תפריט נגישות
ניגודיות עדינהניגודיות גבוהה
מונוכרום
הדגשת קישורים
חסימת אנימציה
פונט קריא
סגור
איפוס הגדרות נגישות
להורדת מודול נגישות חינם תפריט נגישותניגודיות עדינהניגודיות גבוההמונוכרוםהדגשת קישוריםחסימת אנימציהפונט קריאסגוראיפוס הגדרות נגישותלהורדת מודול נגישות חינםEpigenetic modifications play a vital role in the preservation of genome integrity and in the regulation of gene expression. DNA methylation, one of the key mechanisms of epigenetic control, impacts growth, development, stress response and adaptability of all organisms, including plants. The detection of DNA methylation marks is crucial for understanding the mechanisms underlying these processes and for developing strategies to improve productivity and stress resistance of crop plants. There are different methods for detecting plant DNA methylation, such as bisulfite sequencing, methylation-sensitive amplified polymorphism, genome-wide DNA methylation analysis, methylated DNA immunoprecipitation sequencing, reduced representation bisulfite sequencing, MS and immuno-based techniques. These profiling approaches vary in many aspects, including DNA input, resolution, genomic region coverage, and bioinformatics analysis. Selecting an appropriate methylation screening approach requires an understanding of all these techniques. This review provides an overview of DNA methylation profiling methods in crop plants, along with comparisons of the efficacy of these techniques between model and crop plants. The strengths and limitations of each methodological approach are outlined, and the importance of considering both technical and biological factors are highlighted. Additionally, methods for modulating DNA methylation in model and crop species are presented. Overall, this review will assist scientists in making informed decisions when selecting an appropriate DNA methylation profiling method. Copyright © 2023 Agius, Kapazoglou, Avramidou, Baranek, Carneros, Caro, Castiglione, Cicatelli, Radanovic, Ebejer, Gackowski, Guarino, Gulyás, Hidvégi, Hoenicka, Inácio, Johannes, Karalija, Lieberman-Lazarovich, Martinelli, Maury, Mladenov, Morais-Cecílio, Pecinka, Tani, Testillano, Todorov, Valledor and Vassileva.
Epigenetic modifications play a vital role in the preservation of genome integrity and in the regulation of gene expression. DNA methylation, one of the key mechanisms of epigenetic control, impacts growth, development, stress response and adaptability of all organisms, including plants. The detection of DNA methylation marks is crucial for understanding the mechanisms underlying these processes and for developing strategies to improve productivity and stress resistance of crop plants. There are different methods for detecting plant DNA methylation, such as bisulfite sequencing, methylation-sensitive amplified polymorphism, genome-wide DNA methylation analysis, methylated DNA immunoprecipitation sequencing, reduced representation bisulfite sequencing, MS and immuno-based techniques. These profiling approaches vary in many aspects, including DNA input, resolution, genomic region coverage, and bioinformatics analysis. Selecting an appropriate methylation screening approach requires an understanding of all these techniques. This review provides an overview of DNA methylation profiling methods in crop plants, along with comparisons of the efficacy of these techniques between model and crop plants. The strengths and limitations of each methodological approach are outlined, and the importance of considering both technical and biological factors are highlighted. Additionally, methods for modulating DNA methylation in model and crop species are presented. Overall, this review will assist scientists in making informed decisions when selecting an appropriate DNA methylation profiling method. Copyright © 2023 Agius, Kapazoglou, Avramidou, Baranek, Carneros, Caro, Castiglione, Cicatelli, Radanovic, Ebejer, Gackowski, Guarino, Gulyás, Hidvégi, Hoenicka, Inácio, Johannes, Karalija, Lieberman-Lazarovich, Martinelli, Maury, Mladenov, Morais-Cecílio, Pecinka, Tani, Testillano, Todorov, Valledor and Vassileva.
