Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Full Ebook of Tilling and Eco Tilling For Crop Improvement 1St Edition Anjanabha Bhattacharya Vilas Parkhi Bharat Char Online PDF All Chapter
Full Ebook of Tilling and Eco Tilling For Crop Improvement 1St Edition Anjanabha Bhattacharya Vilas Parkhi Bharat Char Online PDF All Chapter
https://ebookmeta.com/product/tilling-and-eco-tilling-for-crop-
improvement-1st-edition-anjanabha-bhattacharya-vilas-parkhi-
bharat-char/
https://ebookmeta.com/product/complexity-in-tsunamis-volcanoes-
and-their-hazards-2nd-edition-robert-i-tilling/
https://ebookmeta.com/product/genome-editing-current-technology-
advances-and-applications-for-crop-improvement-1st-edition-
shabir-hussain-wani/
https://ebookmeta.com/product/silicon-and-nano-silicon-in-
environmental-stress-management-and-crop-quality-improvement-
progress-and-prospects-1st-edition-hassan-etesami-editor/
I Survived 1st Edition Bruno Vilas Boas
https://ebookmeta.com/product/i-survived-1st-edition-bruno-vilas-
boas/
https://ebookmeta.com/product/bravehearts-of-bharat-vikram-
sampath/
https://ebookmeta.com/product/room-for-improvement-first-edition-
jessica-gregory/
https://ebookmeta.com/product/cybersecurity-and-identity-access-
management-bharat-s-rawal/
https://ebookmeta.com/product/digital-disruption-implications-
and-opportunities-for-economies-society-policy-makers-and-
business-leaders-1st-edition-bharat-vagadia/
Anjanabha Bhattacharya
Vilas Parkhi
Bharat Char Editors
TILLING and
Eco-TILLING
for Crop
Improvement
TILLING and Eco-TILLING for Crop
Improvement
Anjanabha Bhattacharya • Vilas Parkhi •
Bharat Char
Editors
Bharat Char
Mahyco Research Centre
Mahyco Private Limited
Jalna, India
# The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore
Pte Ltd. 2023
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether
the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of
illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and
transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by
similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication
does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant
protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this
book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or
the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any
errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional
claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
The registered company address is: 152 Beach Road, #21-01/04 Gateway East, Singapore 189721,
Singapore
Preface
Food and nutritional security for feeding the global population remains a constant
challenge in the years to come. The human population is expected to reach 9.7
billion by 2050. Climate change-associated events like heat waves, high
temperatures, drought as well as flooding will constrain food production. Along
with newly emerging anti-globalization sentiments, the supply chain crisis fuels
spiraling food prices, and inflationary pressure is adding fuel to the fire in the
affordability of food for all. Elimination of hunger is envisioned in the UN 2030
agenda as an immediate sustainability goal. Agriculture today needs a technology-
aided solution. The rate of genetic gain in food crops has remained stagnant in the
past decade. The diversity of germplasm remains a key element in enhancing the
breeder’s capacity to breed new crops. The spontaneous mutation also happens in
nature at a very low frequency. In a sense nature is also facilitating mutagenesis all
the time. Thus, intervention by mankind to facilitate the process of creating
variability to breed new crop varieties as per the need of the marketplace. Thus
random mutagenesis approaches have a major role to play by increasing the number
of permutations and combinations among available germplasms which can translate
to designer crops. New biotechnology tools are being discovered at a rapid pace but
the regulatory environment remains hostile. Licensing issues also add multiple
constraints to the commercial use of the recent genome editing technologies and
thus thwart innovation. The first generation of the Green Revolution thus needs to be
repeated using a newer basket of technologies. Mutation breeding has played a
significant role in the development of improved varieties led by agencies like the
Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) and Bhabha Atomic Research Centre
(BARC), India, among many others. Thus, by their (FAO & BARC) pioneering
efforts, plant breeding efforts focused on mutation breeding came to the forefront.
Readers are directed to FAO/IEAE mutant database available online at https://mvd.
iaea.org/, which lists more than 3365 mutant released varieties across 214 crop
species. The advent of next-generation sequencing tools has further aided in the
mutation discovery efforts, particularly recessive alleles which are hard to detect by
phenotypic means alone. Given the importance of mutagenesis and technological
advances in creating and identifying useful alleles, this book will appraise the target
audience, viz., students, researchers, policymakers, consumers, and advocacy
groups. This will facilitate further developments in this field of mutagenesis. Since
v
vi Preface
mutagenesis and TILLING have already been accepted by consumers for more than
a century, it is hoped that the relevance and efforts provided by all the stakeholders
including the crop breeding community, seed industry, Government agencies, and
policymakers will remain upbeat even if many advanced technologies start playing
out. This is primarily due to the popularity of mutagenesis being free from any
controversy, regulatory hurdles, licensing required, clean patentscape, and the mass
participation of start-ups, institutes, and industry in developing new products. Public
outreach is one of the objectives of this book in light of precise genome editing,
particularly CRISPR/Cas9.
We hope a bit of illustration on the contents will enhance the book’s appeal to the
target audience. Firstly, the major objective of this book is to introduce the topic of
mutagenesis and mutant screening technique and the relevance of these technologies
in the era of precise genome editing. We have tried our best to include the latest
information and technological advances in this book compilation. Every day new
findings emerge and therefore it is near impossible to claim completeness in the
topics covered in this publication. Inadvertently errors also might have crept in and
we would like our readers to reach to us and we will incorporate them in future
editions. Our mutagenesis and TILLING journey begins with Chap. 1, which is
comprehensively written by the editors themselves and primarily focuses on
introducing the topic of mutagenesis, progress in screening techniques, and compar-
ison with the recently developed genome editing tools. Comprehensive deliberation
is conducted for the social acceptability aspect, patentscape including plant varietal
protection (PVP). Mutagenesis efforts in various crops are described at length for
crop improvement efforts. Chapter 2 is written by Dr. Tyagi and their team, focusing
on induced mutagenesis beginning with the application of various mutagens, both
chemical and physical agents, and their application in vegetative tissue. This chapter
ends with a mention of CRISPR/Cas mutagenesis. Chapter 3 focuses on bioinfor-
matic tools used in the identification of genes of interest, mining genes for functional
SNPs, tools used for the analysis of TILLING by sequencing data, and In Silico
TILLING. Chapter 4 focuses on next-generation mutation detection methods which
are vital in speeding up allele discovery compared to gel-based methods. Chapter 5
focuses entirely on TILLING by sequencing. Chapter 6 is dedicated to natural
TILLING and provides examples of cultivated crops where natural variation can
be exploited to speed up crop improvement efforts. Chapter 7 is on mutagenesis in
somatic tissues and a team led by Dr. Debasis Chakraborty, NBRI, takes the reader
through the various somatic mutagenesis approaches and mutation detection.
Chapter 8 focuses on phenomics and trait selection. Chapter 9 focuses on the
development of climate-resilient crops and Chap. 10 deliberates on the future of
TILLING while the last chapter of the book (Chap. 11) focuses on the perception of
food crops developed by mutagenesis compared to other approaches like
GM. Stakeholder perception will ultimately pave the way for acceptance of food
products and thus the last chapter of the book discusses various topics related to the
use of biotechnological tools in food production.
Preface vii
Our reader may find at times a bit of overlap in contents between chapters which
are kept deliberately as these cannot be seen in isolation and multiple perspectives
are needed to understand various viewpoints.
Thus, with the availability of advanced sequencing systems, bioinformatics tools
can help in the efficient utilization of mutagenesis and help the breeding community
in unleashing a second green revolution. The crops of the future are expected to
withstand the vagaries of climate change and have a positive predictable outcome on
the global food supply chain.
We hope this book will provide a holistic view of the mutagenesis and TILLING
approach toward crop improvement and keep its relevance intact in advancing
modern agriculture.
We at Mahyco live by the vision to feed the world by empowering smallholder
farmers, and we fulfill our mission by providing smallholder farmers with scientifi-
cally advanced genetics, in annual crops, to improve their income sustainably. We
thank our Managing Director, Mr. Shirish Barwale, Mahyco, for letting us undertake
this project. Special thanks to all our contributors spanning several countries and
geographies for undertaking this project despite their busy schedules. Thank you,
team Springer, for wholeheartedly accepting our proposal to edit a book project on
an important topic of mutagenesis and TILLING.
We sincerely hope this book will facilitate further use of mutagenesis and
screening techniques in bringing designer crops into the world which will help to
improve the livelihood of millions of small farmers in India and the World.
We wish everyone a happy read!
The recent pandemic led to severe food supply chain disruption, marked changes in
policy from global to single market, hostile trade barriers, wars, increasing inflation-
ary pressure, and climate change. Self-reliance in food production now is a long-term
strategy for every nation on this planet. For more than a hundred years mutation
breeding has resulted in the release of thousands of crop varieties and thus played a
role in alleviating hunger. The efforts by the Food and Agriculture Organisation
(FAO)-International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Bhabha Atomic Research
Centre (BARC)-Department of Nuclear Agriculture, India, are praiseworthy in the
field of mutation breeding. The list of released mutants is available online at mvid.
iaea.org. The most commonly used mutagen has been physical irradiation and later
on chemicals were used to induce single base pair change. Vegetative parts like
tubers are also used. Consumer distrust remains with other biotechnology-assisted
technologies in several marketplaces. The already widespread acceptability of
mutagenesis-derived products along with multiple CRISPR patents, and licensing
difficulties associated with precise genome editing means the fruits of precise
breeding will still take a few years to fructify. Meanwhile, mutagenesis and
TILLING which are free to practice will remain relevant without any restrictions.
Further advancements in mutation detection led by TILLING by sequencing (TbyS)
will make allele discovery more appealing, economical, and fast. Therefore, this
book aims to focus on mutagenesis and associated allele discovery tools and
platforms. Given the importance of mutagenesis and technological advances in
creating and identifying useful alleles, this book will appraise the target audience,
viz., students, researchers, policymakers, consumers, and advocacy groups. We
sincerely hope this book will provide readers with a holistic view of mutagenesis
and TILLING in the era of precise genome editing like CRISPR/Cas and yet show its
relevance in the modern era of biotechnology. We hope both TILLING and
CRISPR/Cas precise genome editing tools will co-exist in the years to come and
help in creating designer crops for the betterment of humankind.
ix
Contents
xi
xii Contents
Bharat Char is the Chief Science Officer (CSO) at Mahyco. He obtained his PhD
in Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, University of Southern California Medical
School, Los Angeles, and undertook postdoctoral work at the University of
California, Berkeley, in plant molecular genetics. He has served as a member of
the International Seed Federation Working Group on GM Vegetables.
Contributors
xiii
xiv Editors and Contributors
Abstract
The human population is burgeoning and land resource to grow crops is decreas-
ing day by day impacted by climate change. Feeding mankind remains a chal-
lenge. Nutritional security and the development of crops resilient to biotic and
abiotic stress are the need of the hour. For more than a 100 years mutation
breeding has resulted in the release of thousands of crop varieties and thus played
a role in alleviating hunger. The efforts by the Food and Agriculture Organisation
(FAO)-International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Bhabha Atomic Research
Centre (BARC)-Department of Nuclear Agriculture, India is laudable in the field
of mutation breeding. The most commonly used mutagen has been physical
irradiation and later on chemicals were used to induce single base pair change.
Usually, the seed is the primary material for conducting mutagenesis. Vegetative
parts like tubers are also used. Consumer distrust remains with other
biotechnology-assisted technologies in several marketplaces. The already wide-
spread acceptability of mutagenesis-derived products along with patent, and
licensing difficulties associated with the new generation of genome editing
technologies like CRISPR/Cas9 can translate into a favorable shift toward muta-
genesis and TILLING which are free to practice. Plant breeders are in a race
against time to develop the most promising lines to meet the market demand and
thus may not be interested in retrieving traits directly from wild species and fine-
tuning the desirable character. Thus crop breeders may continue to focus on
adapting existing varieties with the much-needed desired traits by mutation
breeding. Combined with the approved use of mutants in organic farming,
Keywords
Abbreviations
1.1 Introduction
The mutation is the source of primary variation in plants (Griffiths et al. 2000) and it
is an abrupt inheritable change in the genetic material of an organism and therefore is
a substantial steering force of evolution in ever-changing climatic regimes. The term
mutation breeding was first coined by Freisleben and Lenin. Mutation-induced
change may or may not result in a noticeable phenotype and can be detected by
visual or molecular means (Brown 2002). Mutation has played a key part in crop
improvement. Hugo De Vries in 1889 while rediscovering Mendel’s law showed
that the inheritance of variation in primrose and snapdragon resulted in traits that do
not follow the typical segregation patterns and at the same time the traits were
heritable (Stamhuis et al. 1999). Hugo De Vries, therefore, is credited with the
discovery of mutation. He described such anomalous plants as mutants (Stoltzfus
and Cable 2014). Later on, Johannsen described these factors as genes, which can
pass from one generation to another (Portin and Wilkins 2017). Mutagenesis has
been in use for a very long time since its initial discovery by Sadler in the nineteenth
century in Agriculture crops for creating random variability (Sikora et al. 2011).
Recently, a paper in Nature by Monroe et al. (2022) showed that mutations in
Arabidopsis thaliana are non-random and follow a typical pattern of occurrence.
They sequenced mutants that otherwise would not have survived in nature and
analyzed over a million mutations. The author was able to decipher that mutation
in genes that are essential for survival, occurs in low frequency than in other regions.
Thus, the probability of finding mutation could be of interest to crop breeders who
are typically interested in one gene for an independent trait that is easy to manage in
plant breeding settings. Rötter et al. (2015) observed that the future crop improve-
ment goals must address food sufficiency by 2050 when climatic events like heat
waves, high temperatures, frequent drought in a few places, and heavy rainfall in
other regions will place new food challenges. Ramirez-Villegas et al. (2015)
described models on genotypes suitable to climate change models, i.e., a type of
ideotype design. The objective was to identify plant processes related to yield, and
growth in face of climate uncertainty. Some reports suggested that Sadler himself
was not so enthusiastic about the technology (Shu et al. 2012). Mutagenesis is also
dubbed as factual due to the oddness of the mutagenesis process and most of the
selection is done visually in the field by the crop breeders. In this chapter, we will
4 A. Bhattacharya et al.
The early days of chemical mutagenesis involved mutagens like mustard gas and
nitrous acid (Povirk and Shuker 1994). Then chemicals like diethyl sulfate, and
alkylating agents like nitroso compounds, acridines, azides, and base analogous
were introduced (Shu et al. 2012). The genetic screen was previously used for the
understanding role of any particular gene. The main purpose of genetic screens is to
phenotype mutants caused by single-gene lesions. Chiefly, mutations are classified
into transition, silent mutation, missense, nonsense, transversions as well as
INDELS, frameshift, and inversion (Website 1 n.d.; Website 2 n.d.). In each of
these cases, the mode of action varies, in almost all cases, it is a case of base
substitution. A silent mutation might cause exon skipping, similarly, a mutation in
the intron may impede self-splicing activity. However, still, such nonsignificant
changes can modify the chaperone activity of the coding protein, modify physiolog-
ical and chemical functions in plants, and are important for improvement efforts. The
green revolution genes of the 1960s were spontaneous mutations (Bhattacharya et al.
2021). Most mutations are silent and only a fraction results in a phenotype. The plant
genome absorbs many rapid mutation-induced changes over a long period without
showing any negative impact. The ability to withstand mutation has been a part of
plant evolution as standing crops endure sunlight along with UV radiation during
their life cycle (Gill et al. 2015). Many of the mutations induced are identified
promptly by the natural cell repair mechanism and can revert to their natural levels
(Alberts et al. 2002). Thus, mutagenized induced breeding is different from natural
mutagenesis as this is a deliberate effort to induce changes in the genome to change
plant phenotype (Jankowicz-Cieslak et al. 2017). Today, physical (gamma rays, fast
neutron mutagenesis), chemical, and biological mutagens like transposon-based
chromosome integration, Agrobacterium-based site-directed, insertional techniques
are used in mutagenesis which has resulted in robust crop breeding, genomic
research (Chaudhary et al. 2019), though is tedious and costly. Even, MITE (minia-
ture inverted-repeat transposable elements) can cause genetic change but, can remain
unstable. Apart from applied Agriculture, TILLING has many applications in basic
sciences like being involved in the identification of genes and pathways related to
plant developmental pathways including flowering, yield, and stress tolerance. In
fact, till recently mutation breeding was only the method available for creating novel
genetic variants in crops, and mostly phenotyping was the sole basis of trait selection
among crop breeders (Muñoz-López and García-Pérez 2010). Few mutations may
also cause epigenetic changes without modifying the DNA molecule and may
1 Mutagenesis and TILLING in the Era of Precise Genome Editing 5
remain stable for multiple generations (Osabe et al. 2014). These mutagenesis
methods create SNP, INDEL which is random, takes time, is costly, and mostly
trait discovery is limited to visual inspection (Tadele 2016). Physical mutagenesis
mostly creates knockout or nonfunctional alleles of the gene of interest in the mutant
plants (Alberts et al. 2002). Today, with the common usage of the gamma radiation
facility using Cobalt-60, physical mutagenesis is routinely used in plant breeding.
Cosmic space is another source of inducing mutations that involve cosmic radiation,
weak magnetic fields, and microgravity. Thus, living samples are also experimented
with in space flights (Oladosu et al. 2016). The need for creating variability arose due
to repeatedly using genetically similar germplasm in the breeding program, thus
narrowing the genetic base tremendously. In general, mutation breeding involves
generating mostly recessive mutations with a small fraction of mutations described
as dominant (Loewe and Hill 2010). Mutation in genes can also play an important
role in pleiotropy, which is a term used for a gene influencing a second gene (Paaby
and Rockman 2013). Most of the mutations identified by physical means tend to be
recessive (Holme et al. 2019). Nowadays, both the phenotypic and the genotypic
platforms are automated using an entirely computerized system with artificial intel-
ligence coming to the forefront to predict true mutations from a pool of putative
mutations (Beans 2020). It is possible to link genotype to crop phenotype using high
throughput phenomics platform (Zhao et al. 2019). Many of the previously used
popular mutants like short stature with strong culm which can withstand strong wind
and rain are being now mapped to the specific lesion in target genes (Dockter and
Hansson 2015). Later with the discovery of many other molecular biology tools
detecting subtle mutations was possible thus extending the value proposition, and
drastically decreasing resource requirements including time and labor. Many traits
are hard to detect by visual means alone, for example, quality traits, disease, and pest
resistance to name a few, and require additional interventions by molecular biology
tools (Website 3). In case of resistance to disease tolerance, amino acid changes in
the virulence proteins lead to loss of recognition site (Jia et al. 2000). Thus, the
interaction of protein from the host organism with altered plant protein can lead to
disease tolerance.
Once scarcely available genomic data was used extensively to study gene function in
development, protein–protein interactions, and metabolic pathways by sequencing,
is used today with NGS across organisms (Unamba et al. 2015). Using next-
generation mapping by sequencing approach resulted in the method which does
not depend on any particular reference genome, multiple crosses which are complex
and require further linkage information. Thus, this combined approach is amenable
for species for which no genetic screen exists so far (Schneeberger 2014). Thus, one
of the aims of the vast amount of data generated by various sequencing platforms
across crops is to assign a function to operational genes. Previously, thought of as a
6 A. Bhattacharya et al.
tiresome method to screen for novel traits by visual means over many generations
has gained traction in the recent decade due to the advent of new molecular screening
tools like Mutchrom Seq, Netmap, exome capture sequencing, SNP chips, MutRen
seq, whole-genome sequence by a new generation of sequencing and assembly by
improvised bioinformatic assembly analyzer with in-depth long and short reads
(Unamba et al. 2015; Thao and Tran 2016). A brief overview of various sequencing
techniques is discussed as rapid progress allowed analysis of multiple targets in less
time thus replacing the tedious ways to detect mutations in TILLING with gel-based
methods (Gupta et al. 2017). We aim here to provide a glimpse of the workability of
each system. Sequencing platforms that are used to detect mutations in both
TILLING and modern genome editing are developed by Roche, Illumina,
and Applied biosystems (for more details refer to Dorado et al. 2021, Heather and
Chain 2016). In the primary days of sequencing, two scientists Allan Maxam and
Walter Gilbert used chemical sequencing. This was based on radioactive labeling
and was complex. Thus, the hunt for a reliable, simple method resulted in the chain
termination technique by Sanger and co-workers. Sanger sequencing was further
refined with the inclusion of fluorescent probes, automated platforms, and electro-
phoresis systems (Moorthie et al. 2011). The second generation of sequencing
platforms includes Polony, MPSS (massively parallel signature sequencing),
SOLID, HiSeq, MiSeq from Illumina, and pyrosequencing (Koboldt et al. 2013).
The second-generation pyrosequencing works using streptavidin-coated magnetic
beads with a polymerase (also refer to Pourmand et al. 2002). Then, there is the
Illumina (Solexa) sequencing system which introduced two types of sequencing
platforms, Hi Seq and Mi Seq (refer to Illumina Website 4 n.d.), the other platform is
SOLID sequencing which uses beads containing single copies of a DNA (Website
5 n.d.). MPSS is based on a bead, ligated adapter, which could measure the
expression of genes (Moorthie et al. 2011). 454-pyrosequencing paved the way for
the next generation of sequencing technology, which was mostly dominated by
Sanger sequencing over the last three decades. The new improved sequencing
technology including second and third generations increased precision with high
throughput while decreasing cost immensely. The main difference between the
second (next generation) and third generations is that in the latter a single DNA
molecule is used instead of template DNA. The template DNA reads are prone to
error during the amplification step. Further, parallel sequencing of such smaller
templates increases the chances of error (also refer, Heather and Chain 2016).
Gupta et al. 2017 used MiSeq Illumina sequencing to TILL the tomato mutant
population and analyzed the sequence data by six software namely SNVER,
CRISPR, GENOTYPER, UNIFIED, CAMBA, and VIPR. They found that no single
software was able to predict changes with high accuracy. Tomato samples were
pulled to 128 folds. Only 64 of 75 mutations were verified by Sanger sequencing. In
the latest developed sequencing technology, the nanopore is coming to an age. Here,
each strand of DNA is read without the PCR bias. Therefore, with major strides in
the sequencing platform for the first time mutagenesis could be explored beyond
visual means at the sequence level with certainty. One of the early reports of
TILLING came from McCallum and their research team where the mutation was
1 Mutagenesis and TILLING in the Era of Precise Genome Editing 7
The first step in a TILLING project is the mutagenized population (Figs. 1.1, 1.2, and
1.3). Mutation sources can be diverse. Physical mutagens such as ultraviolet
radiations, alpha, gamma, and X-rays. Biological agents like virus, bacteria,
retrotransposons, transposons, and artificial T-DNA insertions cause random reloca-
tion and disrupts the function of DNA, however, not used in the crop mutagenesis
process. Commonly used chemical means include nitrous acid (which causes base
pair change from cytosine to uracil), deaminating agents, alkylating agents like
ethylnitrosourea, vinyl chloride, mustard gas, aromatic amines, sodium azide, ben-
zene, and ethidium bromide (causes frameshift mutations). Ethyl methanesulfonate
10 A. Bhattacharya et al.
The M2 plants were used for tissue M2 plants were grown to harvest
collection to extract the DNA which M3 seeds which could be stored
could be stored as DNA Library for as Seed Bank for future
future TILLING experiments requirements
Pooling of DNA samples (2-fold to 8-fold) is done to reduce the efforts for
screening of large samples before PCR amplification of target gene
mutagenesis. Even vegetative parts like tubers are used. The primary untreated
material is designated as M0 on which EMS treatment is done. After the treatment
seeds are designated M1. Till et al. (2006) reported a protocol for TILLING and
Eco-TILLING in plants using primers targeting particular sequences in DNA, PCR
samples are denatured and annealed. Further, heteroduplexes are cleaved with any
endonucleases, and PCR products are separated by applying denaturing polyacryl-
amide electrophoresis. Several approaches like sample pooling, gel analyzer, and
multi-well can reduce overall cost. Mutagen is selected depending on the nature of
the desired mutation. The primary untreated seeds are termed M0 on which EMS
chemical treatment in phosphate buffer (Hohmann et al. 2005). The treated seeds are
termed M1 and these are planted in soil to get M2 lines. This is our master population.
A master population contains all possible mutations in that line. Thus, master seed
packets contain seeds having related recessive mutations. Many a time growing a
large population (M3 onward) is labor and resource intensive and storing seeds is
also a logistic problem. The population size is also critical. For example, Arabidopsis
requires >100 K population to ensure that each gene is mutated at least once
(Ruegger and Chapple, 2001). Arabidopsis has a genome size of 135 Mb whereas
commercially important crops like corn have a genome size of 2.3 Gb and Cotton is
2.5 Gb (for more information on “The First 50 Plant Genome,” refer Scott and Todd
2013). However, maintaining such a large population in every commercial crop is
not feasible. Also, seeds have a limited viability period. Therefore, storing seeds in
12 A. Bhattacharya et al.
Find or extract the Sequence of the Gene of Interest from the databases such as
GenBank available in different species and then identify the proper homologue
Identify the region within coding sequence with the most potential to generate
deleterious changes with the help of CODDLE (Codons Optimized to Discover
Deleterious LEsions) Software
PARSESNP (Project Aligned Related Sequences and Evaluate SNPs) analyses the
nucleotide polymorphisms and determines its effect on protein, based on alignment of
related protein with PSSM (Position-Specific Scoring Matrix) and SIFT (Sort
Intolerant From Tolerant) soft wares
Further, to predict the effect of mutation on the secondary structure of proteins before
phenotyping could be done with SAS (Sequence Annotated by Structure) and SOPMA
(Self-OPtimized Method for secondary structure prediction with Alignment) softwares
ambient conditions is essential along with reviving the population from time to time
to preserve the master population. Similarly, DNA libraries prepared from such a
population should also be stored at -80 °C for long-term storage. This DNA library
must be prepared using high-quality DNA kits. Quality of DNA is an important
attribute and therefore, in-house protocols are best avoided. Developing an entire
mutation population is an expensive affair, therefore, care must be taken at each of
the steps for harvesting the entire benefits of novel mutants from such a population.
For practical purposes, a population size of 3000–5000 M2 is preferable. Once, the
population is developed, this can be screened by phenotypes (forward genetics) and
genotypes (reverse genetics). There are different types of mutation. If there is a
mutation in the transcription start site can lead to a loss of function which in most
cases will be a knockout or entire gene inactivation. Similarly, a situation will arise
in the case of mutation in the promoter region. Targeting regulatory sequence and
1 Mutagenesis and TILLING in the Era of Precise Genome Editing 13
intronic sequence is desirable only when there is enough evidence, through prior
publication or bioinformatic analysis upstream that such a mutation works consider-
ing the time and resource which is invested in TILLING activities. Whereas any
intronic mutation may affect chaperone activity or make the final protein unstable
due to changes in peptide, hydrophobic, hydrophilic, ionic, disulfide, and hydrogen
bonds. Primer design in diploid species with one copy of the gene is fairly straight-
forward. However, in the case of polyploidy having multiple copies of homeologous
gene sequence, variability between coding, and non-coding regions should be of
focus. The primer must be designed taking into account differences in the 3′ prime
region usually toward the tail sequence thus increasing specificity. Today, KASP
(Kompetitive allele-specific PCR) is increasingly being used for genotyping from
low to high scale. An automated bioinformatic platform like PolyMarker can be used
for homolog-specific assays for polyploidy species. A recent book on TILLING
which also focus on screening mutants by sequencing and utilizing the mutants in
functional genomics can be referred to for further information. In any situation,
reverse genetics is important because traits like quality, phytonutrient, and
bio-fortified with mineral content may not be easily discernable by the naked eye.
Genomic sequence is readily available for the majority of crops. Many individual
lines and cultivars are already resequenced (Hao et al. 2020). Using genomic
information we can detect mutation using traditional TILLING. TILLING involves
amplifying the gene of interest by PCR and digesting the fragment by an endonu-
clease like CEL1, Endo 1 which is found naturally in celery and tomato among many
other sources. Then, these digested products are passed through agarose gel or
LICOR instruments (which contain labeled probes), and only selected samples
showing fragments are sequenced. To reduce the cost involved with molecular
biology aspects, samples are pulled 2–16 folds depending on accuracy and experi-
ence. Once, the mutant and corresponding trait are identified, the lines need to be
segregated further to find a homozygous line (Viana et al. 2019). Further, a few
rounds of backcrosses with non-mutagenized control lines are recommended to
remove background mutation. Line purification and trait stabilization make take
multiple generations, even up to M8 to M10 depending on the stability of the trait
(Das et al. 2014). Increasing the number of seeds will need bulking. This is important
for evaluating agronomic characters.
authors listed the economic impact of mutant varieties of major cereal crops. An
equivalent of sd1 (Dee-geo-woo-gen) was induced by gamma irradiation in rice
cv. Calrose-76. The germplasm (Calrose-76) was used extensively in plant breeding.
A derived line from Calrose-76 is Amaroo which occupies 60–70% of rice area in
Australia. The rice yield rose 2x in Egypt when the dwarf trait was used. No updated
data is available on the mutant varieties in India separately. In an earlier estimation of
productivity increase and value capture, IARI reported a US$1748 value of produce
from 2 PNR (rice) varieties. Further, Ahloowalia et al. (2004) review show value
capture in a wide range of cereal crops showing tremendous acceptance of varieties
developed from random mutagenesis. It seems consumers are not concerned with the
mutation-based approach and it is hoped that the recent plant breeding techniques to
edit endogenous genes similarly will not stir any fresh controversy. The European
Commission had requested an expert panel to address the question of in vitro and
in vivo mutagenesis, i.e., whether there is a difference in the cellular mechanism and
the nature of genetic changes including repair mechanism and the nature of genetic
change in both the processes. The expert panel concluded that such a distinction is
unwarranted and impossible to classify (Mullins et al. 2021). There are other social
studies to find consumer acceptance of the new generation of precise editing of genes
which shows modern-day genetic intervention can make the public skeptical largely
due to misunderstanding perpetuated by vested interest groups. For the time being, it
is safe to conclude that traditional mutagenesis will continue to be used in various
crop improvement efforts in an unhindered manner.
The first criterion for registering any plant variety must be compliance with distinct-
ness, uniformity, and stability (DUS). Any mutant developed by chemical and
physical mutagenesis must fit the description of DUS. Most of the varieties crop
breeders develop are protected under plant variety rights (PVP), the equivalent in
India is ‘The Plant variety protection and Farmer’s rights (PPVFR) Act, 2001 (the
“Act”). Indian PPVFR is aligned to TRIPS (Trade-related aspects of Intellectual
property rights), an agreement that protects varieties as well as essentially derived
varieties. Protection under PPVFR ranges from 15 years (for seeds) to 18 years (for
trees). An inventive step is not essential in PVP the same is a must for patenting. A
plant patent is not allowed in India. However, there are certain advantages to
patenting a plant variety vs. registering the new variety under PVP. A patent prevents
others from developing derived varieties which PVP fails to protect, thus limited in
value (this is not the case with India). Patents are of 20 years duration, thus more than
PVP. However, many countries including India do not allow plant patenting due to
concerns about misuse by the patent holders and throttling further innovation. If we
look at other countries, like European Economic Zone countries, The European
patent office grants patents in exceptional circumstances to plant varieties. Though
there are controversies surrounding the patentability of plant varieties found in
1 Mutagenesis and TILLING in the Era of Precise Genome Editing 15
nature, these arise from different interpretations of the “exception” wording used in
the European Patent Act. Plants bred naturally cannot be patented in Europe
(Website 10 n.d.). Plant patenting varies from country to country. For one, plant
varieties already available in the wild and in the cultivated state cannot be patented.
In the USA, under the provision of 35 US C161 which centers on a distinct
phenotype obtained asexually and uncultivated. This includes plant varieties and
mutants that are discovered in cultivation or trial and must have at least one distinct
characteristic not present in nature. The meaning of plant covers fungi and algae and
is limited to asexually reproduced in nature, excluding tubers. The novel plant
variety must satisfy the general requirements of obtaining a patent which will not
be obvious to one generally skilled in the art and is subject to a utility application.
The purpose of asexual reproduction is included to assert that is produced (i.e., A
true genetic copy and stable in nature). A true genetic copy can be maintained by
several horticultural practices like grafting, budding, grafting, and tissue culture
(Website 11 n.d.). Spontaneous mutants are excluded. The botanical classification
of the novel plant to be patented must be included in its entirety, including ones from
breeding trials. The DUS criteria for the UK are listed on Website 12 (n.d.).
Here in this section, we will closely look into traits improved by mutagenesis and
TILLING in various crops (also, see Table 1.1 for commercialized mutant products).
Kurowska et al. (2011) found an average of 1 mutation in every 200–500 kb region
screened in various crop species.
1.9.1 Rice
Cooper et al. (2013) proclaimed a strategy for rice TILLING and Eco-TILLING
using a LI-COR DNA analyzer. The developed mutant population can be used to
screen several genes and is offered to the public in a service mode for wider outreach.
Tai (2013) opined that advances in mutation detection techniques have resulted in
renewed interest in the traditional mutagenesis program. Though in the past chemical
mutagenesis has been used extensively for generating useful genetic variation in
breeding programs. From a nutritional viewpoint, the phytic acid complex contains
phosphorous which is not bioavailable. This presents a complex problem as P along
with other micronutrients remains unavailable to humans and livestock as reported
by Kishor et al. 2019. Kim and Tai (2014) identified 4 LPA mutants that showed a
reduction in phytic acid which was up to 46% less than the original line. Similarly,
deploying TILLING in cv. Volcano, Casella et al. (2013) targeted four genes related
to plant architecture height, flowering initiation, aroma, and abiotic stress (drought).
Height in the mutant SD1 (semi-dwarf 1) was reduced by 21%. In this (Casella et al.
2013) mutation density on average was 1/373 kb. Another study in rice by TILL
et al. (2007) used two different mutagens, one was methyl nitrosourea (MNU) and
16 A. Bhattacharya et al.
Table 1.1 Worldwide commercial mutant products (Source: FAO/IAEA Mutant Variety
Database)
Sr. Country of Registration
no. Crop Variety name origin year Improved characters
1 Rice Vikram-TCR India 2021 Dwarf variety with mid
(Trombay to early maturity and
Chhattisgarh high yielding
Rice)
2 Rice CG Jawaphool India 2021 Semi-dwarf stature,
Trombay mid-early maturity,
high yield potential
3 Tomato Girón 50 Cuba 2021 High productive
potential, high content
of total soluble solids,
short cycle, tolerant to
heat and diseases
4 Soybean CUVIN 22 Cuba 2021 High productive
potential, relatively
short cycle, robustness
for disease resistance
5 Lentil Binamasur-12 Bangladesh 2021 Higher yield
6 Rice Kian Iran 2021 Drought-tolerant, early
flowering, dwarf,
optimal grain length
after cooking, and
elongation ratio higher
than parent lines
7 Rice Sinar 1 Indonesia 2020 High yield, higher
aroma level than the
parent, moderately
resistant to brown plant
hopper
8 Rice Sinar 2 Indonesia 2020 Resistant to BLB
diseases, high yield,
higher aroma level than
the parent
9 Barley Madaba1 Jordan 2019 Plant height, biomass,
yield, drought tolerance
10 Banana Pirama 1 Indonesia 2019 Tolerant to fusarium
wilt disease (TR 4),
high vitamin C content
11 Rice Konjikinokaze Japan 2019 Low amylose content
12 Soybean Kemuning 1 Indonesia 2019 High yield, large seed
size, moderately
resistant to leaf rust
disease and
pod-sucking pests,
drought tolerant
(continued)
1 Mutagenesis and TILLING in the Era of Precise Genome Editing 17
the other was EMS. Multiple genes conferring biotic and abiotic stress tolerance
were TILLED. A total of 57 mutations were deciphered. Here, the MNU population
showed an average frequency of 1 in 265 kb, whereas for the EMS population it was
1/294 kb. Ramkumar et al. (2019) developed and screened a mutant population in
rice cv. Nagina 22 and obtained three EMS mutants named stay green mutants
(SGM-1, 2, 3). These mutants were tested for drought tolerance and morphologically
were similar as evident by SNP marker assay involving 72 markers. The stay green
gene results in an increased level of cytokinin. Only SGM-3 displayed delayed
maturation and showed promising results under normal irrigation and water stress
conditions. A set of 15 candidate genes associated with stay green was analyzed and
these lines showed non-synonymous mutations in SGM-1, 2 mutants whereas no
change was found associated with mutant-3. Thus SGM-3 was suggested as a new
mutant with a better harvest index under irrigated and stress conditions.
1.9.2 Wheat
Krasileva et al. (2017) pointed out that genetic resources for polyploidy like wheat
are scarce compared to diploid species. Also, having a high degree of redundancy
enables wheat to tolerate a high degree of mutation. Taking this into consideration
they were able to catalog 10 million mutations translating into 2735 mutants with a
density of 35–40 mutations per kb. Compared to diploid rice, wheat is an
allohexaploid crop with a genome size of 17 GB. TILLING has been reported
extensively in wheat. Traits like high amylase content were reported by Slade
et al. (2012), where SNPs caused altered branching related to starch synthesis
(SBEIIa). This novel allele when used in wheat breeding resulted in elevated starch
content (47–55% amylose) compared with the original line. In another study, Rawat
et al. (2012) developed a mutagenized population of T. monococcum (TA 4342-96),
a spring wheat variety targeting the waxy gene. The mutation frequency achieved
was 1 in 90 kb which is very high. Slade et al. 2005 and Dong et al. 2009 also found a
mutation in the waxy gene in the range of 1 in 17.6–34.4 kb DNA. Rawat et al.
(2012) targeted genes involved in the biosynthesis of lignin, namely, COMT1
(1/86 kb), HCT2 (1/92 kb), and CL1(1/100 kb). They also predicted a 95% proba-
bility, the minimum wheat population required for TILLING at 5520 for obtaining
18 A. Bhattacharya et al.
Corn is an important food, feed, and biofuel crop. The consumption demand for corn
is increasing day by day. Therefore, corn improvement is very critical for high-
yielding traits to meet the gap. Mutagenesis experiments to improve corn traits are
reported in plenty. However, in the history of corn breeding, a unique mutation
transformed wild corn into cultivated one by turning its hard kernel into a soft one
that is easy to consume (Website 7 n.d.). An early study by Freeling (1978) described
the Adh1 gene as a mutagen monitor which was used for assessing hazards from
pollutants thus the indirect utilization of the mutation. We reviewed TILL et al.
(2004) early work where chromomethylase gene was targeted. A total of 17 unique
mutations were found. The mutation rate varied from 0.93 to 2.1/kb in the two
cultivars under study (i.e., B73 and W22). Many of the functional genomic studies in
corn were facilitated by using maize transposons by tagging genes. These mutations
will act as a source of new alleles in functional genomic studies (Walbot 2000). May
et al. (2003) developed a knockout resource in maize by using transposon-
mutagenized seeds. This resource is available to the public and any gene knockout
can be screened. A Robertson’s mutator (MU) pollen parents were used thus this
1 Mutagenesis and TILLING in the Era of Precise Genome Editing 19
resource sheds light on the epigenetic and functional genomics of corn. Effective
mutagenesis is a must for establishing the relationship between traits to those of
corresponding sequences (Settles 2020). Chemical mutagenesis can be effectively
used for creating high-density mutation screens. Settles 2020 also reported muta-
genesis using mature pollen. Brunelle et al. (2017) hypothesized the possibility of
using chemical mutagenesis to induce mutation in corn more effectively than
previously reported in Robertson’s mutator germplasm. They screened the EMS
population for embryo-specific (emb) mutations which were found in higher fre-
quency than that of the transposon KO population. Thus the presence of emb loci in
corn which resulted in an abnormal embryo with normal endosperm was validated in
this EMS population. Heuermann et al. (2019) combined next-generation sequenc-
ing with phenotyping to identify induced recessive as well as dominant mutations. A
rapid process to identify corn mutants having dwarf and pale green phenotype which
was obtained through EMS mutagenesis of pollens of M2 family was subjected to
whole-genome sequencing. The state of zygosity was identified in M2 family by
phenotypically analyzing M3. Zygosity was analyzed with sequence data. Therefore,
Mendelian inheritance and individual sequence data passed their zygosity filter for
dwarfism which happened due to insertion in an1 locus and pale green phenotype in
the W2 gene due to non-synonymous amino acid change.
1.9.4 Sorghum
Sorghum has multiple uses for food, feed, and industrial use (bioenergy, remedia-
tion, and use in small industries). Wild relatives have several important traits such as
shattering and disease resistance. Intercrossing wild relatives with traditional lines
and transferring desirable traits will result in improved lines. The other approach
could be mutagenesis in preferred lines. In a recent paper, Hao et al. (2021)
envisioned a paper on sorghum breeding involving NAM (next associated mapping),
MAGIC (multi-parent advanced generation inter-cross), and mutant population.
Going forward the aim is to combine agricultural traits with other industrial traits.
We report the work carried out by Xin et al. (2008) where 1600 mutant lines were
produced using EMS. Mutation frequency was reported at 1 in 526 kb. The mutation
corresponds to the brown midrib (Bmr) phenotype, translating to modified lignin
composition and improved absorption. In another screening study, Nide et al. found
mutants for NAC and Lsi1 (low silicon) using the Illumina HiSeq2500 system. They
generated data of 22 M bytes which were analyzed by ComSeq software. The true
mutation was subsequently validated by phenotyping. Chen et al. (2019) discussed a
plan for the development of a pedigree mutant library using EMS treatment for new
traits. The pedigree population is a powerful resource for identifying mutations
related to agronomy and key biological traits. Combining gene discovery programs
with sequencing will fasten crop breeding. Jiao et al. (2016) stated that sorghum
being a C4 plant has a high-quality sequence available in the BTx623 population.Six
thousand four hundred pedigreed M4 mutants were created from a single seed
descent method. Further, the sequence data clearly showed that variation in the
20 A. Bhattacharya et al.
genome was different from those found in nature. Eight genes attributing to drought
tolerance were identified which had allelic mutations and these showed
co-segregation with phenotype, thus providing a unique platform for functional
validation of genes in Sorghum. Addo-Quaye et al. (2017) advocated that EMS
mutagenesis caused few base pair changes in each line in BTx623. NGS data with 7x
coverage from 586 lines had 5.4 million mutations. The repeat region in the genome
showed poor call reads. The CG-rich patches and overlapping sequences influence
the mutation rate allowing the detection of true mutation. The mutation in a sequence
was linearly correlated with transcript rate and G:C content. Sorghum is indicated as
an emerging bioenergy crop (Ordonio et al. 2016). Present efforts for the characteri-
zation of sorghum mutants are described with the identification of quantitative trait
loci (QTL). Further improvement strategies are discussed in light of genomic and
molecular breeding benchmarks. Sorghum is a stress-tolerant C4 plant and is well-
grown in semiarid and arid zones of the country. Now, sorghum grain is yet again
finding a place in culinary products which are shown as healthy. For the rapid
discovery of genes attributing to food, feed, and energy demands. Screening various
sets of germplasm (Eco-TILLING) and mutants (TILLING) is a useful tool for
breeding (Xin et al. 2021). Striga is a parasite that thrives in sorghum. However, a
low germination stimulant 1 (lgs1) shows low Striga germination or lower induction
(stimulation) for germination to screen 177 accessions. Dhurrin-cyanogenic gluco-
side is a plant defense molecule against insects and pests. Blomstedt et al. (2018)
identified two mutants, tcd1 (totally cyanide deficient 1) and acdc 1 (adult cyanide
deficient class 1). They found the expression levels of dhurrin are more at the initial
growth stages than at the later stage thus a relative trade-off exists between nitrogen
partitioning and dhurrin levels. Another study by Sohail et al. 2020 concluded that
dhurrin production in the initial critical stages particularly seedling emergence gave
plant growth advantages then acyanogenic plants which are typically small in size.
The vegetative growth parameters were not affected in later growth stages.
1.9.5 Barley
azide-treated barley population was four genes namely Constans like (Col1), nitrate
reductase (NR), rust resistance protein gene (Rpg1), and eukaryotic factor gene
(eIF4e) were screened (TILLed). Here they had a population size of 3148 M2 in
more background. They obtained a total of 22 mutants with a frequency of 1 in
374 kb. In another study, Bovina et al. (2011) obtained 29 mutations in targeted five
genes (viz. starch metabolism gene, beta-amylase 1, starch synthase I, and starch
synthase II with a mutation density of 1 in 520 kb. Later, Sparla et al. screened lines
for various quality parameters like granule size, which led to the identification of
7 mutant lines with improved quality traits. Again, we refer to another work by
Szurman-Zubrzycka et al. 2018, where they created a HorTILLUS platform by
treating barley on cv. Sebastian. A relatively large population of 9600 M2 plants
was created as a part of the study. A total of 32 genes were screened which played a
role in plant architecture. Dockter and Hansson (2015) reported more than 1000
short-culm mutants from a barley resource. Some of these mutants were linked to
hormonal rhythms. Thus, the entire resource could be used to develop climate-
resilient cultivars.
1.9.6 Oats
In the mutagenesis study of Chawade et al. (2010) in oats where the researchers
developed 2600 mutant resources. To develop new oat varieties, particularly to alter
starch and protein among others, the entire mutation population was screened for
PAL1 (phenylalanine ammonia-lyase gene) and six mutants were identified. Simi-
larly, 10 mutations were identified in the cellulose synthase-like (CslF6), beta-glucan
biosynthesis gene among others. The mutation detection frequency varied from 1 in
20 kb to 38 kb depending on the detection method employed. Hernandez-Hernandez
et al. (2017) created an EMS mutagenesis population. The project aimed to increase
avenanthramide (Arv-A, B, C) which is an antioxidant with health-promoting
properties. Genes involved in avenanthramides are 4-CL, HHT, and CCoADMT
(Caffeoyl-CoA-O-methyltransferase N-hydroxycinnamoyl transferase) {Li et al.
2019}. A total of 17 lines with elevated AVN were obtained with the highest amount
of 227.5 ug/g in flour compared to 78.2 ug/g in control. Thus, the biochemical
selection of mutant lines was sown. Chawade et al. (2010) conducted a study to
develop high beta-glucan oats using 2500 EMS-TILLING populations. They
analyzed 1700 lines biochemically for altered beta-glucan contents. One mutant
line showed a 52% increase in glucan over the non-mutagenesis control.
1.9.7 Flax
1.9.8 Soybean
Oil quality and content are important traits for fetching higher value in soybeans.
With the same objective to increase Soybean oil production, a JTN-5203, 1820 M1
EMS population was developed by mutagenizing 15,000 seeds. The resultant mutant
population is a resource for a range of genetic diversity. Several lines with an
increase in total protein and total oil were obtained (Espina et al. 2018). A recent
2021 study by Lakhssassi et al. mined new variants in the FAD2 gene, i.e.,
GmFAD2-2A, GmFAD2-2B, GmFAD2-2C, GmFAD2-2D, and GmFAD2-2E
which grew normally under cold conditions, whereas the earlier alleles did not
grow normally under low temperature. The primary goal of soybean breeders is to
increase the amount of oleic acid and thus bring high oxidative stability in oil and
applied products. In another study, Millas et al. (2019) developed 1820 mutant
populations after treating 15,000 seeds of cv. JTN-5203 and targeted FAD2-1A,
1B genes that are involved in fatty acid biosynthesis. They obtained allelic variants
of the targeted genes. Most of the mutants had GC to AT transition which is a
1 Mutagenesis and TILLING in the Era of Precise Genome Editing 23
significant change of EMS wherever the chemical is used. We also looked at another
study by Hoshino et al. (2014) where a very large mutation population consisting of
39,100 lines was developed in five different mutant populations and was analyzed
for several genes. These populations were developed using EMS, and X-rays for
different cultivars. The same authors reported FAD 3-2a mutant which had a reduced
2-linolenic acid profile in soybean oil along with another seven mutants. A triple
combination of mutants had less than 2% linolenic acid profile in oil. In another
study by Cooper et al. (2008), where they subjected soybean seeds to NMU and
EMS-induced mutagenesis in cv. Williams 82 and Forrest. A total of four
mutagenized population was developed. A total of 116 mutations were identified
among seven target genes. For the NMU-induced mutagenized population, a higher
mutation density of 1 in 140 kb was obtained whereas for EMS the range was 1 in
250 and 550 kb, respectively.
1.9.10 Sunflower
1.9.11 Brassica
1.9.12 Potato
In the case of potatoes, GBSS (Granule Bound Starch Synthase) gene was screened
in a mutagenized potato population. The mutant contained no amylase and only
amylopectin starch, which is most useful in the industrial use of paper, textiles, and
food. The mutant line was named “Super potato” and this became the first product
developed by TILLING in Germany with market readiness (ISAAA 2009).
1.9.13 Tomato
Tomato finds a wide range of applications in the food and processing industries. The
genome size is fairly placed at 950 Mb and this crop has been sequenced and many
cultivars have been resequenced multiple times. Thus tomato is used as a model crop
to understand gene functions (Okabe et al. 2013). Tomato finds its place in Indian
cuisine. Seasonal supply and continuously growing demand result in drastic price
movement. Moreover, postharvest damage is in the range of 20–35% adding to the
problem of scarcity and price fluctuations (Fig. 1.4). Thus, extended shelf life (ESC)
is an important trait of interest. TILLING has been used extensively in tomatoes with
a focus on improving fruit quality and shelf life (Okabe et al. 2011; Minoia et al.
2010; Piron et al. 2010). A micro-tom population of 3052 lines was developed by
Okabe et al. 2011 to elucidate functional genomics studies. The population was
developed using EMS treatment at 0.5% and 1%. The mutation frequency varied
from 1 in 1710 kb for 0.5%EMS and 1 in 737 kb for 1% EMS population in
10 distinct genes which are involved in fruit quality and neutraceutical application,
gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) metabolism with 1 in 1737 kb mutation fre-
quency. Two mutants showing altered/reduced ethylene response were identified in
the same mutant population. Minoia et al. 2010 reported a mutagenized population
of tomato cultivar cv. Red Setter by treating seeds with EMS at 0.7 and 1.0% dose.
Primarily, the study focused on fruit quality traits. The target genes included RIN
(ripening inhibitor), Green ripe (Gr) involved in the maturation of the fruit, Rab
GTPase, expansin 1 involved in cell wall ripening or maturation, and genes involved
in carotenoid biosynthesis. In this study, a total of 9.5 kb region of tomato genome
was investigated and 66 mutations were identified in the two mutant populations
(EMS 0.7%, 1%). A broad spectrum of mutations was identified 37.6% silent, and
62.4% missense mutation with STOP codon. The mutation density was in the range
of 1 in 322–574 kb. In another study, Silletti et al. (2013) screened the tomato “Red
Setter” population. The cyc-B locus was targeted with 8 identified new alleles. The
phenotypic analysis resulted in the identification of a missense mutation with higher
lycopene accumulation with effecting plant traits including fruit quality. Jones et al.
(2012) developed a mutant population intending to focus on nutritional quality. A
point mutation in DE-ETIOLATED 1 resulted in high pigment fruits with increased
carotenoid, and phenylpropanoid phytonutrients, and better fruit types. In India, a lot
of commercial interest is seen by private players. Chief among them is the collabo-
ration of Shriram Bio seeds and Arcadia BioSciences for developing extended shelf
26 A. Bhattacharya et al.
ABSTRACT RESULTS
Tomato finds a wide range of applications in food and processing industries.
The genome size is well-established at 950Mb and the species has been
extensively studied at the genomic level with related information available in
abundance. Tomato is therefore used as a model crop to understand gene
function. In India, seasonal supply and continuously growing demand for a
tomato results in drastic fluctuations in pricing. Moreover, post harvest
damage of fruits is in the range of 20-35%, further adding to the problem of
scarcity and price instability. Thus, extended shelf life (ESC) is an important
trait of national interest. One of the solutions for developing ESC could be
with the use of mutagenesis and TILLING (Targeting Induced Local Lesion
Fig.1 Germination % in different
in Genome). Mutation is the source of primary variation in plants. EMS doses
Mutagenesis induced breeding is different from natural breeding as this is a
deliberate effort to induce changes in the genome with the objective to
change the plant phenotype. The economic benefit derived from mutagenesis
Fig.2 Tomato mutants
and TILLING activities stands vindicated by the vast number of products
(a) Seedless (b) shelf life traits
developed and commercialized as reported in mvd.iaea.org. Here we report a
tomato mutagenesis population, developed by using a proprietary cultivar,
which was treated with ethyl methyl sulfonate (EMS) and the optimum dose
standardized for the development of a robust TILLING population. The
tomato seeds were treated with six different concentrations of EMS (0.5%,
0.75%, 1%, 1.5% and 2%) including control for 8 hrs. Further, a standard
kill curve was established for the cultivar. The tomato mutants were grown
till maturity to study the morphological changes occurring in the fruit
development stages. A range of phenotypes like seedless, extended shelf life,
different fruit shapes and sizes were observed at maturity among the
developed mutants. This mutant population is continuously being TILLED
for shelf life, quality and yield traits.
Key words: Tomato, Non-GM, Mutagenesis, TILLING, Shelf life, Yield
INTRODUCTION
Considering the wide application of tomato in food processing industry
and post harvest damage, there is a need of producing tomato cultivars
with extended shelf life with increased yield to fulfill the demand. This can Fig.3 Tomato mutant plants in Greenhouse Fig.4 Variation in Fruit shapes and sizes
be achieved with one of the many available crop improvement methods
including mutagenesis and TILLING. According to FAO/IAEA Mutant CONCLUSION
Variety Database (MVD), 3365 mutant varieties were released worldwide 1. Induced mutagenesis with EMS showed a wide range of phenotypic
till date. India shared 4 out of 25 mutant varieties of tomato listed in MVD. variability in a Mahyco proprietary tomato cultivar.
We report a similar strategy to TILL for tomato mutants with desirable 2. It was observed that germination percentage decreased with increase in
traits like shelf life, seedless among others. Thus, EMS is used as a concentration of EMS in general.
mutagen for the development of TILLING population due to its wider
3. The population will be evaluated for a wide range of phenotypes like
acceptability (Palan et al. 2021). Further, exonic mutations increases
chances of developing new traits. Different concentrations of EMS were seedless, extended shelf life, different fruit shapes and sizes.
used for induction of mutations and kill curve was developed. The mutant 4. The mutant population will also be utilized to TILL genes of interest
tomato population could be utilized for screening of several traits of specifically linked to important commercial traits like yield.
interests in future.
REFERENCES
MATERIALS & METHODS 1. Joint FAO/IAEA Programme’s Mutant Variety Database
1. The seeds of a proprietary tomato cultivar were received from https://mvd.iaea.org/#!Home (accessed on December 30, 2021).
Breeding team for mutagenesis experiment. 2. Palan B, Bhattacharya A, Char B. (2021) TILLING in the era of precise
2. The seeds were soaked in proprietary buffer for an hour before genome editing. Indian J. Biotechnol. 20 (1): 9-16.
adding EMS. 3. Laskar RA, Chaudhary C, Khan S, Chandra A. (2018) Induction of
3. Six different concentrations of EMS (Zero, 0.5%, 0.75%, 1%, 1.5% mutagenized tomato populations for investigation on agronomic traits
and mutant phenotyping. J Saudi Soc. Agril. Sci. 17: 51-60.
and 2% for 8 hrs) were used for optimization of dose.
4. Minoia S, Petrozza A, D’Onofrio O, Piron F, Mosca G etal, (2010) A
4. Later, the seeds were thoroughly washed with running tap water for
new mutant genetic resource for tomato crop improvement by
removing the traces of EMS. TILLING technology. BMC Res. Notes 3: 1-8.
5. The treated seeds were sown in pro-trays for germination. 5. LycoTILL: Tomato mutant DB http://www.agrobios.it/tilling/
6. The germination percentage was noted down across the treatments. (accessed on December 30, 2021).
7. The germinated seedlings were transplanted in the field at
Greenhouse located in campus. Presented at 43rd Annual Meeting of Plant Tissue Culture Association-
India (PTCA-I) and International Symposium on Advances in Plant
8. The tomato plants were grown till maturity to study the
Biotechnology and Nutritional Security- APBNS 2022 organized by
morphological changes occurring in the fruit development stages and ICAR- National Institute for Plant Biotechnology, New Delhi during
mutant seed library was developed. February17-19, 2022.
life (ESL) tomatoes using TILLING. The gene selected was the non-ripening (nor)
gene. For, this technology Arcadia holds a patent, US 9392759B2. In another study,
4759 M3 mutant lines were developed in the background of M82 as reported by
Piron et al. (2010). A total of 19 genes were screened including eIF4E and 4G
1 Mutagenesis and TILLING in the Era of Precise Genome Editing 27
(Eukaryotic initiation factors) and 256 SNPs were identified. The average mutation
density in this study was 1 in 574 kb.
1.9.14 Cucumber
A mutant population of 768 lines in “Poinsett 76,” using 1.5–2% EMS was devel-
oped and screened for six genes which included phytoene desaturase-3, a gene
involved in carotene biosynthesis, female (f) gene that is involved in the formation
of female flowers and at the same time suppression of male flowers. The other genes
involved in the study were Ramosus 3 and 4, which play a role in apical dominance,
a self-pruning gene (sp) that confers determinate growth, and CUM-1, a MAD box
gene. In this project, mutation density was found in the frequency of 1 in 1030kbp. In
another study, Boualem et al. (2014) developed a mutagenized population of
3331 M2 by EMS treatment (0.5% and 0.75%) in the “Beit Alpha” background.
Here, they screened the mutant population for five genes (CsACS2, ACSIG, WIP
1, RMS 3, and 4). In this study, a total of 26 mutants with a frequency of 1 in 1147 kb
were found and confirmed by sequencing. Predominantly, the type of mutation
reported was mainly G/C to A/T transitions.
1.9.15 Melon
1.10 Conclusion
References
Addo-Quaye C, Buescher E, Best N, Chaikam V, Baxter I, Dilkes BP (2017) Forward genetics by
sequencing EMS variation-induced inbred lines. G3 (Bethesda) 7:413–425
Ahloowalia BS, Maluszynski M, Nichterlein K (2004) Global impact of mutation derived varieties.
Euphytica 135:187–204
Alberts B, Johnson A, Lewis J et al (2002) Molecular biology of the cell, 4th edn. Garland Science.
DNA Repair, New York
Anonymous (2021) License CRISPR patents for free to share gene editing globally. Nature 597:152
Beans C (2020) Inner workings: crop researchers harness artificial intelligence to breed crops for the
changing climate. PNAC 44:27066–27069
Bhattacharya A, Parkhi V, Char B (2021) Genome editing for crop improvement: a perspective
from India. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol Plant 26:1–9
Blomstedt CK, Rosati VC, Lindberg Møller B, Gleadow R (2018) Counting the costs: nitrogen
partitioning in Sorghum mutants. Funct Plant Biol 45:705–718
Boualem A, Fleurier S, Troadec C, Audigier P, Kumar APK, Chatterjee M, Alsadon AA (2014)
Development of a Cucumis sativus TILLinG platform for forward and reverse genetics. PLoS
One 9:e97963
Bovina R, Brunazzi A, Gasparini G, Sestili F, Palombieri S, Botticella E, Lafiandra D, Mantovani P,
Massi A (2014) Development of a TILLING resource in durum wheat for reverse- and forward-
genetic analyses. Crop Pasture Sci 65:112–124
Bovina R, Talame V, Silvio S, Sanguineti MC, Trost P, Sparla F, Tuberosa R (2011) Starch
metabolism mutants in barley: a TILLING approach. Plant Genet Res: Characterization and
Utilization 9:170–173
Brown TA (2002) Genomes, 2nd edn. Wiley-Liss, Oxford. Chapter 14, Mutation, Repair and
Recombination
1 Mutagenesis and TILLING in the Era of Precise Genome Editing 29
Brunelle DC, Clark JK, Sheridan WF (2017) Genetic screening for EMS-induced maize embryo-
specific mutants altered in embryo morphogenesis. G3 (Bethesda) 7:3559–3570
Burnett PG, Young LW, Olivia CM, Jadhav PD, Okinyo-Owiti DP, Reaney MJT (2018) Novel flax
orbitide derived from genetic deletion. BMC Plant Biol 18:90
Casella L, Greco R, Bruschi G, Wozniak B, Dreni L, Kater M, Cavigiolo S, Lupotto E, Piffanelli P
(2013) TILLING in European Rice: hunting mutations for crop improvement. Crop Sci 53:
2550–2562
Chantreu M, Grec S, Gutierrez L, Dalmais M, Pineau C, Demailly H, Paysant-Leroux C (2013)
PT-Flax (phenotyping and TILLinG of flax): development of a flax (Linum usitatissimum L.)
mutant population and TILLinG platform for forward and reverse genetics. BMC Plant Biol 13:
159
Chaudhary J, Deshmukh R, Sonah H (2019) Mutagenesis approaches and their role in crop
improvement. Plants (Basel, Switzerland) 8:467
Chawade A, Sikora P, Brautigam M, Larsson M, Vivekanand V, Nakash MA, Chen T, Olsson O
(2010) Development and characterization of an oat TILLING-population and identification of
mutations in lignin and β-glucan biosynthesis genes. BMC Plant Biol 10:86
Chen J, Zou G, Xin Z (2019) Development of a pedigreed sorghum mutant library. Methods Mol
Biol 1931:61–73
Comai L, Henikoff S (2006) TILLING: practical single-nucleotide mutation discovery. Plant J 45:
684–694
Cooper JL, Henikoff S, Comai L, Till BJ (2013) TILLING and eco-TILLING for rice. Methods Mol
Biol 956:39–56
Cooper JL, Till BJ, Laport RG, Darlow MC, Kleffner JM, Jamai A, El-Mellouki T et al (2008)
TILLING to detect induced mutations in soybean. BMC Plant Biol 8:9
Dahmani-Mardas F, Troadec C, Boualem A, Leveque S, Alsadon AA, Aldoss AA, Dogimont C,
Bendahmane A (2010) Engineering melon plants with improved fruit shelf life using the
TILLING approach. PLoS One 5:e15776
Das P, Mishra M, Lakra N, Singla-Pareek SL, Pareek A (2014) Mutation breeding: a powerful
approach for obtaining abiotic stress-tolerant crops and upgrading food security for human
nutrition. In: Tomlekova N, Kozgar I, Wani R (eds) Mutagenesis: exploring novel genes and
pathways. Wageningen Academic Publishers, The Netherlands
Dockter C, Hansson M (2015) Improving barley culm robustness for secured crop yield in a
changing climate. J Exp Bot 66:3499–3509
Dong C, Dalton-Morgan J, Vincent K, Sharp P (2009) A modified TILLING method for wheat
breeding. Plant Genome 2:39–47
Dorado G, Gálvez S, Rosales TE, Vásquez VF, Hernández P (2021) Analyzing modern
biomolecules: the revolution of nucleic-acid sequencing—review. Biomol Ther 11:1111
Espina MJ, Ahmed CMS, Bernardini A (2018) Development and phenotypic screening of an ethyl
methane sulfonate mutant population in soybean. Front Plant Sci 9:394
Farhud DD, Zarif-Yeganeh M (2020) CRISPR pioneers win 2020 Nobel prize for chemistry. Iran J
Public Health 49:2235–2239
Fofana B, Ghose K, Somalraju A, McCallum J, Main D, Deyholos MK, Rowland GG, Cloutier S
(2017) Induced mutagenesis in UGT74S1 gene leads to stable new flax lines with altered
secoisolariciresinol diglucoside (SDG) profiles. Front Plant Sci 8:1638
Freeling M (1978) Maize Adh1 as a monitor of environmental mutagens. Environ Health Perspect
27:91–97
Gaj T, Sirk SJ, Shui SL, Liu J (2016) Genome-editing technologies: principles and applications.
Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol 8:a023754
Gao R, Guo G, Fang C, Huang S, Chen J, Lu R, Huang J, Fan X, Liu C (2018) Rapid generation of
barley mutant lines with high nitrogen uptake efficiency by microspore mutagenesis and field
screening. Front Plant Sci 9:450
30 A. Bhattacharya et al.
Ghosh P (2020) Patent landscape of CRISPR/Cas. In: Bhattacharya A, Parkhi V, Char B (eds)
CRISPR/Cas genome editing. Concepts and strategies in plant sciences. Springer, Cham. https://
doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-42022-2_11
Gilchrist EJ, Sidebottom CHD, Koh CS, Maclnnes T, Sharpe AG, Haughn GW (2013) A mutant
Brassica napus (canola) population for the identification of new genetic diversity via TILLING
and next generation sequencing. PLoS One 8:e84303
Gill SS, Anjum NA, Gill R, Jha M, Tuteja N (2015) DNA damage and repair in plants under
ultraviolet and ionizing radiations. Sci World J
Gonazalez M, Xu M, Esteras C, Roig C, Monforte AJ, Troadec C, Pujol M et al (2011) Towards a
TILLING platform for functional genomics in Piel de Sapo melons. BMC Res Notes 4:289
Griffiths AJF, Miller JH, Suzuki DT (2000) An introduction to genetic analysis, 7th edn. W. H.
Freeman. Sources of variation, New York
Guo Y, Abernathy B, Zeng Y, Ozias-Akins P (2015) TILLING by sequencing to identify induced
mutations in stress resistance genes of peanut (Arachis hypogaea). BMC Genomics 16:157
Guo Y, Hans H, Christian J, Molina C (2014) Mutations in single FT- and TFL1- paralogs of
rapeseed (Brassica napus L.) and their impact on flowering time and yield components. Front.
Plant Sci 5:282
Gupta P, Reddaiah B, Salava H, Upadhyaya P, Tyagi K, Sarma S, Datta S, Malhotra B, Thomas S,
Sunkum A, Devulapalli S, Till BJ, Sreelakshmi Y, Sharma R (2017) Next-generation sequenc-
ing (NGS)-based identification of induced mutations in a doubly mutagenized tomato (Solanum
lycopersicum) population. Plant J 92:495–508
Hao C, Jiao C, Hou J, Li T, Liu H, Wang Y, Zheng J, Liu H, Bi Z, Xu F, Zhao J, Ma L, Wang Y,
Majeed U, Liu X, Appels R, Maccaferri M, Tuberosa R, Lu H, Zhang X (2020) Resequencing of
145 landmark cultivars reveals asymmetric sub-genome selection and strong founder genotype
effects on wheat breeding in China. Mol Plant 13:1733–1751
Hao H, Li Z, Leng C, Lu C, Luo H, Liu Y, Wu X, Liu Z, Shang L, Jing HC (2021) Sorghum
breeding in the genomic era: opportunities and challenges. Theor Appl Genet 134:1899–1924
Harloff HJ, Mittasch LJ, Frolov A, Wu JG, Dreyer F, Leckband G, Jung C (2012) A mutation
screening platform for rapeseed (Brassica napus L.) and the detection of sinapine biosynthesis
mutants. Theor App Genet 124:957–969
Heather JM, Chain B (2016) The sequence of sequencers: the history of sequencing DNA.
Genomics 107:1–8
Hernandez-Hernandez O, Pereira-Caro G, Borges G, Crozier A, Olsson O (2017) Characterization
and antioxidant activity of avenanthramides from selected oat lines developed by mutagenesis
technique. Food Chem 343:128408
Heuermann MC, Rosso MG, Mascher M, Brandt R, Tschiersch H, Altschmied L, Altmann T (2019)
Combining next-generation sequencing and progeny testing for rapid identification of induced
recessive and dominant mutations in maize M2 individuals. Plant J 100:851–862
Himelblau E, Gilchrist EJ, Buono K, Bizzell C, Mentzer L, Vogelzang R, Osborn T, Amasino RM,
Parkin IAP, Haughn GW (2009) Forward and reverse genetics of rapid-cycling Brassica
oleracea. Theor App Genet 118:953–961
Hohmann U, Jacobs G, Jung C (2005) An EMS mutagenesis protocol for sugar beet and isolation of
non-bolting mutants. Plant Breed 124:317–321
Holme IB, Gregersen PL, Brinch-Pedersen H (2019) Induced genetic variation in crop plants by
random or targeted mutagenesis: convergence and differences. Front Plant sci 10:1468
Hoshino T, Watanabe S, Takagi Y, Anai T (2014) A novel GmFAD3-2a mutant allele developed
through TILLING reduces α-linolenic acid content in soybean seed oil. Breed Sci 64:371–377
ISAAA Issue (2009) Amylopectin Potatoes by Precision Breeding. Crop Biotech Update December
11, 2009
Jankowicz-Cieslak J, Mba C, Till BJ (2017) Mutagenesis for crop breeding and functional
genomics. In: Jankowicz-Cieslak J, Tai T, Kumlehn J, Till B (eds) Biotechnologies for plant
mutation breeding. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45021-6_1
1 Mutagenesis and TILLING in the Era of Precise Genome Editing 31