Radiation induced mutagenesis, physio-biochemical profiling and field evaluation of mutants in sugarcane cv. CoM 0265

Purankar, Madhavi V.; Nikam, Ashok A.; Devarumath, R. M.; Suprasanna, Penna

doi:10.1080/09553002.2022.2024291

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 70 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In mutation breeding, genotypes showing spontaneous mutations are selected for breeding or mutations are induced using physical or chemical mutagens to create mutant phenotypes with desired traits ( Devarumath et al, 2015 ; Purankar et al, 2022 ). Marker assisted breeding makes use of molecular markers, in combination with linkage maps and genomics, to alter and improve the crop traits on the basis of genotypic assays ( Jiang, 2013 ).…”

Section: Breeding Approaches For Crop Improvementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Advances in Crop Breeding Through Precision Genome Editing

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The global climate change and unfavourable abiotic and biotic factors are limiting agricultural productivity and therefore intensifying the challenges for crop scientists to meet the rising demand for global food supply. The introduction of applied genetics to agriculture through plant breeding facilitated the development of hybrid varieties with improved crop productivity. However, the development of new varieties with the existing gene pools poses a challenge for crop breeders. Genetic engineering holds the potential to broaden genetic diversity by the introduction of new genes into crops. But the random insertion of foreign DNA into the plant’s nuclear genome often leads to transgene silencing. Recent advances in the field of plant breeding include the development of a new breeding technique called genome editing. Genome editing technologies have emerged as powerful tools to precisely modify the crop genomes at specific sites in the genome, which has been the longstanding goal of plant breeders. The precise modification of the target genome, the absence of foreign DNA in the genome-edited plants, and the faster and cheaper method of genome modification are the remarkable features of the genome-editing technology that have resulted in its widespread application in crop breeding in less than a decade. This review focuses on the advances in crop breeding through precision genome editing. This review includes: an overview of the different breeding approaches for crop improvement; genome editing tools and their mechanism of action and application of the most widely used genome editing technology, CRISPR/Cas9, for crop improvement especially for agronomic traits such as disease resistance, abiotic stress tolerance, herbicide tolerance, yield and quality improvement, reduction of anti-nutrients, and improved shelf life; and an update on the regulatory approval of the genome-edited crops. This review also throws a light on development of high-yielding climate-resilient crops through precision genome editing.

show abstract

Section: Breeding Approaches For Crop Improvementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Advances in Crop Breeding Through Precision Genome Editing

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For improvement of horizontal resistance to non-specific parasitic pathotypes of saprophytic pathogens, such as Bhizoctonia solani and Hyaloperonospora parasitica (pathogens of maize sheath blight and rape downy mildew, respectively), as well as pathogenic viruses and phytophagous insects, it is a great challenge to pyramid the multiple dominant resistant genes into a single cultivar for developing broad-spectrum and durable resistance [37][38][39][40][41][42]. This challenge occurs even with the advances in distant hybridization, artificial mutation, double haploid technology, somatic hybrid, and DNA marker-assisted genotyping and selection [38,39,[43][44][45][46][47][48][49], due to the limitation of germplasm resources, the genetic background of minor polygenes, and negative correlation with yield and quality characteristics [50][51][52][53]. The application of agrochemicals is effective for the control of herbivory insects, but increases production costs and causes environmental pollution [54][55][56][57].…”

Section: Conventional Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This challenge occurs even with the advances in distant hybridization, artificial mutation, double haploid technology, somatic hybrid, and DNA marker-assisted genotyping and selection [38,39,[43][44][45][46][47][48][49], due to the limitation of germplasm resources, the genetic background of minor polygenes, and negative correlation with yield and quality characteristics [50][51][52][53]. The application of agrochemicals is effective for the control of herbivory insects, but increases production costs and causes environmental pollution [54][55][56][57].…”

Section: Transgenic Improvementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Transgenic Improvement for Biotic Resistance of Crops

Wang

et al. 2022

IJMS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biotic constraints, including pathogenic fungi, viruses and bacteria, herbivory insects, as well as parasitic nematodes, cause significant yield loss and quality deterioration of crops. The effect of conventional management of these biotic constraints is limited. The advances in transgenic technologies provide a direct and directional approach to improve crops for biotic resistance. More than a hundred transgenic events and hundreds of cultivars resistant to herbivory insects, pathogenic viruses, and fungi have been developed by the heterologous expression of exogenous genes and RNAi, authorized for cultivation and market, and resulted in a significant reduction in yield loss and quality deterioration. However, the exploration of transgenic improvement for resistance to bacteria and nematodes by overexpression of endogenous genes and RNAi remains at the testing stage. Recent advances in RNAi and CRISPR/Cas technologies open up possibilities to improve the resistance of crops to pathogenic bacteria and plant parasitic nematodes, as well as other biotic constraints.

show abstract