The CRISPR/Cas9 system and its applications in crop genome editing

References

• Jeon JS, Lee S, Jung KH, et al. T-DNA insertional mutagenesis for functional genomics in rice. Plant J. 2000;22:561–570.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang L, Zheng J, Luo Y, et al. Construction of a genomewide RNAi mutant library in rice. Plant Biotechnol J. 2013;11:997–1005.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Puchta H, Dujon B, Hohn B. Two different but related mechanisms are used in plants for the repair of genomic double-strand breaks by homologous recombination. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1996;93:5055–5060.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bleuyard JY, Gallego ME, White CI. Recent advances in understanding of the DNA double-strand break repair machinery of plants. DNA Repair (Amst). 2006;5:1–12.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Puchta H. The repair of double-strand breaks in plants: mechanisms and consequences for genome evolution. J Exp Bot. 2005;56:1–14.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Osakabe K, Osakabe Y, Toki S. Site-directed mutagenesis in Arabidopsis using custom-designed zinc finger nucleases. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2010;107:12034–12039.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller JC, Tan S, Qiao G, et al. A TALE nuclease architecture for efficient genome editing. Nat Biotechnol. 2011;29:143–150.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kumar V, Jain M. The CRISPR-Cas system for plant genome editing: advances and opportunities. J Exp Bot. 2015;66:47–57.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Soda N, Verma L, Giri J. CRISPR-Cas9 based plant genome editing: significance, opportunities and recent advances. Plant Physiol Biochem. 2018;131;2–11.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jinek M, Chylinski K, Fonfara I, et al. A programmable dual-RNA-guided DNA endonuclease in adaptive bacterial immunity. Science. 2012;337:816–822.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shan Q, Wang Y, Li J, et al. Targeted genome modification of crop plants using a CRISPR-Cas system. Nat Biotechnol. 2013;31:686–688.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li J-F, Norville JE, Aach J, et al. Multiplex and homologous recombination-mediated genome editing in Arabidopsis and Nicotiana benthamiana using guide RNA and Cas9. Nat Biotechnol. 2013;31:688–691.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nekrasov V, Staskawicz B, Weigel D, et al. Targeted mutagenesis in the model plant Nicotiana benthamiana using Cas9 RNA-guided endonuclease. Nat Biotechnol. 2013;31:691–693.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abdelrahman M, Al-Sadi AM, Pour-Aboughadareh A, et al. Genome editing using CRISPR/Cas9-targeted mutagenesis: an opportunity for yield improvements of crop plants grown under environmental stresses. Plant Physiol Biochem. 2018;131:31–36.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kishi-Kaboshi M, Aida R, Sasaki K. Genome engineering in ornamental plants: current status and future prospects. Plant Physiol Biochem. 2018;131:47–52.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schindele P, Wolter F, Puchta H. Transforming plant biology and breeding with CRISPR/Cas9, Cas12 and Cas13. FEBS Lett. 2018;592:1954–1967.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ishino Y, Shinagawa H, Makino K, et al. Nucleotide sequence of the iap gene, responsible for alkaline phosphatase isozyme conversion in Escherichia coli, and identification of the gene product. J Bacteriol. 1987;169:5429–5433.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jansen R, Embden J, Gaastra W, et al. Identification of genes that are associated with DNA repeats in prokaryotes. Mol Microbiol. 2002;43:1565–1575.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mojica FJM, Díez-Villaseñor C, García-Martínez J, et al. Intervening sequences of regularly spaced prokaryotic repeats derive from foreign genetic elements. J Mol Evol. 2005;60:174–182.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pourcel C, Salvignol G, Vergnaud G. CRISPR elements in Yersinia pestis acquire new repeats by preferential uptake of bacteriophage DNA, and provide additional tools for evolutionary studies. Microbiology. 2005;151:653–663.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bolotin A, Quinquis B, Sorokin A, et al. Clustered regularly interspaced short palindrome repeats (CRISPRs) have spacers of extrachromosomal origin. Microbiology. 2005;151:2551–2561.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barrangou R, Fremaux C, Deveau H, et al. CRISPR provides acquired resistance against viruses in prokaryotes. Science. 2007;315:1709–1712.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kunin V, Sorek R, Hugenholtz P. Evolutionary conservation of sequence and secondary structures in CRISPR repeats. Genome Biol. 2007;8:R61.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mojica FJM, Díez-Villaseñor C, García-Martínez J, et al. Short motif sequences determine the targets of the prokaryotic CRISPR defence system. Microbiology. 2009;155:733–740.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brouns SJ, Jore MM, Lundgren M, et al. Small CRISPR RNAs guide antiviral defense in prokaryotes. Science. 2008; 321:960–964.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garneau JE, Dupuis MÈ, Villion M, et al. The CRISPR/cas bacterial immune system cleaves bacteriophage and plasmid DNA. Nature. 2010;468:67–71.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Makarova KS, Haft DH, Barrangou R, et al. Evolution and classification of the CRISPR-Cas systems. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2011;9:467–477.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deltcheva E, Chylinski K, Sharma CM, et al. CRISPR RNA maturation by trans-encoded small RNA and host factor RNase III . Nature. 2011;471:602–607.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ma X, Zhang Q, Zhu Q, et al. A robust CRISPR/Cas9 system for convenient, high-efficiency multiplex genome editing in monocot and dicot plants. Mol Plant. 2015;8:1274–1284.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Soyk S, Müller NA, Park SJ, et al. Variation in the flowering gene SELF PRUNING 5G promotes day-neutrality and early yield in tomato. Nat Genet. 2017;49:162–168.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cai Y, Chen L, Liu X, et al. CRISPR/Cas9-mediated targeted mutagenesis of GmFT2a delays flowering time in soya bean. Plant Biotechnol J. 2018;16:176–185.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhou H, He M, Li J, et al. Development of commercial thermo-sensitive genic male sterile rice accelerates hybrid rice breeding using the CRISPR/Cas9-mediated TMS5 editing system. Sci Rep. 2016;6:37395.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li M, Li X, Zhou Z, et al. Reassessment of the four yield-related genes Gn1a, DEP1, GS3, and IPA1 in rice using a CRISPR/Cas9 system. Front Plant Sci. 2016;7:377.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li C, Liu C, Qi X, et al. RNA-guided Cas9 as an in vivo desired-target mutator in maize. Plant Biotechnol J. 2017;15:1566–1576.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Butt H, Jamil M, Wang JY, et al. Engineering plant architecture via CRISPR/Cas9-mediated alteration of strigolactone biosynthesis. 2018;18:174.
   Google Scholar
• Braatz J, Harloff H-J, Mascher M, et al. CRISPR-Cas9 targeted mutagenesis leads to simultaneous modification of different homoeologous gene copies in polyploid oilseed rape (Brassica napus). Plant Physiol. 2017;174:935–942.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lawrenson T, Shorinola O, Stacey N, et al. Induction of targeted, heritable mutations in barley and Brassica oleracea using RNA-guided Cas9 nuclease. Genome Biol. 2015;16:258.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang P, Zhang J, Sun L, et al. High efficient multisites genome editing in allotetraploid cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) using CRISPR/Cas9 system. Plant Biotechnol J. 2018;16:137–150.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang J, Zhang H, Botella JR, et al. Generation of new glutinous rice by CRISPR/Cas9-targeted mutagenesis of the Waxy gene in elite rice varieties. J Integr Plant Biol. 2018; 60:369–375.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andersson M, Turesson H, Nicolia A, et al. Efficient targeted multiallelic mutagenesis in tetraploid potato (Solanum tuberosum) by transient CRISPR-Cas9 expression in protoplasts. Plant Cell Rep. 2017;36:117–128.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tang L, Mao B, Li Y, et al. Knockout of OsNramp5 using the CRISPR/Cas9 system produces low Cd-accumulating indica rice without compromising yield. Sci Rep. 2017;7:14438.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nonaka S, Arai C, Takayama M, et al. Efficient increase of γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA) content in tomato fruits by targeted mutagenesis. Sci Rep. 2017;7:7057.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li R, Li R, Li X, et al. Multiplexed CRISPR/Cas9-mediated metabolic engineering of γ-aminobutyric acid levels in Solanum lycopersicum. Plant Biotechnol J. 2018;16:415–427.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang L, Chen L, Li R, et al. Reduced drought tolerance by CRISPR/Cas9-mediated SlMAPK3 mutagenesis in tomato plants. J Agric Food Chem. 2017;65:8674–8682.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lou D, Wang H, Liang G, et al. OsSAPK2 confers abscisic acid sensitivity and tolerance to drought stress in rice. Front Plant Sci. 2017;8:993.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jia Y, Ding Y, Shi Y, et al. The cbfs triple mutants reveal the essential functions of CBFs in cold acclimation and allow the definition of CBF regulons in Arabidopsis. New Phytol. 2016;212:345–353.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shi J, Gao H, Wang H, et al. ARGOS8 variants generated by CRISPR-Cas9 improve maize grain yield under field drought stress conditions. Plant Biotechnol J. 2017;15:207–216.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang Y, Bai Y, Wu G, et al. Simultaneous modification of three homoeologs of TaEDR1 by genome editing enhances powdery mildew resistance in wheat. Plant J. 2017;91:714–724.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang Y, Cheng X, Shan Q, et al. Simultaneous editing of three homoeoalleles in hexaploid bread wheat confers heritable resistance to powdery mildew. Nat Biotechnol. 2014;32:947–951.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nekrasov V, Wang C, Win J, et al. Rapid generation of a transgene-free powdery mildew resistant tomato by genome deletion. Sci Rep. 2017;7:482.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jia H, Zhang Y, Orbović V, et al. Genome editing of the disease susceptibility gene CsLOB1 in citrus confers resistance to citrus canker. Plant Biotechnol J. 2017;15:817–823.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chandrasekaran J, Brumin M, Wolf D, et al. Development of broad virus resistance in non-transgenic cucumber using CRISPR/Cas9 technology. Mol Plant Pathol. 2016;17:1140–1153.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pyott DE, Sheehan E, Molnar A. Engineering of CRISPR/Cas9-mediated potyvirus resistance in transgene-free Arabidopsis plants. Mol Plant Pathol. 2016;17:1276–1288.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Macovei A, Sevilla NR, Cantos C, et al. Novel alleles of rice eIF4G generated by CRISPR/Cas9-targeted mutagenesis confer resistance to Rice tungro spherical virus. Plant Biotechnol J. 2018;16:1918–1927.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang F, Wang C, Liu P, et al. Enhanced rice blast resistance by CRISPR/ Cas9-targeted mutagenesis of the ERF transcription factor gene OsERF922. PLoS One. 2016;11:e0154027.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang X, Tu M, Wang D, et al. CRISPR/Cas9-mediated efficient targeted mutagenesis in grape in the first generation. Plant Biotechnol J. 2018;16:844–855.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abdullah E, Idris A, Saparon A. Establishing RNA virus resistance in plants by harnessing CRISPR immune system. ARPN J Eng Appl Sci. 2017;12:3218–3221.
   Google Scholar
• Liu H, Ding Y, Zhou Y, et al. CRISPR-P 2.0: an improved CRISPR-Cas9 tool for genome editing in plants. Mol Plant. 2017;10:530–532.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fu Y, Foden JA, Khayter C, et al. High-frequency off-target mutagenesis induced by CRISPR-Cas nucleases in human cells. Nat Biotechnol. 2013;31:822–826.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cameron P, Fuller CK, Donohoue PD, et al. Mapping the genomic landscape of CRISPR-Cas9 cleavage. Nat Methods. 2017;14:600–606.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Doench JG, Hartenian E, Graham DB, et al. Rational design of highly active sgRNAs for CRISPR-Cas9-mediated gene inactivation. Nat Biotechnol. 2014;32:1262.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kleinstiver BP, Pattanayak V, Prew MS, et al. High-fidelity CRISPR-Cas9 variants with undetectable genome-wide off-targets. Nature. 2016;529:490–495.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slaymaker IM, Gao L, Zetsche B, et al. Rationally engineered Cas9 nucleases with improved specificity. Science. 2016;351:84.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ran FA, Hsu PD, Lin CY, et al. Double nicking by RNA-guided CRISPR cas9 for enhanced genome editing specificity. Cell. 2013;154:1380–1389.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fauser F, Schiml S, Puchta H. Both CRISPR/Cas-based nucleases and nickases can be used efficiently for genome engineering in Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant J. 2014;79:348–359.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xiang G, Zhang X, An C, et al. Temperature effect on CRISPR-Cas9 mediated genome editing. J Genet Genomics. 2017;44:199–205.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Le Blanc C, Zhang F, Mendez J, et al. Increased efficiency of targeted mutagenesis by CRISPR/Cas9 in plants using heat stress. Plant J. 2017;9:377–386.
   Google Scholar
• Xie X, Ma X, Zhu Q, et al. CRISPR-GE: a convenient software toolkit for CRISPR-based genome editing. Mol Plant. 2017;10:1246–1249.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shalem O, Sanjana NE, Hartenian E, et al. Genome-scale CRISPR-Cas9 knockout screening in human cells. Science. 2014; 343:84.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lu Y, Ye X, Guo R, et al. Genome-wide targeted mutagenesis in rice using the CRISPR/Cas9 system. Mol Plant. 2017;10:1242–1245.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meng X, Yu H, Zhang Y, et al. Construction of a genome-wide mutant library in rice using CRISPR/Cas9. Mol Plant. 2017;10:1238–1241.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobs TB, Zhang N, Patel D, et al. Generation of a collection of mutant tomato lines using pooled CRISPR libraries. Plant Physiol. 2017;174:2023–2037.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shan Q, Wang Y, Li J, et al. Genome editing in rice and wheat using the CRISPR/Cas system. Nat Protoc. 2014;9:2395–2410.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vouillot L, Thélie A, Pollet N. Comparison of T7E1 and surveyor mismatch cleavage assays to detect mutations triggered by engineered nucleases. G3: Genes|Genomes|Genetics. 2015;5:407–415.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhu X, Xu Y, Yu S, et al. An efficient genotyping method for genome-modified animals and human cells generated with CRISPR/Cas9 system. Sci Rep. 2014;4:6420.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thomas HR, Percival SM, Yoder BK, et al. High-throughput genome editing and phenotyping facilitated by high resolution melting curve analysis. PLoS One. 2014;9:e114632.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hua Y, Wang C, Huang J, et al. A simple and efficient method for CRISPR/Cas9-induced mutant screening. J Genet Genomics. 2017;44:207–213.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen L, Li W, Katin-Grazzini L, et al. A method for the production and expedient screening of CRISPR/Cas9-mediated non-transgenic mutant plants. Hortic Res. 2018;5:13.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang H, Zhang J, Wei P, et al. The CRISPR/Cas9 system produces specific and homozygous targeted gene editing in rice in one generation. Plant Biotechnol J. 2014;12:797–807.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xu R, Li H, Qin R, et al. Gene targeting using the Agrobacterium tumefaciens-mediated CRISPR-Cas system in rice. Rice (N Y). 2014;7:5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lu HP, Liu SM, Xu SL, et al. CRISPR-S: an active interference element for a rapid and inexpensive selection of genome-edited, transgene-free rice plants. Plant Biotechnol J. 2017;15:1371–1373.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zaidi SS-A, Tashkandi M, Mansoor S, et al. Engineering plant immunity: using CRISPR/Cas9 to generate virus resistance. Front Plant Sci. 2016;7:1673.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang Q. Strategies for developing green super rice. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2007;104:16402–16409.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xu M, Xu Z, Liu B, et al. Genetic variation in four maturity genes affects photoperiod insensitivity and PHYA-regulated post-flowering responses of soybean. BMC Plant Biol. 2013;13:91.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Subudhi PK, De Leon TB, Tapia R, et al. Genetic interaction involving photoperiod-responsive Hd1 promotes early flowering under long-day conditions in rice. Sci Rep. 2018;8:2081.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhou H, Liu Q, Li J, et al. Photoperiod- and thermo-sensitive genic male sterility in rice are caused by a point mutation in a novel noncoding RNA that produces a small RNA. Cell Res. 2012;22:649–660.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnston R, Wang M, Sun Q, et al. Transcriptomic analyses indicate that maize ligule development recapitulates gene expression patterns that occur during lateral organ initiation. Plant Cell Online. 2014;26:4718–4732.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Waldie T, McCulloch H, Leyser O. Strigolactones and the control of plant development: lessons from shoot branching. Plant J. 2014;79:607–622.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hu Y, Cheng H, Tao S. The challenges and solutions for cadmium-contaminated rice in China: a critical review. Environ Int. 2016;92–93:515–532.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Takayama M, Ezura H. How and why does tomato accumulate a large amount of GABA in the fruit? Front Plant Sci. 2015;6:612.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee J, Nonaka S, Takayama M, et al. Utilization of a genome-edited tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) with high gamma aminobutyric acid content in hybrid breeding. J Agric Food Chem. 2018;66:963–671.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frye CA, Tang D, Innes RW. From the cover: negative regulation of defense responses in plants by a conserved MAPKK kinase. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2001;98:373–378.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Humphry M, Consonni C, Panstruga R. mlo-based powdery mildew immunity: silver bullet or simply non-host resistance? Mol Plant Pathol. 2006;7:605–610.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hu Y, Zhang J, Jia H, et al. Lateral organ boundaries 1 is a disease susceptibility gene for citrus bacterial canker disease. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2014;111:E521–E529.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lellis AD, Kasschau KD, Whitham SA, et al. Loss-of-susceptibility mutants of Arabidopsis thaliana reveal an essential role for eIF(iso)4E during potyvirus infection. Curr Biol. 2002;12:1046–1051.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jung J, Won SY, Suh SC, et al. The barley ERF-type transcription factor HvRAF confers enhanced pathogen resistance and salt tolerance in Arabidopsis. Planta. 2007;225:575–588.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mahas A, Neal JSC, Mahfouz MM. Harnessing CRISPR/Cas systems for programmable transcriptional and post-transcriptional regulation. Biotechnol Adv. 2018;36:295–310.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meyer RS, Purugganan MD. Evolution of crop species: genetics of domestication and diversification. Nat Rev Genet. 2013;14:840–852.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Olsen KM, Wendel JF. A bountiful harvest: genomic insights into crop domestication phenotypes. Annu Rev Plant Biol. 2013;64:47–70.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wittkopp PJ, Kalay G. Cis-regulatory elements: molecular mechanisms and evolutionary processes underlying divergence. Nat Rev Genet. 2012;13:59–69.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodríguez-Leal D, Lemmon ZH, Man J, et al. Engineering quantitative trait variation for crop improvement by genome editing. Cell. 2017;171:470–480.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang H, Si X, Ji X, et al. Genome editing of upstream open reading frames enables translational control in plants. 2018;36:894–898.
   Google Scholar
• Shalem O, Sanjana NE, Zhang F. High-throughput functional genomics using CRISPR-Cas9. Nat Rev Genet. 2015;16:299–311.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gao X, Chen J, Dai X, et al. An effective strategy for reliably isolating heritable and Cas9-free Arabidopsis mutants generated by CRISPR/Cas9-mediated genome editing. Plant Physiol. 2016;171:1794–1800.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Svitashev S, Schwartz C, Lenderts B, et al. Genome editing in maize directed by CRISPR-Cas9 ribonucleoprotein complexes. Nat Commun. 2016;7:13274.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang Y, Liang Z, Zong Y, et al. Efficient and transgene-free genome editing in wheat through transient expression of CRISPR/Cas9 DNA or RNA. Nat Commun. 2016;7:12617.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liang Z, Chen K, Li T, et al. Efficient DNA-free genome editing of bread wheat using CRISPR/Cas9 ribonucleoprotein complexes. Nat Commun. 2017;8:14261.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liang Z, Chen K, Zhang Y, et al. Genome editing of bread wheat using biolistic delivery of CRISPR/Cas9 in vitro transcripts or ribonucleoproteins. Nat Protoc. 2018;13:413–430.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tuteja N, Verma S, Sahoo RK, et al. Recent advances in development of marker-free transgenic plants: regulation and biosafety concern. J Biosci. 2012;37:167–197.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Waltz E. CRISPR-edited crops free to enter market, skip regulation. Nat Biotechnol. 2016;34:582.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Waltz E. Gene-edited CRISPR mushroom escapes US regulation. Nature. 2016;532:293.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schouten HJ, vande Geest H, Papadimitriou S, et al. Re-sequencing transgenic plants revealed rearrangements at T-DNA inserts, and integration of a short T-DNA fragment, but no increase of small mutations elsewhere. Plant Cell Rep. 2017;36:493–504.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang G-P, Yu X-D, Sun Y-W, et al. Generation of marker- and/or backbone-free transgenic wheat plants via Agrobacterium-mediated transformation. Front Plant Sci. 2016;7:1324.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gorbunova V, Levy AA. Non-homologous DNA end joining in plant cells is associated with deletions and filler DNA insertions. Nucleic Acids Res. 1997;25:4650–4657.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Woo JW, Kim J, Kwon SI, et al. DNA-free genome editing in plants with preassembled CRISPR-Cas9 ribonucleoproteins. Nat Biotechnol. 2015;33:1162–1164.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malnoy M, Viola R, Jung M-H, et al. DNA-free genetically edited grapevine and apple protoplast using CRISPR/Cas9 ribonucleoproteins. Front Plant Sci. 2016;7:1904.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Subburaj S, Chung SJ, Lee C, et al. Site-directed mutagenesis in Petunia×hybrida protoplast system using direct delivery of purified recombinant Cas9 ribonucleoproteins. Plant Cell Rep. 2016;35:1535–1544.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Callaway E. CRISPR plants now subject to tough GM laws in European Union. Nature. 2018;560:16.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar