Journal of Plant Genetics and Breeding
Open Access

Conservation; Propagation in vitro; Plant biodiversity; Plant biotechnology methodology; Microbial byproducts; Biotechnology area

Introduction

Biotechnology is defined by the Convention on Biological Diversity of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) as a collection of methods that use biological systems, living organisms, or their derivatives to create or modify products or processes for a specific purpose. The South African Biotechnology Strategy makes use of this same definition as well [1]. The definition above demonstrates that biotechnology is an old science that has been used for a long time, despite the perception that it is a recent field of study. The use of fermentation agents in bakeries and breweries, the processing of dairy products, the creation of new animal breeds and crop cultivars, and the development of crop cultivars all involve the use of living organisms to enhance or alter a product, meeting the definition completely. However, the discovery of DNA and the development of gene technologies gave biotechnology a contemporary appearance and added a new dimension [2].

South Africa has a long history of utilizing biotechnology, but the country has not fully utilized the benefits of recent biotechnology advancements, necessitating the development of a national biotechnology strategy to make up for lost ground. The National Biotechnology Strategy was put into place ten years ago. This audit means to survey the examination attempts, financial possibilities, and difficulties of plant biotechnology research in South Africa with exceptional accentuation on the utilization of plant tissue culture in the proliferation, protection, commercialization as well as progress of monetarily significant plant species [3]. The biotechnology of nonfood plants receives the most attention, despite a brief mention of the biotechnology of food crops.

In this paper, the work acted in KDII2, specifically on the reconciliation issues connected with the Rearing Cover (BB) and its subordinate frameworks, is portrayed. It examines how the blanket's use of water or helium as coolants and its effect on plant design as a whole affect the integrated design of blanket ancillary systems [4]. Specific center is given to the issues associated with the BB variations as far as (I) influence on the general plant configuration, (ii) radiation security measures because of the BB coordination (Area 3), (iii) the executives of tritium (Area 4) and (iv) influence on the wellbeing. In fact, if all BB variants perform similarly and meet the System Requirement, it is worthwhile to investigate the integration issue. Consequently, the extent of this work is to recognize the potential mix issues and the potential arrangements that ought to be additionally explored. However, these topics are not meant to be comprehensive; rather, they represent the most up-to-date knowledge that EUROfusion has developed during the Pre-Concept Design Phase and will be used in the subsequent Concept Design Phase [5]. Moreover, albeit these subjects are not tending to every one of the difficulties related with the BB choice, they have been distinguished to be the main ones because of their effect on the DEMO plant plan.

By far most of food crops the purchaser experiences in supermarket walkways are the result of traditional plant reproducing. Indeed, even assortments like seedless watermelons, pluots, apriums, and tangelos, which are in many cases erroneously remembered to be a result of current hereditary designing innovations, are results of ordinary rearing practices [6]. A small number of food crops, including maize, soybean, canola, rice, potato, papaya, squash, and apple, only have varieties created through genetic engineering, which the USDA defines as the use of cutting-edge biotechnology tools to introduce, eliminate, or rearrange particular genes.

By correlation, many new yield assortments are delivered consistently by business ordinary reproducing to further develop crop efficiency, support food security, upgrade sustenance, and grow customer decision. In conventional plant breeding, desirable parent plants are identified in order to produce advantageous combinations in the subsequent generation [7]. The most common way of choosing unrivaled performing plants for food, feed, and fiber items goes back over 10,000 years and has been significantly refined somewhat recently. Early farmers selected individual plants with desired characteristics and relied on existing genetic variation in wild plant populations. Today, plant breeders build on the genetic diversity that is already there by choosing parents from genetically diverse plants. These parents may or may not sexually reproduce in nature because of obstacles like geographic isolation or differences in maturity. Plant breeders use wellestablished scientific methods to characterize parameters important for each crop and select plants based on traits of interest in order to identify the best individuals in the resulting offspring.

Traditional rearing practices utilized by plant raisers

Over the course of time, conventional breeding has developed into an efficient framework that not only supports the creation of safe and nutritious foods but also supports crop performance. Choosing which parents to choose, which parents to cross-pollinate, and which progeny to advance is the process of plant breeding [8]. In contrast to animal breeding, plant breeding benefits from the capacity to produce extremely large populations—up to tens of thousands, depending on the crop—in which the vast majority of plants—often more than 99 percent—are discarded while the select few individual plants that possess the characteristics that are desired are chosen to advance to subsequent breeding rounds. This capacity to choose a couple of people from enormous populaces is a basic supporter of the plant reproducing process and is applied during many phases of the cycle, including quality planning, characteristic introgression and field testing.

By locating the DNA region linked to the trait, trait mapping aims to identify and confirm the genetic basis of the trait of interest [9]. Breeders identify a set of DNA markers that distinguish both parent plants because the genetic basis of plant phenotypic differences is not always readily apparent. One normal rearing procedure for characteristic planning is to cross-fertilize parent plants with limits of the quality of interest (e.g., high versus low sickness opposition or presence versus nonattendance of the quality of interest) to deliver descendants. In subsequent rounds of self- or cross-pollination, this permits the desired trait to segregate in the progeny plants. In order to establish a statistically iterative relationship between the measurement of the trait of interest (phenotype) and DNA markers (genotype), trait mapping is used. Genotype information is obtained by assaying DNA from each generation's progeny plants with each plant's parental marker set. Plant breeders test all offspring simultaneously for the desired trait. A relationship among's aggregate and genotype illuminates the reproducer which markers co-isolate with the characteristic of interest at every age [10]. The original (F2) of descendants surveyed for aggregate genotype connection maps the quality of interest at the chromosome level. Distinguishing proof of the exact area of qualities fundamental the attribute of interest inside the recognized chromosome is accomplished over the resulting 5-6 ages of descendants plants. In order to obtain a more precise localization of the DNA region (gene(s) or causal locus) responsible for the trait of interest (phenotype), the number of progeny plants, markers, and advanced generations of selfpollination or cross-pollination must increase. To map the genetic locations for the trait to a region of 200,000 base pairs within one of the ten chromosomes, a breeder might need to grow 20,000 maize plants over five to six generations to select 200 to 300 plants that co-segregate for the trait and marker.

A trait-linked DNA marker that segregates or is consistently co-inherited with the trait has now been identified to be genetically linked to the trait after the genetic basis for the trait of interest was mapped within a chromosomal region. A DNA marker-based assay is then developed using this trait-linked marker [11]. In place of more laborious and resource-intensive phenotyping methods, DNA markerbased assays enable breeders to quickly conduct molecular screening assays for the genetic basis of the trait of interest in thousands of progeny plants. Breeders can now use the DNA marker-based assay to identify and select individual plants with the trait of interest for the subsequent stage of trait introgression breeding.

Food Crops' Naturally Occurring Toxins

A wide variety of chemical compounds, some of which are harmful or detrimental to nutrition, are naturally produced and accumulated by plants. Two categories of crops are proposed based on the kind of compound that is present during crop production, harvest, and processing in order to help comprehend how plant breeders can finetune their practices to guarantee a safe supply of food for consumers. For each category, crop case studies are used to explain how plant breeders change their breeding methods to make sure that food made from conventionally bred crops is safe to eat.

First crop group: crop plants devoid of significant toxins produced by plants

This category contains numerous plant crops. In addition to agronomic traits crucial to crop growers, crop breeding in this category includes a series of tests and selection for a variety of quality parameters (such as taste, size, shape, appearance, and nutrient levels) [12]. When relevant, reproducers of these yields additionally screen and select mixtures associated with qualities vital to further developed food handling, buyer inclination, or potentially human nourishment. For instance, to work on quality attributes important to purchasers, carrot reproducers select color (e.g., carotenoids and anthocyanins) and flavor (e.g., unstable terpenoids) accumulates.

The only other type of food safety concern associated with Category 1 crops primarily stems from whether the plants have properties that mitigate mycotoxin contamination. By definition, Category 1 crops do not contain significant known toxins or allergens. Keeping that in mind, plant raisers by implication lessen mycotoxin pollution in the food supply by creating illness safe assortments. For instance, the presence of aflatoxin contamination in various Aspergillus species-infected grains and nuts can render a crop illegally unmarketable in developed nations and pose a significant threat to public health in developing nations. Plant breeders who work with these crops target aspergillus resistance, but physical and chemical aflatoxin decontamination methods frequently complement the use of host plant-resistant varieties. Since mycotoxin tainting in the food supply, coming about because of contamination of specific contagious plant microbes during plant advancement, reap, or capacity, has been thoro [13]. Be that as it may, features of sickness opposition plant reproducing rules to assist with lessening mycotoxin tainting in food varieties are remembered for the accompanying contextual analysis of maize (a Class 1 yield) since maize rearing incorporates critical endeavors pointed toward consolidating host plant antifungal obstruction against mycotoxigenic parasites.

Second crop group: crop plants with known plant-created regular poisons

It is essential to have an understanding of the plant biochemistry of the portion of a crop plant that is consumed in order to develop food products and crop varieties that are safe and nutritious for human consumption [14]. For instance, fruits in the Rosaceae family, such as cherries, apples, apricots, peaches, and almonds, are known to produce a natural, unpleasant, bitter compound in the seed called amygdalin. When ingested in high concentrations, this compound can lead to cyanide poisoning. As a seed crop, new almond varieties must be evaluated for amygdalin, and those with unacceptable seed bitterness are eliminated. Humans, on the other hand, typically only consume the skin and flesh of other Rosaceae species. Because amygdalin is not found in the fleshy parts of fruit that are eaten, apple, apricot, peach, and cherry breeders do not screen new fresh market varieties for the toxins.

The objective market area for the food crop additionally illuminates the reproducer's determination measures. For instance, the whole apple is typically processed for apple juice, including the seeds, which could break down and contaminate the juice. However, an analysis of apple juice revealed a significant decrease in the amount of amygdalin present, from 0.01 mg/m to 0.08 mg/ml, suggesting that processing did not pose any health risks.

A food crop's expansion into new markets may also be contingent on efforts to reduce plant toxin production through breeding [15]. The availability of cultivars with low amygdalin seed levels limits the use of apricot seeds for human consumption, despite the fact that they are a source of dietary protein, fiber, and oil.

Conclusion

Micropropagation of two elite exotic cultivars of date palm (Samany and Bertamoda) was done successfully via somatic embryogenesis. The application of different PGRs used at different in vitro growth stages gave optimistic results. A high frequency multiplication of somatic embryos produced an enormous number of healthy plantlets. The better root and shoot formation in the plantlets were achieved. Root trimming technique resulted in the formation of multiple roots with secondary roots in each plantlet. Plantlets’ survival in greenhouse was also supported by root trimming and in vitro hardening techniques. The plantlets exhibited the better survival in the greenhouse and then in the open field. The epigenetic variations in date palm reported as abnormal phenotypes that reverted to normal phenotypes within few years of field plantation. Samany and Bertamoda exhibited normal vegetative growth in the open field and produced normal fruits with similar size, shape, colour and taste was the evidence of the true-to-type. Dates of cv. Samany were exploited in making excellent quality Chhuhara to preserve for off-season under room temperature. The obtained results of the detailed study will be useful in micropropagation of elite rare date cultivars growing in the area and worldwide.

Acknowledgement

None

Conflict of Interest

None

1. Menz J, Modrzejewski D, Hartung F, Wilhelm F, Sprink T (2020) Genome edited crops touch the market: a view on the global development and regulatory environment. Front Plant Sci 11: 586027.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

2. Eş I, Gavahian M, Marti-Quijal F, Lorenzo JM, Khaneghah AM, Tsatsanis C, et al. (2019) The application of the CRISPR-Cas9 genome editing machinery in food and agricultural science: current status, future perspectives, and associated challenges. Biotechnol Adv 37: 410-421.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

3. Ku HK, Ha SH (2020) Improving nutritional and functional quality by genome editing of crops: status and perspectives. Front Plant Sci 11: 577313.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

4. Li Q, Sapkota M, Knaap EVD (2020) Perspectives of CRISPR/Cas-mediated cis-engineering in horticulture: unlocking the neglected potential for crop improvement. Hortic Res 7: 36.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

5. Li S, Xia L. (2020) Precise gene replacement in plants through CRISPR/Cas genome editing technology: current status and future perspectives. aBIOTECH 1: 58-73.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

6. Wada N, Ueta R, Osakabe Y, Osakabe K. (2020) Precision genome editing in plants: state-of-the-art in CRISPR/Cas9-based genome engineering. BMC Plant Biol 20: 234.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

7. Criscuolo E,  Caputo V, Diotti AR, Sautto GA, Kirchenbaum GA, et al. (2019) Alternative methods of vaccine delivery: an overview of edible and intradermal vaccines. J Immunol Res 4: 8303648.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

8. Margolin E, Chapman R, Williamson AL, Rybicki EP, Meyers AE (2018) Production of complex viral glycoproteins in plants as vaccine immunogens. Plant Biotechnol J 16: 1531-1545.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

9. Andrew IKS, Storkey J, Sparkes DL (2015) A review of the potential for competitive cereal cultivars as a tool in integrated weed management. Weed Res 55: 239-248.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

10. Mwendwa JM, Brown WB, Weston PA, Weston LA (2022) Evaluation of Barley Cultivars for Competitive Traits in Southern New South Wales. Plants (Basel) 11: 362.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

11. Boccalandro HE, Ploschuk EL, Yanovsky MJ, Sánchez RA, Gatz C, et al. (2003) Increased phytochrome B alleviates density effects on tuber yield of field potato crops. Plant Physiology, 133:  1539-1546.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

12. Egli L, Meyer C, Scherber C, Kreft H, Tscharntke T, et al. (2018) Influence of management and environment on Australian wheat: Winners and losers of national and global efforts to reconcile agricultural intensification and biodiversity conservation. Glob Chang Biol 24: 2212-2228.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

13. Kremen C (2015) Reframing the land-sparing/land-sharing debate for biodiversity conservation. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1355: 52-76.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

14. Firbank SLG, Petit S, Smart S, Blain A, Fuller RJ (2008) Assessing the impacts of agricultural intensification on biodiversity: a British perspective. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 363: 777-87.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

15. Elsen PR, Kalyanaraman R, Ramesh K, Wilcove DS (2017) The importance of agricultural lands for Himalayan birds in winter. Conserv Biol 31: 416-426.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref