Genome editing has revolutionized many processes, including crop improvement and production of next-generation hybrid seeds from genic male sterile lines and maintainers. Different genome editing techniques include zinc-finger nucleases, transcription activator-like effector nucleases, and clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR)-associated protein (Cas), and came into existence after the success of engineered meganucleases. Insertion of DSBs at specific sites and induction of the repair process to bring about desirable amendments in gene functions are the prime tasks of genome editing approaches. CRISPR/Cas system, developed recently, relies on CRISPR-RNAs for recognizing the targeted sequence and is far more effective than the previously developed genome editing approaches. The refinement of abiotic and biotic stress tolerance, enhancement of quality traits, and improvement of yield represent the changes that have been achieved through various genome editing practices. This update review presents an overview of genome editing in plants and the currently available genome-editing tools to evaluate their effectiveness, along with their positive and negative aspects.
AhmarS, GillRA, JungKH, et al.Conventional and molecular techniques from simple breeding to speed breeding in crop plants: Recent advances and future outlook. Int J Mol Sci, 2020; 21(7):2590; doi: 10.3390/ijms21072590
2.
HolmeIB, GregersenPL, Brinch-PedersenH. Induced genetic variation in crop plants by random or targeted mutagenesis: Convergence and differences. Front Plant Sci, 2019; 10:1468; doi: 10.3389/fpls.2019.01468
3.
HinnenA, HicksJB, FinkGR. Transformation of yeast. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 1978; 75(4):1929–1933; doi: 10.1073/pnas.75.4.1929
4.
SchererS, DavisRW. Replacement of chromosome segments with altered DNA sequences constructed in vitro. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 1979; 76(10):4951–4955; doi: 10.1073/pnas.76.10.4951
5.
GajT, GersbachCA, BarbasCF.3rd., ZFN, TALEN, and CRISPR/Cas-based methods for genome engineering. Trends Biotechnol, 2013; 31(7):397–405; doi: 10.1016/j.tibtech.2013.04.004
6.
ThomasKR, FolgerKR, CapecchiMR. High-frequency targeting of genes to specific sites in the mammalian genome. Cell, 1986; 44(3):419–428; doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(86)90463-0
7.
RudnickiMA, BraunT, HinumaS, et al.Inactivation of MyoD in mice leads to up-regulation of the myogenic HLH gene Myf-5 and results in apparently normal muscle development. Cell, 1992; 71(3):383–390; doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(92)90508-a
8.
RouetP, SmihF, JasinM. Introduction of double-strand breaks into the genome of mouse cells by expression of a rare-cutting endonuclease. Mol. Cell. Biol, 1994; 14(12):8096–8106; doi: 10.1128/mcb.14.12.8096-8106.1994
9.
StrathernJN, KlarAJ, HicksJB, et al.Homothallic switching of yeast mating type cassettes is initiated by a double-stranded cut in the MAT locus. Cell, 1982; 31(1):183–192; doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(82)90418-4
10.
SzostakJW, Orr-WeaverTL, RothsteinRJ, et al.The double-strand-break repair model for recombination. Cell, 1983; 33(1):25–35; doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(83)90331-8
11.
OzenbergerBA, RoederGS. A unique pathway of double-strand break repair operates in tandemly repeated genes. Mol Cell Biol, 1991; 11(3):1222–1231; doi: 10.1128/mcb.11.3.1222-1231.1991
12.
MillerJ, McLachlanAD, KlugA. Repetitive zinc-binding domains in the protein transcription factor IIIA from Xenopus oocytes. Embo J, 1985; 4(6):1609–1614; doi: 10.1002/j.1460-2075.1985.tb03825.x
13.
LaityJH, LeeBM, WrightPE. Zinc finger proteins: New insights into structural and functional diversity. Curr Opin Struct Biol, 2001; 11(1):39–46; doi: 10.1016/s0959-440x(00)00167-6
14.
PavletichNP, PaboCO. Zinc finger-DNA recognition: Crystal structure of a Zif268-DNA complex at 2.1 A. Science, 1991; 252(5007):809–817; doi: 10.1126/science.2028256
15.
KimYG, ChaJ, ChandrasegaranS. Hybrid restriction enzymes: Zinc finger fusions to Fok I cleavage domain. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 1996; 93(3):1156–1160; doi: 10.1073/pnas.93.3.1156
16.
LloydA, PlaisierCL, CarrollD, et al.Targeted mutagenesis using zinc-finger nucleases in Arabidopsis. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2005; 102(6):2232–2237; doi: 10.1073/pnas.0409339102
17.
BeumerK, BhattacharyyaG, BibikovaM, et al.Efficient gene targeting in Drosophila with zinc-finger nucleases. G E N, 2006; 172(4):2391–2403; doi: 10.1534/genetics.105.052829
18.
BochJ, ScholzeH, SchornackS, et al.Breaking the code of DNA binding specificity of TAL-type III effectors. Science, 2009; 326(5959):1509–1512; doi: 10.1126/science.1178811
19.
MoscouMJ, BogdanoveAJ. A simple cipher governs DNA recognition by TAL effectors. Science, 2009; 326(5959):1501; doi: 10.1126/science.1178817
20.
MillerJC, TanS, QiaoG, et al.A TALE nuclease architecture for efficient genome editing. Nat Biotechnol, 2011; 29(2):143–148; doi: 10.1038/nbt.1755
21.
MohantaTK, BashirT, HashemA, et al.Genome editing tools in plants. Genes (Basel), 2017; 8(12):399; doi: 10.3390/genes8120399
22.
ChandrasegaranS, CarrollD. Origins of programmable nucleases for genome engineering. J Mol Biol, 2016; 428(5 Pt B):963–989; doi: 10.1016/j.jmb.2015.10.014
23.
CermakT, DoyleEL, ChristianM, et al.Efficient design and assembly of custom TALEN and other TAL effector-based constructs for DNA targeting. Nucleic Acids Res, 2011; 39(12):e82; doi: 10.1093/nar/gkr218
24.
ReyonD, TsaiSQ, KhayterC, et al.FLASH assembly of TALENs for high-throughput genome editing. Nat Biotechnol, 2012; 30(5):460–465; doi: 10.1038/nbt.2170
25.
IshinoY, ShinagawaH, MakinoK, et al.Nucleotide sequence of the iap gene, responsible for alkaline phosphatase isozyme conversion in Escherichia coli, and identification of the gene product. J Bacteriol, 1987; 169(12):5429–5433; doi: 10.1128/jb.169.12.5429-5433.1987
26.
MojicaFJ, Díez-VillaseñorC, SoriaE, et al.Biological significance of a family of regularly spaced repeats in the genomes of Archaea, Bacteria and mitochondria. Mol Microbiol, 2000; 36(1):244–246; doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2958.2000.01838.x
27.
JansenR, EmbdenJD, GaastraW, et al.Identification of genes that are associated with DNA repeats in prokaryotes. Mol Microbiol, 2002; 43(6):1565–1575; doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2958.2002.02839.x
28.
MojicaFJ, JuezG, Rodríguez-ValeraF. Transcription at different salinities of Haloferax mediterranei sequences adjacent to partially modified PstI sites. Mol Microbiol, 1993; 9(3):613–621; doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2958.1993.tb01721.x
29.
BolotinA, QuinquisB, SorokinA, et al.Clustered regularly interspaced short palindrome repeats (CRISPRs) have spacers of extrachromosomal origin. Microbiology (Reading), 2005; 151(Pt 8):2551–2561; doi: 10.1099/mic.0.28048-0
30.
MojicaFJ, Díez-VillaseñorC, García-MartínezJ, et al.Intervening sequences of regularly spaced prokaryotic repeats derive from foreign genetic elements. J Mol Evol, 2005; 60(2):174–182; doi: 10.1007/s00239-004-0046-3
31.
PourcelC, SalvignolG, VergnaudG. CRISPR elements in Yersinia pestis acquire new repeats by preferential uptake of bacteriophage DNA, and provide additional tools for evolutionary studies. Microbiology (Reading), 2005; 151(Pt 3):653–663; doi: 10.1099/mic.0.27437-0
32.
BarrangouR, FremauxC, DeveauH, et al.CRISPR provides acquired resistance against viruses in prokaryotes. Science, 2007; 315(5819):1709–1712; doi: 10.1126/science.1138140
33.
BrounsSJ, JoreMM, LundgrenM, et al.Small CRISPR RNAs guide antiviral defense in prokaryotes. Science, 2008; 321(5891):960–964; doi: 10.1126/science.1159689
34.
GarneauJE, DupuisMÈ, VillionM, et al.The CRISPR/Cas bacterial immune system cleaves bacteriophage and plasmid DNA. Nature, 2010; 468(7320):67–71; doi: 10.1038/nature09523
35.
DeltchevaE, ChylinskiK, SharmaCM, et al.CRISPR RNA maturation by trans-encoded small RNA and host factor RNase III. Nature, 2011; 471(7340):602–607; doi: 10.1038/nature09886
36.
JinekM, ChylinskiK, FonfaraI, et al.A programmable dual-RNA-guided DNA endonuclease in adaptive bacterial immunity. Science, 2012; 337(6096):816–821; doi: 10.1126/science.1225829
37.
MaliP, YangL, EsveltKM, et al.RNA-guided human genome engineering via Cas9. Science, 2013; 339(6121):823–826; doi: 10.1126/science.1232033
38.
DoudnaJA, CharpentierE. Genome editing. The new frontier of genome engineering with CRISPR-Cas9. Science, 2014; 346(6213):1258096; doi: 10.1126/science.1258096
39.
GaoF, ShenXZ, JiangF, et al.DNA-guided genome editing using the Natronobacterium gregoryi Argonaute. Nat Biotechnol, 2016; 34(7):768–773; doi: 10.1038/nbt.3547
40.
BhatJA, AliS, SalgotraRK, et al.Genomic selection in the era of next generation sequencing for complex traits in plant breeding. Front Genet, 2016; 7:221; doi: 10.3389/fgene.2016.00221
41.
NerkarG, DevarumathS, PurankarM, et al.Advances in crop breeding through precision genome editing. Front Genet, 2022; 13:880195; doi: 10.3389/fgene.2022.880195
42.
KumawatS, RanaN, BansalR, et al.Expanding avenue of fast neutron mediated mutagenesis for crop improvement. Plants (Basel), 2019; 8(6):164; doi: 10.3390/plants8060164
43.
ParmarN, SinghKH, SharmaD, et al.Genetic engineering strategies for biotic and abiotic stress tolerance and quality enhancement in horticultural crops: A comprehensive review. 3 Biotech, 2017; 7(4):239; doi: 10.1007/s13205-017-0870-y
44.
ShiJ, GaoH, WangH, et al.ARGOS8 variants generated by CRISPR-Cas9 improve maize grain yield under field drought stress conditions. Plant Biotechnol J, 2017; 15(2):207–216; doi: 10.1111/pbi.12603
45.
OsakabeY, OsakabeK. Genome editing to improve abiotic stress responses in plants. Prog Mol Biol Transl Sci, 2017; 149:99–109; doi: 10.1016/bs.pmbts.2017.03.007
46.
ZhangA, LiuY, WangF, et al.Enhanced rice salinity tolerance via CRISPR/Cas9-targeted mutagenesis of the OsRR22 gene. Mol Breed, 2019; 39:47; doi: 10.1007/s11032-019-0954-y
47.
CampaCC, WeisbachNR, SantinhaAJ, et al.Multiplexed genome engineering by Cas12a and CRISPR arrays encoded on single transcripts. Nat Methods, 2019; 16(9):887–893; doi: 10.1038/s41592-019-0508-6
48.
OgataT, IshizakiT, FujitaM, FujitaY. CRISPR/Cas9-targeted mutagenesis of OsERA1 confers enhanced responses to abscisic acid and drought stress and increased primary root growth under non stressed conditions in rice. PLoS One, 2020; 15(12):e0243376.
49.
Roca PaixaoJF, GilletFX, RibeiroTP, et al.Improved drought stress tolerance in arabidopsis by CRISPR/DCas9 fusion with a histone acetyl transferase. Sci Rep, 2019; 9(1):8080.
50.
LiB, LiangS, AlariqiM, et al.The application of temperature sensitivity CRISPR/LbCpf1 (LbCas12a) mediated genome editing in allotetraploid cotton (G. Hirsutum) and creation of non transgenic, gossypol-free cotton. Plant Biotechnol. J, 2021; 19.
51.
KimST, ChoiM, BaeSJ, et al.The functional association of Acqos/Victr with salt stress resistance in Arabidopsis Thaliana was confirmed by Crispr-mediated mutagenesis. Int. J. of Mol. Sci, 2021:22.
52.
HuZ, LiJ, DingS, et al.The protein kinase CPK28 phosphorylates ascorbate peroxidase and enhances thermotolerance in tomato. Plant Physiol, 2021; 186(2):1302–1317.
53.
AliZ, AbulfarajA, IdrisA, et al.CRISPR/Cas9-mediated viral interference in plants. Genome Biol, 2015; 16:238; doi: 10.1186/s13059-015-0799-6
54.
LiR, ZhangL, WangL, ChenL, et al.Reduction of tomato-plant chilling tolerance by CRISPRCas9-mediated SlCBF1 mutagenesis. J. of Agri. and Food Chem, 2018:66.
55.
BaegGJ, KimSH, ChoiDM, et al.CRISPR/Cas9-mediated mutation of 5-oxoprolinase gene confers resistance to sulfonamide compounds in arabidopsis. Plant Biotechnol. Rep, 2021:15.
56.
LyuYS, CaoLM, HuangWQ, et al.Disruption of three polyamine uptake transporter genes in rice by CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing confers tolerance to herbicide paraquat. aBIOTECH, 2022; 3(2):140–145; doi: 10.1007/s42994-022-00075-4
57.
PandeyP, IrulappanV, BagavathiannanMV, et al.Impact of combined abiotic and biotic stresses on plant growth and avenues for crop improvement by exploiting physio-morphological traits. Front Plant Sci, 2017; 8:537; doi: 10.3389/fpls.2017.00537
58.
ZaidiSS, TashkandiM, MansoorS, et al.Engineering plant immunity: Using CRISPR/Cas9 to generate virus resistance. Front Plant Sci, 2016; 7:1673; doi: 10.3389/fpls.2016.01673
59.
TashkandiM, AliZ, AljedaaniF, et al.Engineering resistance against Tomato yellow leaf curl virus via the CRISPR/Cas9 system in tomato. Plant Signal Behav, 2018; 13(10):e1525996; doi: 10.1080/15592324.2018.1525996
60.
MoriT, TakenakaK, DomotoF, et al.Inhibition of binding of tomato yellow leaf curl virus rep to its replication origin by artificial zinc-finger protein. Mol Biotechnol, 2013; 54(2):198–203; doi: 10.1007/s12033-012-9552-5
61.
ChengX, LiF, CaiJ, et al.Artificial TALE as a convenient protein platform for engineering broad-spectrum resistance to begomoviruses. Viruses, 2015; 7(8):4772–4782; doi: 10.3390/v7082843
62.
O’ConnellMR, OakesBL, SternbergSH, et al.Programmable RNA recognition and cleavage by CRISPR/Cas9. Nature, 2014; 516(7530):263–266; doi: 10.1038/nature13769
63.
ZhangY, HuangS, WangX, et al.Defective APETALA2 genes lead to sepal modification in Brassica crops. Front Plant Sci, 2018; 9:367; doi: 10.3389/fpls.2018.00367
64.
PyottDE, SheehanE, MolnarA. Engineering of CRISPR/Cas9-mediated potyvirus resistance in transgene-free Arabidopsis plants. Mol Plant Pathol, 2016; 17(8):1276–1288; doi: 10.1111/mpp.12417
65.
BorrelliV, BrambillaV, RogowskyP, et al.The enhancement of plant disease resistance using CRISPR/Cas9 Technology. Front Plant Sci, 2018; 9:1245; doi: 10.3389/fpls.2018.01245
66.
VatsS, KumawatS, KumarV, et al.Genome editing in plants: Exploration of technological advancements and challenges. Cell, 2019; 8(11):1386; doi: 10.3390/cells8111386
67.
MalnoyM, ViolaR, JungMH, et al.DNA-free genetically edited grapevine and apple protoplast using CRISPR/Cas9 ribonucleoproteins. Front Plant Sci, 2016; 7:1904; doi: 10.3389/fpls.2016.01904
68.
WangF, WangC, LiuP, et al.Enhanced rice blast resistance by CRISPR/Cas9-targeted mutagenesis of the ERF transcription factor gene OsERF922. PLoS One, 2016; 11(4):e0154027; doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0154027
69.
TyagiS, KesirajuK, SaakreM, et al.Genome editing for resistance to insect pests: An emerging tool for crop improvement. ACS Omega, 2020; 5(33):20674–20683; doi: 10.1021/acsomega.0c01435
70.
LuHP, LuoT, FuHW, et al.Resistance of rice to insect pests mediated by suppression of serotonin biosynthesis. Nat Plants, 2018; 4(6):338–344; doi: 10.1038/s41477-018-0152-7
71.
SattlerMC, CarvalhoCR, ClarindoWR. The polyploidy and its key role in plant breeding. Planta, 2016; 243(2):281–296; doi: 10.1007/s00425-015-2450-x
72.
PengA, ChenS, LeiT, et al.Engineering canker-resistant plants through CRISPR/Cas9-targeted editing of the susceptibility gene CsLOB1 promoter in citrus. Plant Biotechnol J, 2017; 15(12):1509–1519; doi: 10.1111/pbi.12733
73.
WangY, ChengX, ShanQ, et al.Simultaneous editing of three homoeoalleles in hexaploid bread wheat confers heritable resistance to powdery mildew. Nat Biotechnol, 2014; 32(9):947–951; doi: 10.1038/nbt.2969
74.
KhatodiaS, BhatotiaK, TutejaN. Development of CRISPR/Cas9 mediated virus resistance in agriculturally important crops. Bioengineered, 2017; 8(3):274–279; doi: 10.1080/21655979.2017.1297347
75.
ThirugnanasambandamPP, HoangNV, HenryRJ. The challenge of analyzing the sugarcane genome. Front Plant Sci, 2018; 9:616; doi: 10.3389/fpls.2018.00616
76.
BirchRG, BowerRS, ElliottA. Highly efficient, 5′-sequence-specific transgene silencing in a complex polyploid. Tropical Plant Biol, 2010; 3(2):88–97; doi: 10.1007/s12042-010-9047-0
77.
MohanC. Genome editing in sugarcane: Challenges ahead. Front Plant Sci, 2016; 7:1542; doi: 10.3389/fpls.2016.01542
78.
LiangZ, ZhangK, ChenK, et al.Targeted mutagenesis in Zea mays using TALENS and the CRISPR/Cas system. J Genet Genomics, 2014; 41(2):63–68; doi: 10.1016/j.jgg.2013.12.001
79.
HaunW, CoffmanA, ClasenBM, et al.Improved soybean oil quality by targeted mutagenesis of the fatty acid desaturase 2 gene family. Plant Biotechnol J, 2014; 12(7):934–940; doi: 10.1111/pbi.12201
DemorestZL, CoffmanA, BaltesNJ, et al.Direct stacking of sequence-specific nuclease-induced mutations to produce high oleic and low linolenic soybean oil. BMC Plant Biol, 2016; 16(1):225; doi: 10.1186/s12870-016-0906-1
82.
GuptaM, DeKelverRC, PaltaA, et al.Transcriptional activation of Brassica napus β-ketoacyl-ACP synthase II with an engineered zinc finger protein transcription factor. Plant Biotechnol J, 2012; 10(7):783–791; doi: 10.1111/j.1467-7652.2012.00695.x
83.
OkuzakiA, OgawaT, KoizukaC, et al.CRISPR/Cas9-mediated genome editing of the fatty acid desaturase 2 gene in Brassica napus. Plant Physiol Biochem, 2018; 131:63–69; doi: 10.1016/j.plaphy.2018.04.025
84.
MorineauC, BellecY, TellierF, et al.Selective gene dosage by CRISPR-Cas9 genome editing in hexaploid Camelina sativa. Plant Biotechnol J, 2017; 15(6):729–739; doi: 10.1111/pbi.12671
85.
ShenL, WangC, FuY, et al.QTL editing confers opposing yield performance in different rice varieties. J Integr Plant Biol, 2018; 60(2):89–93; doi: 10.1111/jipb.12501
86.
ZhangY, LiangZ, ZongY, et al.Efficient and transgene-free genome editing in wheat through transient expresion of CRISPR/Cas9 DNA or RNA. Nat Commun, 2016; 7:12617; doi: 10.1038/ncomms12617
87.
GaoJ, WangG, MaS, et al.CRISPR/Cas9-mediated targeted mutagenesis in Nicotiana tabacum. Plant Mol Biol, 2015; 87(1–2):99–110; doi: 10.1007/s11103-014-0263-0
88.
WangX, TuM, WangD, et al.CRISPR/Cas9-mediated efficient targeted mutagenesis in grape in the first generation. Plant Biotechnol J, 2018; 16(4):844–855; doi: 10.1111/pbi.12832
89.
XuC, ParkSJ, Van EckJ, et al.Control of inflorescence architecture in tomato by BTB/POZ transcriptional regulators. Genes Dev, 2016; 30(18):2048–2061; doi: 10.1101/gad.288415.116
90.
Rodríguez-LealD, LemmonZH, ManJ, et al.Engineering quantitative trait variation for crop improvement by genome editing. Cell, 2017; 171(2):470.e8–480.e8; doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2017.08.030
91.
MishraR, JoshiRK, ZhaoK. Base editing in crops: Current advances, limitations and future implications. Plant Biotechnol J, 2020; 18(1):20–31; doi: 10.1111/pbi.13225
92.
KomorAC, KimYB, PackerMS, et al.Programmable editing of a target base in genomic DNA without double-stranded DNA cleavage. Nature, 2016; 533(7603):420–424; doi: 10.1038/nature17946
93.
XuR, YangY, QinR, et al.Rapid improvement of grain weight via highly efficient CRISPR/Cas9-mediated multiplex genome editing in rice. J Genet Genomics, 2016; 43(8):529–532; doi: 10.1016/j.jgg.2016.07.003
94.
XuZS, FengK, XiongAS. CRISPR/Cas9-mediated multiply targeted mutagenesis in orange and purple carrot plants. Mol Biotechnol, 2019; 61(3):191–199; doi: 10.1007/s12033-018-00150-6
95.
SardesaiN, SubramanyamS. Agrobacterium: A genome-editing tool-delivery system. Curr Top Microbiol Immunol, 2018; 418:463–488; doi: 10.1007/82_2018_136
96.
MaoY, YangX, ZhouY, et al.Manipulating plant RNA-silencing pathways to improve the gene editing efficiency of CRISPR/Cas9 systems. Genome Biol, 2018; 19(1):149; doi: 10.1186/s13059-018-1529-7
97.
MaoY, BotellaJS, LiuY, et al.Gene editing in plants: Progress and challenges. Natl Sci Rev, 2019; 6(3):421–437; doi: 10.1093/nsr/nwz005
98.
LiangZ, ChenK, ZhangY, et al.Genome editing of bread wheat using biolistic delivery of CRISPR/Cas9 in vitro transcripts or ribonucleoproteins. Nat Protoc, 2018; 13(3):413–430; doi: 10.1038/nprot.2017.145
99.
SedeekK, MahasA, MahfouzM. Plant genome engineering for targeted improvement of crop traits. Front Plant Sci, 2019; 10:114; doi: 10.3389/fpls.2019.00114
100.
ZhangH, ZhangJ, WeiP, et al.The CRISPR/Cas9 system produces specific and homozygous targeted gene editing in rice in one generation. Plant Biotechnol J, 2014; 12(6):797–807; doi: 10.1111/pbi.12200
101.
SvitashevS, SchwartzC, LendertsB, et al.Genome editing in maize directed by CRISPR-Cas9 ribonucleoprotein complexes. Nat Commun, 2016; 7:13274; doi: 10.1038/ncomms13274
102.
LiangZ, ChenK, LiT, et al.Efficient DNA-free genome editing of bread wheat using CRISPR/Cas9 ribonucleoprotein complexes. Nat Commun, 2017; 8:14261; doi: 10.1038/ncomms14261
103.
ZhangB, YangX, YangC, et al.Exploiting the CRISPR/Cas9 system for targeted genome mutagenesis in petunia. Sci Rep, 2016; 6:20315; doi: 10.1038/srep20315
104.
CunninghamFJ, GohNS, DemirerGS, et al.Nanoparticle-mediated delivery towards advancing plant genetic engineering. Trends Biotechnol, 2018; 36(9):882–897; doi: 10.1016/j.tibtech.2018.03.009
105.
GivensBE, NaguibYW, GearySM, et al.Nanoparticle-based delivery of CRISPR/Cas9 genome-editing therapeutics. Aaps J, 2018; 20(6):108; doi: 10.1208/s12248-018-0267-9
106.
ZhaoX, MengZ, WangY, et al.Pollen magnetofection for genetic modification with magnetic nanoparticles as gene carriers. Nat Plants, 2017; 3(12):956–964; doi: 10.1038/s41477-017-0063-z
107.
SilvaG, PoirotL, GalettoR, et al.Meganucleases and other tools for targeted genome engineering: Perspectives and challenges for gene therapy. Curr Gene Ther, 2011; 11(1):11–27; doi: 10.2174/156652311794520111
108.
GaoH, SmithJ, YangM, et al.Heritable targeted mutagenesis in maize using a designed endonuclease. Plant J, 2010; 61(1):176–187; doi: 10.1111/j.1365-313X.2009.04041.x
109.
ZhangF, MaederML, Unger-WallaceE, et al.High frequency targeted mutagenesis in Arabidopsis thaliana using zinc finger nucleases. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2010; 107(26):12028–12033; doi: 10.1073/pnas.0914991107
110.
MillerJC, HolmesMC, WangJ, et al.An improved zinc-finger nuclease architecture for highly specific genome editing. Nat Biotechnol, 2007; 25(7):778–785; doi: 10.1038/nbt1319
LiuX, WangY, GuoW, et al.Zinc-finger nickase-mediated insertion of the lysostaphin gene into the beta-casein locus in cloned cows. Nat Commun, 2013; 4:2565; doi: 10.1038/ncomms3565
113.
OsakabeK, OsakabeY, TokiS. Site-directed mutagenesis in Arabidopsis using custom-designed zinc finger nucleases. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2010; 107(26):12034–12039; doi: 10.1073/pnas.1000234107
114.
StadlerLJ. Mutations in barley induced by X-rays and radium. Science, 1928; 68(1756):186–187; doi: 10.1126/science.68.1756.186
115.
de PaterS, PinasJE, HooykaasPJ, et al.ZFN-mediated gene targeting of the Arabidopsis protoporphyrinogen oxidase gene through Agrobacterium-mediated floral dip transformation. Plant Biotechnol J, 2013; 11(4):510–515; doi: 10.1111/j.1467-7652.2009.00446.x
116.
TovkachA, ZeeviV, TzfiraT. A toolbox and procedural notes for characterizing novel zinc finger nucleases for genome editing in plant cells. Plant J, 2009; 57(4):747–757; doi: 10.1111/j.1365-313X.2008.03718.x
117.
CurtinSJ, ZhangF, SanderJD, et al.Targeted mutagenesis of duplicated genes in soybean with zinc-finger nucleases. Plant Physiol, 2011; 156(2):466–473; doi: 10.1104/pp.111.172981
118.
PetolinoJF. Genome editing in plants via designed zinc finger nucleases. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol Plant, 2015; 51(1):1–8; doi: 10.1007/s11627-015-9663-3
GasiunasG, Rodolphe BarrangouR, Philippe HorvathP, et al.Cas9-crRNA ribonucleoprotein complex mediates specific DNA cleavage for adaptive immunity in bacteria. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2012; 109(39):E2579–E2586; doi: 10.1073/pnas.1208507109
122.
JiX, ZhangH, ZhangY, et al.Establishing a CRISPR-Cas-like immune system conferring DNA virus resistance in plants. Nat Plants, 2015; 1:15144; doi: 10.1038/nplants.2015.144
123.
QiX, ZhangC, ZhuJ, et al.Genome editing enables next-generation hybrid seed production technology. Mol Plant, 2020; 13(9):1262–1269; doi: 10.1016/j.molp.2020.06.003
124.
ZhangY, HuangG, ZhaoY, et al.Revolutionizing crop breeding: Next-generation artificial intelligence and big data-driven intelligent design. Engineering, 2025; 44(1):245–255; doi: 10.1016/j.eng.2024.11.034
