Abstract

Plant viruses cause yield losses to crops of agronomic and economic significance and are a challenge to the achievement of global food security. Although conventional plant breeding has played an important role in managing plant viral diseases, it will unlikely meet the challenges posed by the frequent emergence of novel and more virulent viral species or viral strains. Hence there is an urgent need to seek alternative strategies of virus control that can be more readily deployed to contain viral diseases. The discovery in the late 1980s that viral genes can be introduced into plants to engineer resistance to the cognate virus provided a new avenue for virus disease control. Subsequent advances in genomics and biotechnology have led to the refinement and expansion of genetic engineering (GE) strategies in crop improvement. Importantly, many of the drawbacks of conventional breeding, such as long lead times, inability or difficulty to cross fertilize, loss of desirable plant traits, are overcome by GE. Unfortunately, public skepticism towards genetically modified (GM) crops and other factors have dampened the early promise of GE efforts. These concerns are principally about the possible negative effects of transgenes to humans and animals, as well as to the environment. However, with regards to engineering for virus resistance, these risks are overstated given that most virus resistance engineering strategies involve transfer of viral genes or genomic segments to plants. These viral genomes are found in infected plant cells and have not been associated with any adverse effects in humans or animals. Thus, integrating antiviral genes of virus origin into plant genomes is hardly unnatural as suggested by GM crop skeptics. Moreover, advances in deep sequencing have resulted in the sequencing of large numbers of plant genomes and the revelation of widespread endogenization of viral genomes into plant genomes. This has raised the possibility that viral genome endogenization is part of an antiviral defense mechanism deployed by the plant during its evolutionary past. Thus, GM crops engineered for viral resistance would likely be acceptable to the public if regulatory policies were product-based (the North America regulatory model), as opposed to process-based. This review discusses some of the benefits to be gained from adopting GE for virus resistance, as well as the challenges that must be overcome to leverage this technology. Furthermore, regulatory policies impacting virus-resistant GM crops and some success cases of virus-resistant GM crops approved so far for cultivation are discussed.

Highlights

  • Even when there is correct folding, the small interfering RNA (siRNA) produced might not efficiently target the virus or it might target an endogenous gene, becoming toxic to the plant. These drawbacks have been overcome with the recent elucidation of trans-acting siRNAs (tasiRNA), and to an extent, artificial microRNAs, both of which can be multiplexed to target multiple viruses from the same construct [27,28,51]

  • Given that virus resistance genes are frequently found in wild species that may not be sexually compatible with cultivated species, this becomes a serious drawback. This is the case with papaya ringspot virus (PRSV) where several wild Vasconcellea species are resistant to PRSV, but are not sexually compatible with C. papaya [54]. Because this incompatibility does not exist in crop genetic engineering, whole genes or small segments of genes can be transferred between incompatible species, thereby overcoming one of the insurmountable limitations in crop improvement

  • Decisions about the need for regulation and the level of regulation required are taken in relation to the relevant benefits and costs and this applies to both genetically modified (GM) crops and conventional breeding products

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Continues to play an essential role in crop improvement, it usually entails growing and examining large populations of crop plants over multiple generations. This is an expensive, lengthy, and a labor-intensive process. About seven GE crops with enhanced virus resistance have been approved for commercial production in the United States of America (USA) and China, and greenhouse and field trials of transgenic plants with resistance to viruses are underway in many other countries, especially in South America and Africa [19,20]

Functional Genomics and Genome Editing in Engineering Crops for
Benefits of Genetic Engineering in Plant Virus Control
Short Lead Time
Comparatively Low Production Cost
Efficacy and Durability of GE-Mediated Virus Resistance
Transfer of Virus Resistance Genes Is Not Limited to Closely Related Species
NoAlthough
Clonally Propagated Crops
Potential Risks Associated with GM Crops
Horizontal Gene Transfer and Dissemination in the Environment
Genetic Erosion
Recombination of Transgene with Infecting Viruses
Toxicity of Transgene
Regulation of Genetically Modified Crops
Findings
Conclusions
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call