan Q., et al. Rapid and efficient gene modification in rice and Brachypodium using TALENs. Mol. Plant 2013, 6:1365-1368.
20. Xu R., et al. Gene targeting using the Agrobacterium tumefaciens-mediated CRISPR-Cas system in rice. Rice 2014, 7:5.
21. Curtin S.J., et al. Targeted mutagenesis of duplicated genes in soybean with zinc-finger nucleases. Plant Physiol. 2011, 156:466-473.
22. Haun W., et al. Improved soybean oil quality by targeted mutagenesis of the fatty acid desaturase 2 gene family. Plant Biotechnol. J. 2014, 12:934-940.
23. Jia H., Wang N. Targeted genome editing of sweet orange using Cas9/sgRNA. PLoS ONE 2014, 9:e93806.
24. Lor V.S., et al. Targeted mutagenesis of the tomato PROCERA gene using transcription activator-like effector nucleases. Plant Physiol. 2014, 166:1288-1291.
25. Wang Y., et al. Simultaneous editing of three homoeoalleles in hexaploid bread wheat confers heritable resistance to powdery mildew. Nat. Biotechnol. 2014, 32:947-951.
26. Shukla V.K., et al. Precise genome modification in the crop species Zea mays using zinc-finger nucleases. Nature 2009, 459:437-441.
27. Bradbury L.M., et al. Inactivation of an aminoaldehyde dehydrogenase is responsible for fragrance in rice. Plant Mol. Biol. 2008, 68:439-449.
28. Chen S., et al. Badh2, encoding betaine aldehyde dehydrogenase, inhibits the biosynthesis of 2-acetyl-1-pyrroline, a major component in rice fragrance. Plant Cell 2008, 20:1850-1861.
29. Goodman R.E., Tetteh A.O. Suggested improvements for the allergenicity assessment of genetically modified plants used in foods. Curr. Allergy Asthma Rep. 2011, 11:317-324.
30. Mannion A.M., Morse S. Biotechnology in agriculture: agronomic and environmental considerations and reflections based on 15 years of GM crops. Prog. Phys. Geogr. 2012, 36:747-763.
31. EFSA Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms Scientific opinion addressing the safety assessment of plants developed using zinc finger nuclease 3 and other site-directed nucleases with similar function. EFSA J. 2012, 10:2943.
32. Schouten H.J., Jacobsen E. Are mutations in genetically modified plants dangerous?. J. Biomed. Biotechnol. 2007, 2007:82612.
33. Bawa A.S., Anilakumar K.R. Genetically modified foods: safety, risks and public concerns-a review. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2013, 50:1035-1046.
34. Bevan M.W., Uauy C. Genomics reveals new landscapes for crop improvement. Genome Biol. 2013, 14:206.
35. Ahmed F.E. Detection of genetically modified organisms in foods. Trends Biotechnol. 2002, 20:215-223.
36. Tsukaya H. Design for controllability. EMBO Rep. 2013, 14:3.
37. Friedrich G., Soriano P. Promoter traps in embryonic stem cells: a genetic screen to identify and mutate developmental genes in mice. Genes Dev. 1991, 5:1513-1523.
38. Davison J. GM plants: science, politics and EC regulations. Plant Sci. 2010, 178:94-98.
39. Ramessar K., et al. Trace and traceability - a call for regulatory harmony. Nat. Biotechnol. 2008, 26:975-978.