1 Historical Developments of Genome Editing in Plants
Ravindra Ramrao Kale
ICAR-Indian Institute of Rice Research
Prashant Raghunath Shingote
Vasantrao Naik College of Agricultural Biotechnology
Dr. Panjabrao Deshmukh Krishi Vidyapeeth
Dhiraj Lalji Wasule
Vasantrao Naik College of Agricultural Biotechnology
Shriram Jagannath Mirajkar
Dr. D. Y. Patil Arts, Commerce and Science College
Darasing Ramsing Rathod and Mangesh Pradeep Moharil
Dr. Panjabrao Deshmukh Krishi Vidyapeeth
Contents
1.1 Genesis
1.2 Techniques for Genome Editing
1.2.1 Cre-Lox System
1.2.2 Meganucleases
1.2.3 Zinc Finger Nucleases
1.2.4 Transcription Activator-Like Effector Nucleases (TALENs)
1.2.5 Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats (CRISPRs)
1.3 Applications of Genome Editing
1.3.1 Applications for Developing Biotic Stress Tolerance
1.3.2 Applications for Developing Abiotic Stress Tolerance and Nutritional Quality
1.4 Conclusion
References
1.1 Genesis
An increase in population and the limitation of available resources for food production have caused food security problems globally. Crop improvement through conventional and molecular breeding approaches can help to tackle the problem of food security through increased food production. Conventional breeding is a very widely used approach for crop improvement and found to be promising for the establishment and increased crop production. Major constraints with conventional breeding are time required for crop improvement; laborious; huge population size; less accurate and reliable; phenotypic selection (PS)-dependent, which is affected by environment; less successful for low-heritable multigenic quantitative traits and the problem with distant crosses, etc. (Tester and Langridge, 2010). Thus, to fasten the crop improvement programme, various molecular breeding approaches such as transgenic, RNAi technology, marker-assisted breeding, gene editing and so on were proven to be effective in terms of the current scenario (Limbalkar et al., 2019). The transgenic approach was found to be effective as it helps to transfer genes from distant species or genera and reduces the time for improvement of crops for a particular trait, but due to societal distrust, biosafety and regulatory issues, the use of transgenic is limited to few countries (Limbalkar et al., 2019). Genome editing has the potential to alter an organismās genetic makeup through precise changes in the DNA sequence. Genome editing is done using enzymes, especially nucleases to make cuts into the DNA strands, allowing the removal or insertion of the target DNA. It is one of the leading approaches for crop improvement that allows for the modification of a specific region of the genome and allows for the removal, alteration and insertion of DNA sequences at a particular location in the genome with very high precision. Genome editing is based on natural enzymes, including site-directed recombinase (SDR) and site-specific nuclease (SSN) repair enzymes. Genome editing has many benefits, such as site-driven mutagenesis rather than random mutation, site-driven insertion of transgenes with small copy numbers, analysis of functional genomics research, virus or pathogen gene disruption and lesser biosafety issues as compared to transgenics (Pohare et al., 2019).
In the 1960s, scientists started to search for ways to alter genomes. Working in test tubes, researchers in the University of California, San Francisco and Stanford, bombarded DNA with complex variations of molecular gadgets, all borrowed from bacteria. For the first time in 1972, it had shown that genes could be mixed and matched to establish hybrid sequences called recombinant DNA, which had never existed before (Jackson et al., 1972). The initial experiments in the direction of genome editing were carried out by Scherer and Devis (1979), where they demonstrated in vitro replacement of target DNA, which involved the double-stranded break (DSB) repair and recombination mechanisms. There are four main subtypes of SSNs developed to make cuts in genomic sequences, viz. meganucleases, zinc finger nucleases (ZFNs), transcriptional activator-like effector nucleases (TALENs) and clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeat/CRISPR-associated proteins (CRISPR/Cas) nuclease system. The timeline of major historical discoveries in genome editing is summarized in Table 1.1.
TABLE 1.1
Timeline of Major Scientific Breakthroughs in Genome Editing Year | Major Discovery |
1978 | Ishino and colleagues for the first time observed an unusual repetitive sequence activity in bacteria |
1979 | In vitro genome editing with the replacement of chromosome segment with other DNA sequence |
1985 | Identification of zinc-binding domain in protein transcription factor |
1987 | CRISPRs, first described as a bacterial immune system in Escherichia coli |
1989 | Studied the double-stranded break repair and recombination mechanism in yeast |
1993 | Francisco Mojica was the first to characterize what is now called a CRISPR locus |
1996 | Use of hybrid restriction enzyme including zinc finger and FokI cleavage domain |
2001 | Spanish researchers at University of Alicante proposed the name CRISPR |
2005 | Discovered the involvement of CRISPR as a form of adaptive immunity in bacteria and the discovery of Cas9 and PAM sequences |
2007 | Experimental demonstration of adaptive immunity of CRISP-Cas9 in bacteria |
2008 | Spacer sequences are transcribed into guide RNAs (crRNAs) and CRISP target DNA |
2009 | Identified action of TAL-type III effecters in Xanthomonas |
2010 | Role of type II, CRISPR-Cas identified |
2011 | Discovery of tracrRNA for Cas9 system |
2012 | Duodna and Charpentier use the CRISPR-Cas9 system as a tool for genome editing, by employing genetically engineered CRISPR-Cas system |
2013 | First-time demonstration of use of the CRISPR/Cas system for genome editing in plants, humans and other eukaryotic |
2015 | DNA-free genome editing technique in plants |
1.2 Techniques for Genome Editing
1.2.1 Cre-Lox System
Cre-lox system has many applications involving controlled removals of DNA fragments and the targeted insertion of DNA into specific genome sites, whereas recent advances, including controlled creative expression and innovative use of wild-type and modified lox sites, have enhanced its applicability. Cre-lox is a member of a broad family of recombinases of tyrosine that includes many other common recombinases, including Flp and Int that are derived from the bacteriophage P1. Cyclization recombination (Cre) gene encodes a 38-kDa protein, which identifies 34-base pair (bp) sites known as lox (locus of crossing over), which includes 13-bp inverted repeats at both sites of 8-bp non-palindromic core region and catalyses recombination between two lox sites (Abremski et al., 1983). The role of such a system involves a precise recombination, removal of a selectable gene (transgene) and site-specific gene transfer for crop improvement (Abremski et al., 1983; Gilbertson, 2003). It is observed that prokaryotic recombinase can be used in the eukaryotes where it enters into the nucleus and Cre recombinase is capable of performing successful recombination events on the chromosomes (Sauer, 1987). A Cre-recombinase protein from microbes may be useful to study the genome modification in other higher organisms (Sauer and Henderson, 1988; Orban et al., 1992).
1.2.2 Meganucleases
Meganucleases are a class of endonucleases characterized by a large recognition site and act like āmolecular DNA scissorsā that can be used to remove, delete or alter sequences in a highly targeted way. Meganucleases possess recognition sites of 12ā40 bp, consequently occur only once in any given genome and are known to be the most common naturally occurring restriction enzymes (Figure 1.1a). By altering their recognition sequence through protein engineering, the enzymes can be specified to the specific desired sequence. Meganucleases can be expressed in different compartments of the cell such as mitochondria or chloroplasts of archaebacteria, bacteria, phages, fungi, yeast, algae and some plants, and are mainly represented by the two main enzyme families, namely intron endonucleases and intein endonucleases. Meganucleases are most commonly found in Saccharomyces cerevisiae (I-SceI), Chlamydomonas reinhardtii and Desulfurococcus mobilis, named as I-CreI and Dmo, respectively (Choulika et al., 1995; Roberts et al., 2003; Marcaida et al., 2008). Chimeric meganucleases, derived from homing endonucleases that can induce recombination and cleave a selected new DNA target site, have been used in genome modification (Epinat et al., 2003). Sylvain et al. (2007) used an engineered homing endonuclease approach for the first time to modify the I-CreI meganuclease DNA-binding interface to target sequences of a chromosomal locus. In another study, Grizot et al. (2009) customized the chimeric meganuclease, DmoCre, by successfully assembling mutants with locally altered specificities, and these newly engineered variants of DmoCre were found selective with low toxicity level, which help to induce successful homologous recombination events. Further, meganuclease engineering was used to make a fram...