Mutation and Mutation Screening

Lee, L. Slade; Till, Bradley J.; Hill, Helen; Huynh, Owen A.; Jankowicz-Cieślak, Joanna

doi:10.1007/978-1-62703-715-0_8

Cited by 17 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 63 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The different mutagenesis techniques applied in mutation breeding (Step 1) are described in more details in the sections below. Regarding step 2, the screening of the mutants obtained by such techniques can follow the ‘forward’ or the ‘reverse’ genetic approach (Lee et al., 2014 ). The forward genetics approach is phenotype‐driven since it consists first in the direct evaluation of the phenotype of the mutagenised plants (e.g.…”

Section: Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On the contrary, the reverse genetics approach consists first in identifying the sequence‐specific mutation and then to characterise the phenotype which is caused by such mutation. For example, the identification of the sequence‐specific mutation can be achieved by exploiting the DNA heteroduplex which forms between the wild type and the mutated DNA fragment in a procedure called Targeting Induced Local Lesions in Genomes (TILLING) (Tadele et al., 2010 ; Till et al., 2012 ; Lee et al., 2014 ). Finally, after mutation breeding step 3, the plant carrying the desired mutation enters a complex selection programme aimed at incorporating such mutation(s) in the cultivated/commercial plant varieties and removing other unwanted mutations (Spencer‐Lopes et al., 2018 ).…”

Section: Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

In vivo and in vitro random mutagenesis techniques in plants

Mullins¹,

Bresson²,

Dalmay³

et al. 2021

EFS2

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mutations are changes in the genetic material that may be transmitted to subsequent generations. Mutations appear spontaneously in nature and are one of the underlying driving forces of evolution. In plants, in vivo and in vitro random mutagenesis relies on the application of physical and chemical mutagens to increase the frequency of mutations thus accelerating the selection of varieties with important agronomic traits. The European Commission has requested EFSA to provide a more detailed description of in vivo and in vitro random mutagenesis techniques and the types of mutations and mechanisms involved, to be able to conclude on whether in vivo and in vitro random mutagenesis techniques are to be considered different techniques. To address the European Commission request, a literature search was conducted to collect information on the random mutagenesis techniques used in plants both in vivo and in vitro, on the type of mutations generated by such techniques and on the molecular mechanisms underlying formation of those mutations. The GMO Panel concludes that most physical and chemical mutagenesis techniques have been applied both in vivo and in vitro; the mutation process and the repair mechanisms act at cellular level and thus there is no difference between application of the mutagen in vivo or in vitro; and the type of mutations induced by a specific mutagen are expected to be the same, regardless of whether such mutagen is applied in vivo or in vitro. Indeed, the same mutation and the derived trait in a given plant species can be potentially obtained using both in vivo and in vitro random mutagenesis and the resulting mutants would be indistinguishable. Therefore, the GMO Panel concludes that the distinction between plants obtained by in vitro or in vivo approaches is not justified.

show abstract

Section: Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

In vivo and in vitro random mutagenesis techniques in plants

Mullins¹,

Bresson²,

Dalmay³

et al. 2021

EFS2

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This may be due primarily to the active promotion of the use of gamma irradiation by the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations and the International Atomic Energy Agency (FAO/IAEA) Joint Programme, but also may be biologically significant as physical mutagens tend to induce larger genomic aberrations than some chemical mutagens, and more dominant or more easily observable traits could be created at a higher frequency . Standardised protocols and general considerations for induced mutations in seed and vegetatively propagated plants using the physical mutagen (gamma rays) and the chemical mutagen (ethyl methanesulfonate, EMS) have been previously discussed (Lee et al 2014;Bado et al 2015;Till et al 2006;Mba et al 2010). Chapters 2, 3, 4 and 6 of this book describe chemical and/or physical mutagenesis protocols for obligate vegetatively propagated banana (Musa acuminata), facultative vegetatively propagated Jatropha (Jatropha curcas) and seed-propagated barley (Hordeum vulgare).…”

Section: Practical Considerations In Induced Crop Mutagenesismentioning

confidence: 99%

Mutagenesis for Crop Breeding and Functional Genomics

Jankowicz-Cieślak

Chikelu

Till

2016

Biotechnologies for Plant Mutation Breeding

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Genetic variation is a source of phenotypic diversity and is a major driver of evolutionary diversification. Heritable variation was observed and used thousands of years ago in the domestication of plants and animals. The mechanisms that govern the inheritance of traits were later described by Mendel. In the early decades of the twentieth century, scientists showed that the relatively slow rate of natural mutation could be increased by several orders of magnitude by treating Drosophila and cereals with X-rays. What is striking about these achievements is that they came in advance of experimental evidence that DNA is the heritable material. This highlights one major advantage of induced mutations for crop breeding: prior knowledge of genes or gene function is not required to successfully create plants with improved traits and to release new varieties. Indeed, mutation induction has been an important tool for crop breeding since the release of the first mutant variety of tobacco in the 1930s. In addition to plant mutation breeding, induced mutations have been used extensively for functional genomics in model organisms and crops. Novel reverse-genetic strategies, such as Targeting Induced Local Lesions IN Genomes (TILLING), are being used for the production of stable genetic stocks of mutant plant populations such as Arabidopsis, barley, soybean, tomato and wheat. These can be kept for many years and screened repeatedly for different traits. Robust and efficient methods are required for the seamless integration of induced mutations in breeding and functional genomics studies. This chapter provides an overview of the principles and methodologies that underpin the set of protocols and guidelines for the use of induced mutations to improve crops.

show abstract

“…3. Mutant populations should be developed following established procedures (Lee et al 2014). It is important to note that the first (M 1 ) generation after mutagenesis is chimeric, and most mutations will not be heritable, also the M 1 generation suffers from physiological disorders as a result of mutagenic treatments.…”

Section: Notesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Utilising NIRS for Qualitative and Non-destructive Identification of Seed Mutants in Large Populations

Vollmann

Jankowicz-Cieślak

2016

Biotechnologies for Plant Mutation Breeding

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Phenotyping of large plant populations for genetic research or plant breeding is often time-consuming and expensive. Seed composition is a primary breeding objective as this determines quality for various markets, e.g. food, fodder and industrial processing. Near-infrared reflectance spectroscopy (NIRS) is a fast developing analytical tool for seed composition screening. For example, it is utilised in plant breeding programmes to predict compositional concentrations in various samples. NIRS can be used to detect variation between seed lots and between individual seeds and can be used to identify and isolate new phenotypes including mutants based on spectroscopic sample properties. Spectral data of seed samples may be subjected to principal component analysis to separate groups and individuals with distinct compositional properties. Spectroscopic outliers such as mutants with novel seed quality alleles may then be selected based on principal component scores. Outliers represent a small subset of the entire population, and these may be subject to more rigorous analyses (chemical, physiological and genetic). In determining their potential exploitation, NIRS is a high-throughput phenotyping platform that can be used to reduce large sample sizes, e.g. a mutant population to manageable numbers.

show abstract

Mutation and Mutation Screening

Cited by 17 publications

References 63 publications

In vivo and in vitro random mutagenesis techniques in plants

In vivo and in vitro random mutagenesis techniques in plants

Mutagenesis for Crop Breeding and Functional Genomics

Utilising NIRS for Qualitative and Non-destructive Identification of Seed Mutants in Large Populations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About