CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 71CRISPR and Genetic EngineeringPlant Stress Responses and ToleranceGenetically Modified Organisms Research

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 261 of the 262 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Gene Editing for Plant Resistance to Abiotic Factors: A Systematic Review

Open access
Nascimento, Fernanda dos Santos, Rocha, Anelita de Jesus, Soares, Julianna Matos da Silva, Mascarenhas, Marcelly Santana, Ferreira, Mileide dos Santos, Morais Lino, Lucymeire Souza, Ramos, Andresa Priscila de Souza, Diniz, Leandro Eugenio Cardamone, Mendes, Tiago Antônio de Oliveira, Ferreira, Claudia Fortes, Santos-Serejo, Janay Almeida dos, Amorim, Edson Perito·2023·Plants
DOI 10.3390/plants12020305PMC PMC9860801
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Agricultural crops are exposed to various abiotic stresses, such as salinity, water deficits, temperature extremes, floods, radiation, and metal toxicity. To overcome these challenges, breeding programs seek to improve methods and techniques. Gene editing by Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats—CRISPR/Cas—is a versatile tool for editing in all layers of the central dogma with focus on the development of cultivars of plants resistant or tolerant to multiple biotic or abiotic stresses. This systematic review (SR) brings new contributions to the study of the use of CRISPR/Cas in gene editing for tolerance to abiotic stress in plants. Articles deposited in different electronic databases, using a search string and predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, were evaluated. This SR demonstrates that the CRISPR/Cas system has been applied to several plant species to promote tolerance to the main abiotic stresses. Among the most studied crops are rice and Arabidopsis thaliana, an important staple food for the population, and a model plant in genetics/biotechnology, respectively, and more recently tomato, whose number of studies has increased since 2021. Most studies were conducted in Asia, specifically in China. The Cas9 enzyme is used in most articles, and only Cas12a is used as an additional gene editing tool in plants. Ribonucleoproteins (RNPs) have emerged as a DNA-free strategy for genome editing without exogenous DNA. This SR also identifies several genes edited by CRISPR/Cas, and it also shows that plant responses to stress factors are mediated by many complex-signaling pathways. In addition, the quality of the articles included in this SR was validated by a risk of bias analysis. The information gathered in this SR helps to understand the current state of CRISPR/Cas in the editing of genes and noncoding sequences, which plays a key role in the regulation of various biological processes and the tolerance to multiple abiotic stresses, with potential for use in plant genetic improvement programs.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/plants12020305

Cites

261 of 261 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 PRISMA flow diagram of the studies included in the systematic review of CRISPR/Cas technology used to edit genes for tolerance to abiotic stresses in plants.
Figure 1 PRISMA flow diagram of the studies included in the systematic review of CRISPR/Cas technology used to edit genes for tolerance to abiotic stresses in plants.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 2 Bibliometric map of the keywords in the selected articles on CRISPR/Cas technology used to edit genes for tolerance to abiotic stresses in plants during the extraction phase of this systematic review.
Figure 2 Bibliometric map of the keywords in the selected articles on CRISPR/Cas technology used to edit genes for tolerance to abiotic stresses in plants during the extraction phase of this systematic review.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 3 Word cloud of the journals that published the most on CRISPR/Cas being used to edit genes for tolerance to abiotic stresses in plants in the last seven years.
Figure 3 Word cloud of the journals that published the most on CRISPR/Cas being used to edit genes for tolerance to abiotic stresses in plants in the last seven years.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 4 Main countries that have studied CRISPR/Cas being used to edit abiotic stress tolerance genes in the last seven years.
Figure 4 Main countries that have studied CRISPR/Cas being used to edit abiotic stress tolerance genes in the last seven years.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 5 Frequency of crops and abiotic stresses most reported in studies with CRISPR/Cas conducted in the last seven years. Article frequency considered that more than one crop and stress was studied per article.
Figure 5 Frequency of crops and abiotic stresses most reported in studies with CRISPR/Cas conducted in the last seven years. Article frequency considered that more than one crop and stress was studied per article.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 6 Explants used in studies on gene editing with CRISPR/Cas for tolerance to abiotic stresses in plants in the last seven years.
Figure 6 Explants used in studies on gene editing with CRISPR/Cas for tolerance to abiotic stresses in plants in the last seven years.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 7 Word cloud of genes related to abiotic stresses identified in studies that used CRISPR/Cas gene-editing technology in the last seven years.
Figure 7 Word cloud of genes related to abiotic stresses identified in studies that used CRISPR/Cas gene-editing technology in the last seven years.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 8 Metabolic pathways reported in the articles on CRISPR/Cas-associated gene editing for tolerance to abiotic stresses published in the last seven years, n = number of articles.
Figure 8 Metabolic pathways reported in the articles on CRISPR/Cas-associated gene editing for tolerance to abiotic stresses published in the last seven years, n = number of articles.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 9 Graph of stacked bars represent the frequency of articles with different delivery methods and mutation detection with CRISPR/Cas. (A) Main delivery methods for genes of interest related to abiotic factors used in editing by CRISPR/Cas in the last seven years. (B) Methods used to detect mutations generated by CRISPR/Cas identified in articles from the last seven years. Determining the frequency involved considering that more than one method for mutation detection was used per article, n = number of articles.
Figure 9 Graph of stacked bars represent the frequency of articles with different delivery methods and mutation detection with CRISPR/Cas. (A) Main delivery methods for genes of interest related to abiotic factors used in editing by CRISPR/Cas in the last seven years. (B) Methods used to detect mutations generated by CRISPR/Cas identified in articles from the last seven years. Determining the frequency involved considering that more than one method for mutation detection was used per article, n = number of articles.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 10 Auxiliary tools used with the CRISPR/Cas technique for comparison between knockout with the control and/or with the overexpression of mutants identified in articles on tolerance to abiotic stresses in the last seven years. The frequency was determined considering that more than one auxiliary method was used per article, n = number of articles.
Figure 10 Auxiliary tools used with the CRISPR/Cas technique for comparison between knockout with the control and/or with the overexpression of mutants identified in articles on tolerance to abiotic stresses in the last seven years. The frequency was determined considering that more than one auxiliary method was used per article, n = number of articles.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 11 Summary of the risk of bias assessment in the articles on CRISPR/Cas technology used for gene editing for tolerance to abiotic stresses published in the last seven years.
Figure 11 Summary of the risk of bias assessment in the articles on CRISPR/Cas technology used for gene editing for tolerance to abiotic stresses published in the last seven years.CC BY · PubMed Central

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

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

1 retracted

Show all 262 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Cohen, J. (2022, March 21). To Feed Its 1.4 Billion, China Bets Big on Genome Editing of Crops. Available online: https://www.science.org/content/article/feed-its-14-billion-china-bets-big-genome-editing-crops.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 71

Related

Metadata

Authors
Nascimento, F. D. S., Rocha, A. D. J., Soares, J. M. D. S., Mascarenhas, M. S., Ferreira, M. D. S., Morais Lino, L. S., Ramos, A. P. D. S., Diniz, L. E. C., Mendes, T. A. D. O., Ferreira, C. F., Santos-Serejo, J. A. D., & Amorim, E. P.
Affiliations
  • Universidade Estadual de Feira de Santana (BR)
  • Embrapa Mandioca e Fruticultura, Cruz das Almas 44380-000, BA, Brazil
  • Embrapa (BR)
  • Embrapa Soja, Londrina 86000-000, PR, Brazil
  • Universidade Federal de Viçosa (BR)
ORCID
Venue
Plants
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2023-01-09
Volume
12
Issue
2
Pages
305
ISSN
2223-7747 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.3390/plants12020305
PMC
PMC9860801
OpenAlex
W4313889986
Cited by
71
References
262
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 6
FWCI
1.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Plants (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
IITA/The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (OPP1093845)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › CRISPR and Genetic Engineering
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Plant Stress Responses and Tolerance
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Genetically Modified Organisms Research
Keywords
CRISPR gene editing, abiotic stress tolerance, plant stress tolerance, salt stress, drought stress, temperature extremes, flooding stress, metal toxicity, rice, Arabidopsis thaliana, tomato, Cas9, CRISPR/Cas12a, stress signaling pathways, plant genetic improvement

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