International E-publication: Publish Projects, Dissertation, Theses, Books, Souvenir, Conference Proceeding with ISBN.  International E-Bulletin: Information/News regarding: Academics and Research

Cisgenesis and Intragenesis: Twin Sisters for Crop Improvement

    , , , , , , , ,

Author Affiliations

  • 1Department of Genetics and Plant Breeding, Govind Ballabh Pant University of Agriculture and Technology, Pantnagar, Uttarakhand, INDIA
  • 2Dept. of Agronomy, IAS, Banaras Hindu University, Varanassi, INDIA
  • 3Department of Genetics and Plant Breeding, Govind Ballabh Pant University of Agriculture and Technology, Pantnagar, Uttarakhand, INDIA
  • 4Department of Genetics and Plant Breeding, Govind Ballabh Pant University of Agriculture and Technology, Pantnagar, Uttarakhand, INDIA
  • 5Department of Genetics and Plant Breeding, Govind Ballabh Pant University of Agriculture and Technology, Pantnagar, Uttarakhand, INDIA
  • 6Division of Genetics, Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi, INDIA
  • 7Department of Genetics, Bidhan Chandra Krishi Viswavidyalaya, Mohanpur, Nadia, West Bengal, INDIA
  • 8Dept. of Plant Breeding and Genetics, Central Agricultural University, Imphal, Manipur, INDIA
  • 9Division of Plant Breeding and Genetics, Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural Sciences & Technology, Jammu & Kashmir, INDIA

Res. J. Agriculture & Forestry Sci., Volume 1, Issue (10), Pages 22-26, November,8 (2013)

Abstract

With the increase in awareness of the people about health and bio safety issue, there is reluctance for the acceptance and use of transgenic crops since it includes combination of genes between species that cannot hybridize by natural means. As an alternative way to transgenesis, two different approaches, cisgenesis and intragenesis were developed. Both these approaches use genetic transformation techniques to introduce new genes (just like transgenesis) but the donor should be from the same or sexually compatible species. In cisgenesis, the unchanged, contiguous and naturally occurring genome fragment containing the gene of interest along with its own introns and regulatory sequences are fragmented as such, and transferred into the host genome. Whereas in case of intragenesis, gene of interest is taken from other source while the regulatory elements and introns from another source and a new combination of DNA fragments are created artificially through in vitro rearrangement. But, one point to be noted here is that the source should belong to the same species or from a cross compatible species. Public research institutes based on European Union (EU) play a big role in the R&D of these techniques. These techniques will be of immense use for crop improvement if the end products are classified as non- GMOs but will have limited use if classified as GMOs. Therefore, the legal status of these techniques will decide whether to use these techniques only for crops with very high value or will use extensively for a broader field of applications.

References

  1. Holme I.B., Wendt T. and Holm P.B., Intragenesis andcisgenesis as alternatives to transgenic crop development, Pl. Biotech. J., 11, 395–407 (2013)
  2. Bauer M. and Gaskell G., Researching the public sphere ofbiotechnology, In: Biotechnology: The Making of a GlobalControversy (Gaskell, G. and Bauer, M., eds), Cambridge,UK: Cambridge University Press, 1–19 (2002)
  3. Gaskell G. and Bauer M., The years of controversy, In:Biotechnology 1996–1999 (Gaskell, G. and Bauer, M.,eds), London, UK: Science Museum Press, 3–11 (2001)
  4. Lassen J., Madsen K.H. and Sandoe P., Ethics and geneticengineering – lessons to be learned from GM foods, Bioprocess Biosyst. Eng., 24, 263–271 (2002)
  5. Lusser M., Parisi C., Plan D. and Rodriguez-Cerezo E., New plant breeding techniques: State-of-the-art andprospects for commercial development, JRC Scientific andTechnical Reports. Luxembourg, European Union, 1-220(2011)
  6. Schaart J.G. and Visser R.G.F., Novel Plant BreedingTechniques - Consequences of new genetic modificationbasedplant breeding techniques in comparison toconventional plant breeding, COGEM Research Report.The Netherlands Commission on Genetic Modification, 1-60 (2009)
  7. Jacobsen E. and Schouten H.J., Cisgenesis stronglyimproves introgression breeding and inducedtranslocation breeding of plants, Trends in Biotech., 25,219-223 (2007)
  8. Lusser M., Parisi C., Plan D. and Rodriguez-Cerezo E., Deployment of new biotechnologies in plant breeding, Nature America, 30, 231- 239 (2012)
  9. Rommens C.M., Humara J.M., Ye J., Yan H., Richael C.,Zhang L., Perry R. and Swords K., Crop improvementthrough modification of the plant, PlantPhysiol., 135, 421-431 (2004)
  10. Rommens C.M., Ye J., Richael C. and Swords K, Improving potato storage and processing characteristicsthrough all-native DNA transformation, J Agric FoodChem., 54, 9882- 9887 (2006)
  11. Rommens C.M., Intragenic crop improvement: Combiningthe benefits of traditional breeding and geneticengineering., J Agric Food Chem., 55, 4281- 4288 (2007)
  12. Conner A.J., Barrell P.J., Baldwin S.J., Lokerse A.S.,Cooper P.A., Erasmuson A.K., Nap J.P. and Jacobs J.M.E., Intragenic vectors for gene transfer without foreign DNA, Euphytica, 154, 341– 353 (2007)
  13. Schouten H.J. and Jacobsen E., Cisgenesis and intragenesis, sisters in innovative plant breeding, Trends in Pl Sci., 13,260- 261 (2008)14. Schouten H.J., Krens F.A. and Jacobsen E., Cisgenic plantsare similar to traditionally bred Plants, EMBO Reports, 7,750-753 (2006)
  14. Schoute H.J., Cisgenesis for crop improvement, Worldcongress on biotechnology, 21-23 March HICC Hyderabad,India (2011)
  15. Dhekney S.A., Li Z.T. and Gray D.J., Grapevinesengineered to express cisgenic Vitis vinifera thaumatin-likeprotein exhibit fungal disease resistance., In Vitro Cell.Dev. Biol.-Plant, 47, 458- 466 (2011)
  16. Han K.M., Dharmawardhana P., Arias R.S., Ma C., BusovV. and Strauss S.H., Gibberellin-associated cisgenesmodify growth, stature and wood properties in Populus,Plant Biotechnol. J., 9, 162- 178 (2011)
  17. Schaart J.G., Towards consumer-friendly cisgenicstrawberries which are less susceptible to Botrytis cinerea, Ph.D. thesis, Wageningen University, Wageningen, theNetherlands (2004)
  18. Weeks J.T., Ye J. and Rommens C.M., Development of anin planta method for transformation of alfalfa (Medicagosativa), Transgenic Res., 17, 587-597 (2008)
  19. Papazova N. and Gecheff K., Position-dependent geneactivity in cytologically reconstructed barley karyotypes, Cell Biol Intern., 27, 247- 248 (2003)
  20. Jacobsen, E.,and Schouten, H.J., Cisgenesis: an importantsub-invention for traditional plant breeding companies, Euphytica, 170, 235-247 (2009)
  21. Greco R., Ouwerkerk P.F.B., Sallaud C., Kohli A.,Colombo L., Puigdomenech P., Guiderdoni E., Christou P.,Hoge J.H.C. and Pereira A., Transposon insertionalmutagenesis in rice, Plant Physiol .,125,1175– 1177 (2001)
  22. Haverkort A., Boonekamp P., Hutten R., Jacobsen E., LotzL., Kessel G., Visser R. and van der Vossen E., SocietalCosts of Late Blight in Potato and Prospects of DurableResistance Through Cisgenic Modification, PotatoResearch, 51, 47- 57 (2008)
  23. Russell A.W. and Sparrow R., The case for regulatingintragenic GMOS, J. Agric. Env. Ethics, 21, 153- 181(2008)
  24. EFSA Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO),Scientific opinion addressing the safety assessment ofplants developed through cisgenesis and intragenesis, EFSAJ., 10, 2561 [33 pp] (2012)
  25. Rommens, C.M., Barriers and paths to market forgenetically engineered crops, Pl. Biotech J., 8,101- 111(2010)
  26. Bradford K.J., Van D.A., Gutterson N., Parrott W. andStrauss S.H., Regulating transgenic crops sensibly: lessonsfrom plant breeding, biotechnology and genomics, NatBiotechnol, 23, 439– 444 (2005) 28. Gaskell G., Allansdottir A., Allum N., Castro P., Esmer Y.,Fischler C., Jackson J., Kronberger N., Hampel J.,Mejlgaard N., Quintanilha A., Rammer A., Revuelta G.,Stares S., Torgersen H. and Wager W., The 2010Eurobarometer on the life sciences, Nat. Biotechnol., 29,113– 114 (2011)
  27. Lusk J.L. and Rozan A., Consumers acceptance ofintergenic foods, Biotechnol. J., 1, 1–2 (2006)
  28. Lusk J.L. and Sullivan P., Consumers acceptance ofgenetically modified foods, Food Technol., 56, 32–37(2002)
  29. Mielby H., Public attitudes to cisgenic crops, Ph.D. thesis,University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark (2011)
  30. Colson G. and Huffman W.E., Consumers, willingness topay for genetically modified foods with product-enhancingnutritional attributes, Am. J. Agr. Econ., 93, 358–363(2011)
  31. Belfanti E., Silfverberg-Dilworth E., Tartarini S., PatocchiA., Barbieri M., Zhu J., Vinatzer B.A., Gianfranceschi L.,Gessler C. and Sansavini S., The HcrVf2 gene from a wildapple confers scab resistance to a transgenic cultivatedvariety, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciencesof the United States of America, 101(3), 886- 890 (2004)
  32. Silfverberg-Dilworth E., Besse S., Paris R., Belfanti E.,Tartarini S., Sansavini S., Patocchi A. and Gessler C., Identification of functional apple scab resistance genepromoters, Theor. Applied Genet., 110(6), 1119-1126(2005)
  33. Szankowski I., Wairdmann S., Degenhardt J., Patocchi A.,Paris R., Silfverberg-Dilworth E., Broggini E. and GesslerC., Highly scab-resistant transgenic apple lines achieved byintrogression of HcrVf2 controlled by different nativepromoter lengths, Tree Genetics and Genomes, 5, 349- 358(2009)
  34. Benjamin I., Kenigsbuch D., Galperin M., Abrameto J. andCohen Y., Cisgenic melons over expressing glyoxylateaminotransferaseare resistant to downy mildew, EuropeanJ. Pl. Patho., 125, 355- 365 (2009)
  35. Park T.H., Vleeshouwers V.G.A.A., Jacobsen E., van derVossen E. and Visser R.G.F, Molecular breeding forresistance to Phytphthora infestans (Mont.) de Bary inpotato (Solanum tuberosum L.): A perspective ofcisgenesis, Plant breeding, 128, 109- 117 (2009)
  36. Rommens C. M., Yan H., Swords K., Richael C. and Ye, J., Low acrylamide French fries and potato chips, PlantBiotechnol. J., 6 (8), 854 (2008)
  37. de Vetten N., Wolters A., Raemakers K., van der Meer I.,ter Stege R., Heeres E., Heeres P. and Visser R., Atransformation method for obtaining marker-free plants of across-pollinating and vegetatively propagated crop, Nat.Biotech., 21, 439- 442 (2003)
  38. Bajaj S., Puthigae S., Templeton K., Bryant C., Gill G.,Lomba P., Zhang H., Altpeter F. and Hanley Z., Towardsengineering drought tolerance in perennial ryegrass usingits own genome, 6th Canadian plant genomics workshop,Abstract, 62 (2008)
  39. Gadaleta A., Giancaspro A., Blechl A.E. and Blanco A., Atransgenic durum wheat line that is free of marker genesand expresses 1DY10, J. Cereal Sci. 48, 439- 445 (2008)
  40. Holme I.B., Dionisio G., Brinch-Pedersen H., Wendt T.,Madsen C.K., Vincze E. and Holm P.B., Cisgenic barleywith improved phytase activity, Plant Biotechnol. J., 10,237- 247 (2012)