4.5 Review

Genome Editing Technology for Genetic Amelioration of Fruits and Vegetables for Alleviating Post-Harvest Loss

期刊

BIOENGINEERING-BASEL
卷 9, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/bioengineering9040176

关键词

post-harvest loss; genetic engineering; genome editing; CRISPR; Cas9; horticultural crops; fruits; vegetables; shelf-life; texture; post-harvest pathogen

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Food security and crop production face challenges due to various factors, and improving post-harvest quality traits is crucial. Genome editing has emerged as a new approach to enhance post-harvest stability and pathogen resistance in horticultural crops. However, there are still obstacles and challenges in employing genome editing tools.
Food security and crop production are challenged worldwide due to overpopulation, changing environmental conditions, crop establishment failure, and various kinds of post-harvest losses. The demand for high-quality foods with improved nutritional quality is also growing day by day. Therefore, production of high-quality produce and reducing post-harvest losses of produce, particularly of perishable fruits and vegetables, are vital. For many decades, attempts have been made to improve the post-harvest quality traits of horticultural crops. Recently, modern genetic tools such as genome editing emerged as a new approach to manage and overcome post-harvest effectively and efficiently. The different genome editing tools including ZFNs, TALENs, and CRISPR/Cas9 system effectively introduce mutations (In Dels) in many horticultural crops to address and resolve the issues associated with post-harvest storage quality. Henceforth, we provide a broad review of genome editing applications in horticulture crops to improve post-harvest stability traits such as shelf life, texture, and resistance to pathogens without compromising nutritional value. Moreover, major roadblocks, challenges, and their possible solutions for employing genome editing tools are also discussed.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据