The DOI matches its Crossref record; 51 of the 52 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Detection and Identification of Genome Editing in Plants: Challenges and Opportunities
Open accessAbstract
Conventional genetic engineering techniques generate modifications in the genome via stable integration of DNA elements which do not occur naturally in this combination. Therefore, the resulting organisms and (most) products thereof can unambiguously be identified with event-specific PCR-based methods targeting the insertion site. New breeding techniques such as genome editing diversify the toolbox to generate genetic variability in plants. Several of these techniques can introduce single nucleotide changes without integrating foreign DNA and thereby generate organisms with intended phenotypes. Consequently, such organisms and products thereof might be indistinguishable from naturally occurring or conventionally bred counterparts with established analytical tools. The modifications can entirely resemble random mutations regardless of being spontaneous or induced chemically or via irradiation. Therefore, if an identification of these organisms or products thereof is demanded, a new challenge will arise for (official) seed, food and feed testing laboratories and enforcement institutions. For detailed consideration, we distinguish between the detection of sequence alterations - regardless of their origin - the identification of the process that generated a specific modification and the identification of a genotype, i.e., an organism produced by genome editing carrying a specific genetic alteration in a known background. This article briefly reviews the existing and upcoming detection and identification strategies (including the use of bioinformatics and statistical approaches) in particular for plants developed with genome editing techniques.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Figures
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“SDN-2 and SDN-3 rely on homology-directed repair (HDR) in which a template DNA sequence is used (Grohmann et al., 2019).”
From Genetic resources and precise gene editing for targeted improvement of barley abiotic stress tolerance (2023) · cites this paper as Grohmann et al., 2019
In the citing paper
“SDN-1 products rely on a non-homologous end joining (NHEJ) pathway to introduce a few base insertions or deletions.”
From Genetic resources and precise gene editing for targeted improvement of barley abiotic stress tolerance (2023) · cites this paper as Grohmann et al., 2019
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Basic local alignment search tool
Altschul, S. F., Gish, W., Miller, W., Myers, E. W., & Lipman, D. J. (1990) · Journal of Molecular Biology · doi:10.1006/jmbi.1990.9999 · Cited by 98,669
Development and Applications of CRISPR-Cas9 for Genome Engineering
Hsu, P. D., Lander, E. S., & Zhang, F. (2014) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2014.05.010 · Cited by 5,762
Wang, Y., Cheng, X., Shan, Q., Zhang, Y., Liu, J., Gao, C., & Qiu, J.-L. (2014) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt.2969 · Cited by 2,072
The CRISPR/Cas9 system for plant genome editing and beyond
Bortesi, L., & Fischer, R. (2014) · Biotechnology Advances · doi:10.1016/j.biotechadv.2014.12.006 · Cited by 1,289
DNA-free genome editing in plants with preassembled CRISPR-Cas9 ribonucleoproteins
Woo, J. W., Kim, J., Kwon, S. I., Corvalán, C., Cho, S. W., Kim, H., Kim, S.-G., Kim, S.-T., Choe, S., & Kim, J.-S. (2015) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt.3389 · Cited by 1,219
The Rate and Molecular Spectrum of Spontaneous Mutations in Arabidopsis thaliana
Ossowski, S., Schneeberger, K., Lucas‐Lledó, J. I., Warthmann, N., Clark, R. M., Shaw, R. G., Weigel, D., & Lynch, M. (2009) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1180677 · Cited by 1,166
Zhang, Y., Liang, Z., Zong, Y., Wang, Y., Liu, J., Chen, K., Qiu, J., & Gao, C. (2016) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms12617 · Cited by 927
Zhang, H., Zhang, J., Wei, P., Zhang, B., Gou, F., Feng, Z., Mao, Y., Yang, L., Zhang, H., Xu, N., et al. (2014) · Plant Biotechnology Journal · doi:10.1111/pbi.12200 · Cited by 799
Svitashev, S. K., Young, J. K., Schwartz, C., Gao, H., Falco, S. C., & Cigan, A. M. (2015) · PLANT PHYSIOLOGY · doi:10.1104/pp.15.00793 · Cited by 758
Fauser, F., Schiml, S., & Puchta, H. (2014) · The Plant Journal · doi:10.1111/tpj.12554 · Cited by 733
The repair of double-strand breaks in plants: mechanisms and consequences for genome evolution
Puchta, H. (2004) · Journal of Experimental Botany · doi:10.1093/jxb/eri025 · Cited by 603
Impact of various factors responsible for fluctuation in plant secondary metabolites
Verma, N., & Shukla, S. (2015) · Journal of Applied Research on Medicinal and Aromatic Plants · doi:10.1016/j.jarmap.2015.09.002 · Cited by 599
Targeted genome modifications in soybean with CRISPR/Cas9
Jacobs, T. B., LaFayette, P. R., Schmitz, R. J., & Parrott, W. A. (2015) · BMC Biotechnology · doi:10.1186/s12896-015-0131-2 · Cited by 594
Sonoda, E., Hochegger, H., Saberi, A., Taniguchi, Y., & Takeda, S. (2006) · DNA repair · doi:10.1016/j.dnarep.2006.05.022 · Cited by 546
Considerations for Digital PCR as an Accurate Molecular Diagnostic Tool
Huggett, J. F., Cowen, S., & Foy, C. A. (2014) · Clinical Chemistry · doi:10.1373/clinchem.2014.221366 · Cited by 445
CRISPR/Cas9-induced knockout and knock-in mutations in Chlamydomonas reinhardtii
Shin, S.-E., Lim, J., Koh, H. G., Kim, E. K., Kang, N. K., Jeon, S., Kwon, S., Shin, W.-S., Lee, B., Hwangbo, K., et al. (2016) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/srep27810 · Cited by 438
Capture of genomic and T‐DNA sequences during double‐strand break repair in somatic plant cells
Salomon, S., & Puchta, H. (1998) · The EMBO Journal · doi:10.1093/emboj/17.20.6086 · Cited by 356
DNA damage and repair in plants – from models to crops
Manova, V. I., & Gruszka, D. (2015) · Frontiers in Plant Science · doi:10.3389/fpls.2015.00885 · Cited by 327
Genome Evolution Due to Allopolyploidization in Wheat
Feldman, M., & Levy, A. A. (2012) · Genetics · doi:10.1534/genetics.112.146316 · Cited by 321
Kyndt, T., Quispe-Huamanquispe, D. G., Zhai, H., Jarret, R. L., Ghislain, M., Liu, Q., Gheysen, G., & Kreuze, J. F. (2015) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1419685112 · Cited by 291
Braatz, J., Harloff, H., Mascher, M., Stein, N., Himmelbach, A., & Jung, C. (2017) · PLANT PHYSIOLOGY · doi:10.1104/pp.17.00426 · Cited by 283
Importance of wheat-rye translocations for breeding modern cultivar of Triticum aestivum L.
Rabinovich, S. V. (1998) · Euphytica · doi:10.1023/a:1018361819215 · Cited by 275
Advances in DNA metabarcoding for food and wildlife forensic species identification
Staats, M., Arulandhu, A. J., Gravendeel, B., Holst‐Jensen, A., Scholtens, I. M. J., Peelen, T., Prins, T. W., & Kok, E. J. (2016) · Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry · doi:10.1007/s00216-016-9595-8 · Cited by 255
Site-directed nucleases: a paradigm shift in predictable, knowledge-based plant breeding
Podevin, N., Davies, H. V., Hartung, F., Nogué, F., & Casacuberta, J. M. (2013) · Trends in biotechnology · doi:10.1016/j.tibtech.2013.03.004 · Cited by 214
Self-citationZapata, L., Ding, J., Willing, E., Hartwig, B., Bezdan, D., Jiao, W., Patel, V., James, G. V., Koornneef, M., Ossowski, S., et al. (2016) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1607532113 · Cited by 202
DNA-Free Genome Editing: Past, Present and Future
Metje‐Sprink, J., Menz, J., Modrzejewski, D., & Sprink, T. (2019) · Frontiers in Plant Science · doi:10.3389/fpls.2018.01957 · Cited by 196
Self-citationSpecies‐specific double‐strand break repair and genome evolution in plants
Kirik, A., Salomon, S., & Puchta, H. (2000) · The EMBO Journal · doi:10.1093/emboj/19.20.5562 · Cited by 193
Nordström, K. J. V., Albani, M. C., James, G. V., Gutjahr, C., Hartwig, B., Turck, F., Paszkowski, U., Coupland, G., & Schneeberger, K. (2013) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt.2515 · Cited by 160
Current and New Approaches in GMO Detection: Challenges and Solutions
Fraiture, M., Herman, P., Taverniers, I., Loose, M. D., Deforce, D. L. D., & Roosens, N. H. C. (2015) · BioMed Research International · doi:10.1155/2015/392872 · Cited by 157
New plant breeding techniques. State-of-the-art and prospects for commercial development
Lusser, M., Claudia, P., Damien, P., & Rodríguez‐Cerezo, E. (2011) · Joint Research Centre (European Commission) · doi:10.2791/60177 · Cited by 153
Rapid generation of genetic diversity by multiplex CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing in rice
Shen, L., Hua, Y., Fu, Y., Li, J., Liu, Q., Jiao, X., Xin, G., Wang, J., Wang, X., Yan, C., et al. (2017) · Science China Life Sciences · doi:10.1007/s11427-017-9008-8 · Cited by 132
Comparison of three PCR-based assays for SNP genotyping in plants
Broccanello, C., Chiodi, C., Funk, A., McGrath, J. M., Panella, L. W., & Stevanato, P. (2018) · Plant Methods · doi:10.1186/s13007-018-0295-6 · Cited by 130
Detection and Quantification of BCR-ABL1 Fusion Transcripts by Droplet Digital PCR
Jennings, L. J., George, D., Czech, J., Yu, M., & Joseph, L. J. (2014) · Journal of Molecular Diagnostics · doi:10.1016/j.jmoldx.2013.10.007 · Cited by 122
(GMO), E. P. O. G. M. O. (2012) · EFSA Journal · doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2012.2943 · Cited by 117
Genome Editing Tools in Plants
Mohanta, T. K., Bashir, T., Hashem, A., Allah, E. F. A., & Bae, H. (2017) · Genes · doi:10.3390/genes8120399 · Cited by 109
Li, G., Chern, M., Jain, R., Martin, J., Schackwitz, W., Jiang, L., Vega‐Sánchez, M. E., Lipzen, A., Barry, K., Schmutz, J., et al. (2016) · Molecular Plant · doi:10.1016/j.molp.2016.03.009 · Cited by 94
Arpaia, S., Birch, A. N., Chesson, A., du Jardin, P., Gathmann, A., Gropp, J., Herman, L., Hoen-Sorteberg, H.-G., Jones, H. D., Kiss, J. G., et al. (2012) · Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) · doi:10.5167/uzh-75266 · Cited by 94
Puchta, H. (1999) · Genetics · doi:10.1093/genetics/152.3.1173 · Cited by 93
Hirano, T., Kazama, Y., Ishii, K., Ohbu, S., Shirakawa, Y., & Abe, T. (2015) · The Plant Journal · doi:10.1111/tpj.12793 · Cited by 90
Kumar, A., Mosa, K. A., Ji, L., Kage, U., Dhokane, D., Karre, S., Madalageri, D. M., & Pathania, N. (2017) · Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition · doi:10.1080/10408398.2017.1285752 · Cited by 90
Metabolite Profiling of Maize Kernels—Genetic Modification versus Environmental Influence
Frank, T., Röhlig, R. M., Davies, H. V., Barros, E., & Engel, K. (2012) · Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry · doi:10.1021/jf204167t · Cited by 89
Challenges and Perspectives in Homology-Directed Gene Targeting in Monocot Plants
Vu, T. V., Sung, Y. W., Kim, J., Tran, M. T., Tran, M. T., & Kim, J. (2019) · Rice · doi:10.1186/s12284-019-0355-1 · Cited by 83
Genome Editing in Agriculture: Technical and Practical Considerations
Jansing, J., Schiermeyer, A., Schillberg, S., Fischer, R., & Bortesi, L. (2019) · International Journal of Molecular Sciences · doi:10.3390/ijms20122888 · Cited by 66
Wahler, D., Schauser, L., Bendiek, J., & Grohmann, L. (2013) · Food Analytical Methods · doi:10.1007/s12161-013-9673-x · Cited by 63
Self-citationPauwels, K., Keersmaecker, S. C. J. D., de Schrijver, A., du Jardin, P., Roosens, N. H. C., & Herman, P. (2015) · Trends in Food Science & Technology · doi:10.1016/j.tifs.2015.07.009 · Cited by 60
Du, Y., Luo, S., Li, X., Yang, J.-Y., Cui, T., Li, W., Yu, L., Feng, H., Chen, Y., Jinhu, M., et al. (2017) · Frontiers in Plant Science · doi:10.3389/fpls.2017.01851 · Cited by 60
Holst‐Jensen, A., Spilsberg, B., Arulandhu, A. J., Kok, E. J., Shi, J., & Žel, J. (2016) · Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry · doi:10.1007/s00216-016-9549-1 · Cited by 55
Wasmer, M. S. (2019) · Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology · doi:10.3389/fbioe.2019.00132 · Cited by 50
Mueller, S. (2019) · Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology · doi:10.3389/fbioe.2019.00189 · Cited by 20
Digital PCR as New Approach to SNP Genotyping in Sugar Beet
Stevanato, P., & Biscarini, F. (2015) · Sugar Tech · doi:10.1007/s12355-015-0408-8 · Cited by 18
Kersten, B., Montalvão, A. P. L., Hoenicka, H., Vettori, C., Paffetti, D., & Fladung, M. (2020) · Transgenic Research · doi:10.1007/s11248-020-00203-0 · Cited by 13
HENDRIK, E., Wim, B., LAURA, B., PHILIPPE, C., Gatto, F., SARA, J., Marco, M., & CRISTIAN, S. (2018) · Joint Research Centre (European Commission) · doi:10.2760/732526 · Cited by 4
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Role of New Plant Breeding Technologies for Food Security and Sustainable Agricultural Development
Qaim, M. (2020) · Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy · doi:10.1002/aepp.13044 · Cited by 594
Genome Edited Crops Touch the Market: A View on the Global Development and Regulatory Environment
Menz, J., Modrzejewski, D., Hartung, F., Wilhelm, R., & Sprink, T. (2020) · Frontiers in Plant Science · doi:10.3389/fpls.2020.586027 · Cited by 275
Self-citationEntine, J., Felipe, M. S. S., Groenewald, J., Kershen, D. L., Lema, M. A., McHughen, A., Nepomuceno, A. L., Ohsawa, R., Ordonio, R. L., Parrott, W. A., et al. (2021) · Transgenic Research · doi:10.1007/s11248-021-00257-8 · Cited by 191
Genome editing around the globe: An update on policies and perceptions
Sprink, T., Wilhelm, R., & Hartung, F. (2022) · PLANT PHYSIOLOGY · doi:10.1093/plphys/kiac359 · Cited by 105
Self-citationCRISPR-Based Genome Editing Tools: Insights into Technological Breakthroughs and Future Challenges
Mushtaq, M., Dar, A. A., Skalický, M., Tyagi, A., Bhagat, N., Basu, U., Bhat, B. A., Zaid, A., Ali, S., Dar, T. U. H., et al. (2021) · Genes · doi:10.3390/genes12060797 · Cited by 100
Metadata
- Authors
- Grohmann, L., Keilwagen, J., Duensing, N., Dagand, E., Hartung, F., Wilhelm, R., Bendiek, J., & Sprink, T.
- Affiliations
- Federal Office of Consumer Protection and Food Safety (DE)
- Julius Kühn-Institut (DE)
- Corresponding author
- Grohmann, Lutz
- Venue
- Frontiers in Plant Science
- Publisher
- Frontiers Media SA
- Published
- 2019-03-12
- Volume
- 10
- Pages
- 236-236
- ISSN
- 1664-462X (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC6423494
- OpenAlex
- W2922011937
- Cited by
- 135
- References
- 51
- Citations by year
- 2026: 11 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 8
- FWCI
- 12.35
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Frontiers in Plant Science (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- OpenAgrar (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Genetically Modified Organisms Research
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › CRISPR and Genetic Engineering
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Identification and Quantification in Food
- Keywords
- genome editing, plants, GMO detection, bioinformatics, statistical approach, regulatory enforcement
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
