Two efficient CRISPR/Cas9 systems for gene editing in soybean

• Published in: Transgenic research 2021-06, Vol.30 (3), p.239-249
• Main Authors: Carrijo, Jéssica, Illa-Berenguer, Eudald, LaFayette, Peter, Torres, Nathalia, Aragão, Francisco J. L., Parrott, Wayne, Vianna, Giovanni R.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Animal Genetics and Genomics; Biomedical and Life Sciences; Biomedical Engineering/Biotechnology; CRISPR; CRISPR-Cas Systems - genetics; Crop improvement; Gene deletion; Gene Editing; Genetic Engineering; Genetic Vectors - genetics; Genome editing; Genome, Plant - genetics; Genomes; Glycine max - genetics; Glycine max - growth & development; Hairy root; Life Sciences; Molecular Medicine; Original Paper; Phytic acid; Plant Genetics and Genomics; Promoter Regions, Genetic - genetics; RNA, Guide, Kinetoplastida - genetics; Soybeans; Transcription; Transgenics
• ISSN: 0962-8819; 1573-9368
• DOI: 10.1007/s11248-021-00246-x

Genome editing using CRISPR/Cas9 has been highlighted as a powerful tool for crop improvement. Nevertheless, its efficiency can be improved, especially for crops with a complex genome, such as soybean. In this work, using the CRISPR/Cas9 technology we evaluated two CRISPR systems, a one-component vs. a two-component strategy. In a simplified system, the single transcriptional unit (STU), SpCas9 and sgRNA are driven by only one promoter, and in the conventional system, the two-component transcriptional unit (TCTU), SpCas9 , is under the control of a pol II promoter and the sgRNAs are under the control of a pol III promoter. A multiplex system with three targets was designed targeting two different genes, GmIPK1 and GmIPK2 , coding for enzymes from the phytic acid synthesis pathway. Both systems were tested using the hairy root soybean methodology. Results showed gene-specific edition. For the GmIPK1 gene, edition was observed in both configurations, with a deletion of 1 to 749 base pairs; however, the TCTU showed higher indel frequencies. For GmIPK2 major exclusions were observed in both systems, but the editing efficiency was low for STU. Both systems (STU or TCTU) have been shown to be capable of promoting effective gene editing in soybean. The TCTU configuration proved to be preferable, since it was more efficient. The STU system was less efficient, but the size of the CRISPR/Cas cassette was smaller.