Using CRISPR/Cas9 to fight potato blight

Using CRISPR/Cas9 to fight potato blight

Potato blight is the potato farmer’s greatest enemy. It spreads quickly in moist conditions and, if left untreated, can lead to devastating crop failures. The Nobel Prize-winning CRISPR/Cas method now makes it possible to breed resistant varieties and may reduce the use of pesticides in agriculture.

Monday, August 23, 2021

In brief

  • Late blight causes massive crop losses in potatoes.
  • Genome editing could soon be used to breed varieties resistant to the fungal disease.
  • The big advantage: massively fewer pesticides would be needed.

The unusually wet summer in 2021 helped spread potato blight to potato fields. The culprit for the world’s worst potato disease is the root disease Phytophthora infestans. Its spores need the wet surfaces of leaves to germinate and infect the plant. The spores are quickly scattered by the wind and can quickly cover an entire field. In the past century, potato blight has led to famines. Because it spreads so quickly, protecting potatoes is a challenge for farmers even in normal years.


Pesticides are effective
To date, the best option for preventing pathogens has been the consistent use of synthetic pesticides (as well as copper in organic farming). However, treating potatoes with pesticides has disadvantages. They must be sprayed several times, depending on the severity of the infestation. During especially wet weather – as was the case this summer – farmers can no longer drive over their fields with their equipment. As a result, they are no longer able to treat the potatoes. The problem with copper is that, as a heavy metal, it enriches the soil, presenting a hazard to various soil organisms.

To address these issues, scientists have long conducted research into potato varieties that are resistant against potato blight. However, they have not succeeded in developing resistant strains without losing other characteristics in existing varieties using traditional breeding methods. By contrast, researchers have managed to insert resistant genes from wild potatoes in established varieties using genetic engineering. The resulting potatoes proved to be resistant against Phytophthora infestans over the long term. However, because they are classified as genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in Europe, they cannot be cultivated.


Resistance with the help of “genetic scissors”
Gene editing offers a new option for making potatoes resistant against potato blight. A team of researchers from Sweden and Denmark have identified genes that make potatoes susceptible to fungus (known as susceptibility genes or S genes). Using the CRISPR/Cas9 genetic scissors, the researchers cut the DNA of potatoes in two places in order to remove the section between them. The resulting varieties were much more resistant against the fungal pathogens than the initial varieties. In addition, the other characteristics appeared to be unchanged. The varieties now need to be examined in release experiments.

Using gene editing to remove S genes represents a major opportunity for breeding disease-resistant plants. This is because in contrast to traditional breeding methods the initial varieties retained their favorable characteristics – such as their flavor, appearance, regular shape, tender yet hearty peel, etc. Gene editing may thus help to reduce the use of pesticides. However, gene-edited plants are considered GMO in Switzerland and the EU. They cannot be cultivated. But if Switzerland, unlike the hesitant EU, wants to take a step toward sustainable and resource-efficient agriculture, it can no longer make do without the use of innovative technologies. It should seize the opportunity it represents for agriculture and Switzerland as a research center and avoid including low-cost genetic scissors in a moratorium on genetic engineering. This is because moratoriums harm research careers.

Related articles

When surveys create fear
New Breeding Technologies

When surveys create fear

Surveys on technologies such as genetic engineering often focus on risks and spread panic instead of promoting a balanced discussion of the pros and cons. A striking example is the environmental indicator of the Federal Statistical Office. Social scientist Angela Bearth is highly critical of the survey. The public debate on new technologies such as genetic engineering or 5G mobile communications is often conducted emotionally. Current surveys encourage this by stirring up fears instead of enabling an objective consideration of risks and benefits. One example of this is the environmental indicator, a survey conducted by the Federal Statistical Office (FSO) on the subject of hazards. Using simplistic questions, it generates distorted perceptions. In an article on the progressive Agrarwende.ch platform of the Eco-Progressive Network association, social scientist Angela Bearth addresses the issue.

More agrobiodiversity thanks to genome editing
New Breeding Technologies

More agrobiodiversity thanks to genome editing

It is often wrongly claimed that new breeding technologies such as genome editing restrict diversity in the seed market. A new study shows that the opposite is the case. Genome editing promotes agrobiodiversity.

Genetic engineering has long been on Swiss plates
New Breeding Technologies

Genetic engineering has long been on Swiss plates

As a consumer, you often don't know: products advertised as GMO-free have long contained genetic engineering. This is a thorn in the side of opponents of genetic engineering. But it is easier to keep quiet about the ‘scandal’ – because something we have been eating for a long time no longer scares us.

Migros and the opportunities of genome editing
New Breeding Technologies

Migros and the opportunities of genome editing

The demand for new breeding technologies is growing. Experts see an urgent need for action in order to utilise technological progress without jeopardising safety. Companies such as Migros also recognise the importance of these developments and are addressing the opportunities and challenges they bring. Meanwhile, contrary to scientific findings, opponents are continuing to tell the same horror stories as they did 30 years ago.

More contributions from New Breeding Technologies