Journal of Applied Genetics

, Volume 47, Issue 4, pp 277–286 | Cite as

Unintended consequences of plant transformation: A molecular insight

Invited Editorial

Abstract

Plant genomes are dynamic structures having both the system to maintain and accurately reproduce the information encoded therein and the ability to accept more or less random changes, which is one of the foundations of evolution. Crop improvement and various uncontrolled stress factors can induce unintended genetic and epigenetic variations. In this review it is attempted to summarize factors causing such changes and the molecular nature of these variations in transgenic plants. Unintended effects in transgenic plants can be divided into three main groups: first, pleiotropic effects of integrated DNA on the host plant genome; second, the influence of the integration site and transgene architecture on transgene expression level and stability; and third, the effect of various stresses related to tissue handling, regeneration and clonal propagation. Many of these factors are recently being redefined due to new researches, which apply modern highly sensitive analytical techniques and sequenced model organisms. The ability to inspect large portions of genomes clearly shows that tissue culture contributes to a vast majority of observed genetic and epigenetic changes. Nevertheless, monitoring of thousands transcripts, proteins and metabolites reveals that unintended variation most often falls in the range of natural differences between landraces or varieties. We expect that an increasing amount of evidence on many important crop species will support these observations in the nearest future.

Key words

unintended effects transgenic plants position effect insertion effect somaclonal variation DNA methylation epigenetic variation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Allen GC, Spiker S, Thompson WF, 2000. Use of matrix attachment regions (MARs) to minimize transgene silencing. Plant Mol Biol 43: 361–376.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Alonso JM, Stepanova AN, Leisse TJ, Kim CJ, Chen H, Shinn P, et al. 2003. Genome-wide insertional mutagenesis ofArabidopsis thaliana. Sci 301: 653–657.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anderson S, Lewis-Smith A, Smith S, 1990. Methylation of ribosomal RNA genes inPetunia hybrida plants, callus cultures and regenerated shoots. Plant Cell Rep 8: 554–557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Arencibia A, Gentinetta E, Cuzzoni E, Castigline S, Kohli A, Vain P, et al. 1998. Molecular analysis ofthe genome of transgenic rice (Oryza sativa L.) plants produced via particle bombardment or intact cell electroporation. Mol Breed 4: 99–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Azpiroz-Leehan R, Feldmann KA, 1997. T-DNA insertion mutagenesis inArabidopsis: going back and forth. Trends Genet 13: 152–156.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Bao PH, Granata S, Castiglione S, Wang G, Giordani C, Cuzzoni E, et al. 1996. Evidence for genomic changes in transgenic rice (Oryza sativa L.) recovered from protoplasts. Transgenic Res 5: 97–103.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Bardini M, Labra M, Winfield M, Sala F, 2003. Antibiotic-induced DNA methylation changes in calluses ofArabidopsis thaliana. Plant Cell Tiss Org Cult 72: 157–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brown PTH, Lange FD, Lörz H, 1992. Molecular changes in tissue culture-derived plants. Adv Mol Genet 5: 171–195.Google Scholar
  9. Butaye KJM, Goderis IJWM, Wouters PFJ, Pues JM-TG, Delaure SL, Broekaert WF, et al. 2004. Stable high-level transgene expression inArabidopsis thaliana using gene silencing mutants and matrix attachment regions. Plant J 39: 440–449.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Butaye KMJ, Cammue BPA, Delauré SL, De Bolle MFC, 2005. Approaches to minimize variation of transgene expression in plants. Mol Breed 16: 79–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Carman JG, 1995. Nutrient absorption and the development and genetic stability of cultured meristems. In: Terzi et al., eds. Current Issues in Plant Molecular and Cellular Biology. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers: 393–403.Google Scholar
  12. Charlton A, Allnutt T, Holmes S, Chisholm J, Bean S, Ellis N, et al. 2004. NMR profiling of transgenic peas. Plant Biotech J 2: 27–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Choffnes DS, Philip R, Vodkin LO, 2001. A transgenic locus in soybean exhibits a high level of recombination. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol Plant 37: 756–762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Clough SJ, Bent AF, 1998. Floral dip: a simplified method for Agrobacterium-mediated transformation ofArabidopsis thaliana. Plant J 16: 735–743.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Colijn-Hooymans CM, Hakkert JC, Jansen J, Custers JBM, 1994. Competence for regeneration of cucumber cotyledons is restricted to specific developmental stages. Plant Cell Tiss Org Cult 39: 211–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. El Ouakfaoui S, Miki B, 2005. The stability of the Arabidopsis transcriptome in transgenic plants expressing the marker genes nptII and uidA. Plant J 41: 791–800.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fiehn O, Kopka J, Dörmann P, Altman T, Trethewey RN, Willmitzer L, 2000. Metabolite profiling for plant functional genomics. Nat Biotech 18: 1157–1161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Filipecki M, Wiśniewska A, Yin Z, Malepszy S, 2005. The heritable changes in metabolic profiles of plants regenerated in different types of in vitro culture. Plant Cell Tiss Org Cult 82: 349–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fitch MM, Manshardt RM, Gonsalves D, Slightom JL, Sanford JC, 1992. Virus resistant papaya plants derived from tissues bombarded with the coat protein gene of papaya ringspot virus. Biotechnology 10: 1466–1472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Forsbach A, Schubert D, Lechtenberg B, Gils M, Schmidt R, 2003. A comprehensive characterization of single-copy T-DNA insertions in theArabidopsis thaliana genome. Plant Mol Biol 52: 161–176.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Fukui K, 1983. Sequential occurrence of mutations in a growing rice callus. Theor Appl Genet 65: 225–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hall G Jr, Allen GC, Loer DS, Thompson WF, Spiker S, 1991. Nuclear scaffolds and scaffold-attachment regions in higher plants. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 88: 9320–9324.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Halweg C, Thompson WF, Spiker S, 2005. The Rb7 matrix attachment region increases the likelihood and magnitude of transgene expression in tobacco cells: a flow cytometric study. Plant Cell 17: 418–429.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Heil M, Baldwin IT, 2002. Fitness costs of induced resistance: the emerging experimental support for a slippery concept. Trends Plant Sci 7: 61–67.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Herman L, Jacobs A, Van Montagu M, Depicker A, 1990. Plant chromosome/marker gene fusion assay for study of normal and truncated T-DNA integration events. Mol Gen Genet 224: 248–256.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Hobbs SL, Kpodar P, DeLong CM, 1990. The effect of T-DNA copy number, position and methylation on reporter gene expression in tobacco transformants. Plant Mol Biol 15: 851–864.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Ichikawa T, Nakazawa M, Kawashima M, Muto S, Gohda K, Suzuki K, et al. 2003. Sequence database of 1172 T-DNA insertion sites inArabidopsis activation-tagging lines that showed phenotypes in T1 generation. Plant J 36: 421–429.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Jackson MW, Stinchcombe JR, Korves TM, Schmitt J, 2004. Costs and benefits of cold tolerance in transgenicArabidopsis thaliana. Mol Ecol 13: 3609–3615.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. James VA, Worland B, Snape JW, Vain P, 2004a. Development of a standard operating procedure (SOP) for the precise quantification of transgene expression levels in rice plants. Physiol Plant 120: 650–656.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. James VA, Worland B, Snape JW, Vain P, 2004b. Strategies for precise quantification of transgene expression levels over several generations in rice. J Exp Bot 55: 1307–1313.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Kaeppler SM, Kaeppler HF, Rhee Y, 2000. Epigenetic aspects of somaclonal variation in plants. Plant Mol Biol 43: 179–188.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Kaeppler SM, Phillips RL, 1993. DNA methylation and tissue culture-induced variation in plants. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol 29: 125–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kaeppler SM, Phillips RL, Olhoft P, 1998. Molecular basis of heritable tissue culture-induced variation in plants. In: Jain et al., eds. Somaclonal variation and induced mutations in crop improvement. Current plant science and biotechnology in agriculture. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers 32: 465–484.Google Scholar
  34. Karp A, 1991. On the current understanding of somaclonal variation. Oxford Surv Plant Mol Cell Biol 7: 1–58.Google Scholar
  35. Koncz C, Németh K, Rédei GP, Schell J, 1992. T-DNA insertional mutagenesis inArabidopsis. Plant Mol Bol 20: 963–976.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kuiper HA, Kleter GA, Noteborn HPJM, Kok EJ, 2001. Assessment of the food safety issues related to genetically modified foods. Plant J 27: 503–528.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Labra M, Savini C, Bracale M, Pelucchi N, Colombo L, Bardini M, Sala F, 2001. Genomic changes in transgenic rice (Oryza sativa L.) plants produced by infecting calli withAgrobacterium tumefaciens. Plant Cell Rep 20: 325–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Labra M, Vanini C, Grassi F, Bracale M, Balsemin M, Basso B, Sala F, 2004. Genomic stability inArabidopsis thaliana transgenic plants obtained by floral dip. Theor Appl Genet 109: 1512–1518.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Larkin PJ, Scowcroft WR, 1981. Somaclonal variation — A novel source of variability from cell culture for plant improvement. Theor Appl Genet 60: 197–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Latham JR, Wilson AK, Steinbrecher RA, 2006. The mutational consequences of plant transformation. J Biomed Biotech 25376: 1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Lechtenberg B, Schubert D, Forsbach A, Gils M, Schmidt R, 2003. Neither inverted repeat T-DNA configurations nor arrangements of tandemly repeated transgenes are sufficient to trigger transgene silencing. Plant J 34: 507–517.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Lee M and Phillips RL, 1988. The chromosomal basis of somaclonal variation. Ann Rev Plant Physiol Plant Mol Biol 39: 413–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Lehesranta SJ, Davies HV, Shepherd LV, Nunan N, McNicol JW, Auriola S, et al. 2005. Comparison of tuber proteomes of potato varieties, landraces, and genetically modified lines. Plant Physiol 138: 1690–1699.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Levin JS, Thompson WF, Csinos AS, Stephenson MG, Weissinger AK, 2005. Matrix attachment regions increase the efficiency and stability of RNA-mediated resistance to Tomato Spotted Wilt Virus in transgenic tobacco. Transgenic Res 14: 193–206.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. LoSchiavo F, Pitto L, Giuliano G, Torti G, Nuti-Ronchi V, Marazatti D, et al. 1989. DNA methylation of embryogenic carrot cell cultures and its variations as caused by mutation, differentiation, hormones and hypomethylating drugs. Theor Appl Genet 77: 325–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Lucht JM, Mauch-Mani B, Steiner H-Y, Metraux JP, Ryals J, Hohn B, 2002. Pathogen stress increases somatic recombination frequency inArabidopsis. Nat Genet 30: 311–314.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Lund G, Das OP, Messing J, 1995. Tissue-specific DNaseI-sensitive sites of the maize P gene and their changes upon epimutation. Plant J 7: 797–807.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Madlung A, Comai L, 2004. The effect of stress on genome regulation and structure. Ann Bot Lond 94: 481–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Matzke MA, Matzke AJM, 1996. Stable epigenetic states in differentiated plant cells: implications for somaclonal variation and gene silencing in transgenic plants. In: Russo et al., eds. Epigenetic mechanisms of gene regulation. Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Cold Spring Harbor Press: 377–392.Google Scholar
  50. Mette MF, Aufsatz W, van der Vinden J, Matzke MA, Matzke AJ, 2000. Transcriptional silencing and promoter methylation triggered by double-stranded RNA. EMBO J 19: 5194–5201.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Mlynarova L, Jansen RC, Conner AJ, Stiekema WJ, Nap J-P, 1995. The MAR-mediated reduction in position effect can be uncoupled from copy number-dependent expression in transgenic plants. Plant Cell 7: 599–609.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Molinier J, Ries G, Zipfel C, Hohn B, 2006. Transgeneration memory of stress in plants. Nature 442: 1046–1049.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Olhoft PM, Phillips RL, 1999. Genetic and epigenetic instability in tissue culture and regenerated progenies. In: Lerner HR, ed. Plant responses to environmental stresses: From phytohormones to genome reorganization. New York: Marcel Dekker: 111–148.Google Scholar
  54. Peach C, Velten J, 1991. Transgene expression variability (position effect) of CAT and GUS reporter genes driven by linked divergent T-DNA promoters. Plant Mol Biol 17: 49–60.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Phillips RL, Kaeppler SM, Olhoft P, 1994. Genetic instability of plant tissue cultures: breakdown of normal controls. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 91: 5222–5226.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Prols F, Meyer P, 1992. The methylation patterns of chromosomal integration regions influence gene activity of transferred DNA inPetunia hybrida. Plant J 2: 465–475.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. Qin H, Dong Y, von Arnim AG, 2003. Epigenetic interactions betweenArabidopsis transgenes: characterization in light of transgene integration sites. Plant Mol Biol 52: 217–231.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. Rang A, Linke B, Jansen B, 2005. Detection of RNA variants transcribed from the transgene in Roundup Ready soybean. Eur Food Res Technol 220: 438–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Reyes JC, Hennig L, Gruissem W, 2002. Chromatin-remodeling and memory factors. New regulators of plant development. Plant Physiol 130: 1090–1101.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. Richards EJ, 1997. DNA methylation and plant development. Trends Genet 13: 319–323.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. Roessner U, Luedemann A, Brust D, Fiehn O, Linke T, Willmitzer L, Fernie AR, 2001. Metabolic profiling allows comprehensive phenotyping of genetically or environmentally modified plant systems. Plant Cell 13: 11–29.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. Rudd S, Frisch M, Grote K, Meyers BC, Mayer K, Werner T, 2004. Genome-wide in silico mapping of scaffold/matrix attachment regions inArabidopsis suggests correlation of intragenic scaffold/matrix attachment regions wi th gene expression. Plant Physiol 135: 715–722.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. Ruebelt MC, Leimgruber NK, Lipp M, Reynolds TL, Nemeth MA, Astwood JD, et al. 2006a. Application of two-dimensional gel electrophoresis to interrogate alterations in the proteome of genetically modified crops. 1. Assessing analytical validation. J Agric Food Chem 54: 2154–2161.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. Ruebelt MC, Lipp M, Reynolds TL, Astwood JD, Engel K-H, Jany K-D, 2006b. Application of two-dimensional gel electrophoresis to interrogate alterations in the proteome of genetically modified crops. 2. Assessing natural variability. J Agric Food Chem 54: 2162–2168.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. Ruebelt MC, Lipp M, Reynolds TL, Schmuke JJ, Astwood JD, DellaPena D, et al. 2006c. Application of two-dimensional gel electrophoresis to interrogate alterations in the proteome of genetically modified crops. 3. Assessing unintended effects. J Agric Food Chem 54: 2169–2177.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. Salvo-Garrido H, Travella S, Bilham LJ, Harwood WA, Snape JW, 2004. The distribution of transgene insertion sites in barley determined by physical and genetic mapping. Genetics 167: 1371–1379.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. Saxe D, Datta A, Jinks-Robertson S, 2000. Stimulation of mitotic recombination events by high levels of RNA polymerase II transcription in yeast. Mol Cell Biol. 20: 5404–5414.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. Schmitt F, Oakeley EJ, Jost JP, 1997. Antibiotics induce genome-wide hypermethylation in culturedNicotiana tabacum plants. J Biol Chem 272: 1534–1540.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. Schubert D, Lechtenberg B, Forsbach A, Gils M, Bahadur S, Schmidt R, 2004. Silencing inArabidopsis T-DNA transformants: The predominant role of a gene-specific RNA sensing mechanism versus position effects. Plant Cell 16: 2561–2572.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. Sha Y, Li S, Pei Z, Luo L, Tian Y, He C, 2004. Generation and flanking sequence analysis of a rice T-DNA tagged population. Theor Appl Genet 108: 306–314.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. Skirvin RM, Coyner M, Horton MA, Motoike S., Gorvin D, 2000. Somaclonal variation: do we know what causes it? AgBiotechNet 2: 1–4.Google Scholar
  72. Skirvin RM, McPheeters KD, Norton M, 1994. Sources and frequency of somaclonal variation. Hort Sci 29: 1232–1237.Google Scholar
  73. Smulders MJM, Rus-Kortekaas W, Vosman B, 1995. Tissue culture-induced DNA methylation polymorphisms in repetitive DNA of tomato calli and regenerated plants. Theor Appl Genet91: 1257–1264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Stief A, Winter D, Stratling W, Sippel A, 1989. A nuclear DNA attachment element mediates elevated and position-independent gene activity. Nature 341: 343–345.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. Tagashira N, Plader W, Filipecki M, Yin Z, Wisniewska A, Gaj P, et al. 2005. The metabolic profiles of transgenic cucumber lines vary with different chromosomal locations of the transgene. Cell Mol Biol Lett 10: 697–710.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. Tovar J, Lichtenstein C, 1992. Somatic and meiotic chromosomal recombination between inverted duplications in transgenic tobacco plants. Plant Cell 4: 319–332.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  77. Tzfira T, Vaidya M, Citovsky V, 2001. VIP1, an Arabidopsis protein that interacts with Agrobacterium VirE2 is involved in VirE2 nuclear import and Agrobacterium infectivity. EMBO J 20: 3596–3607.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. Vain P, James VA, Worland B, Snape JW, 2002. Transgene behaviour across two generations in a large random population of transgenic rice plants produced by particle bombardment. Theor Appl Genet 105: 878–889.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  79. van Blokland R, ten Lohuis M, Meyer P, 1997. Condensation of chromatin in transcriptional regions of an inactivated plant transgene: evidence for an active role of transcription in gene silencing. Mol Gen Genet 257: 1–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. Vaucheret H, Beclin C, Elmayan T, Feuerbach F, Godon C, Morel J-B, et al. 1998. Transgene-induced gene silencing in plants. Plant J 16: 651–659.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  81. Veilleux RE, Johnson AAT, 1998. Somaclonal variation: Molecular analysis, transformation interaction and utilization. Plant Breeding Reviews 16: 229–268.Google Scholar
  82. Wenck A, Czako M, Kanevski I, Marton L, 1997. Frequent collinear long transfer of DNA inclusive of the whole binary vector duringAgrobacterium-mediated transformation. Plant Mol Biol 34: 913–922.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  83. Ye F, Singer ER, 1996. RIGS (repeat-induced gene silencing) inArabidopsis is transcriptional and alters chromatin configuration. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 93: 10881–10886.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  84. Yin Z, Plader W, Malepszy S, 2004. Transgene inheritance in plants. J Appl Genet 45: 127–144.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Institute of Plant Genetics, Polish Academy of Sciences, Poznan 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Plant Genetics, Breeding and Biotechnology, Faculty of Horticulture and Landscape ArchitectureWarsaw Agricultural UniversityWarszawaPoland

Personalised recommendations