A fully annotated wheat genome good be used to massively boost wheat crop yields

Wheat is one of the major sources of food for much of the world. However, because bread wheat’s genome is a large hybrid mix of three separate subgenomes, it has been difficult to produce a high-quality reference sequence. Using recent advances in sequencing, the International Wheat Genome Sequencing Consortium presents an annotated reference genome with a detailed analysis of gene content among subgenomes and the structural organization for all the chromosomes. Examples of quantitative trait mapping and CRISPR-based genome modification show the potential for using this genome in agricultural research and breeding. Ramírez-González et al. exploited the fruits of this endeavor to identify tissue-specific biased gene expression and coexpression networks during development and exposure to stress. These resources will accelerate our understanding of the genetic basis of bread wheat.

This annotated reference sequence of wheat is a resource that can now drive disruptive innovation in wheat improvement, as this community resource establishes the foundation for accelerating wheat research and application through improved understanding of wheat biology and genomics-assisted breeding. Importantly, the bioinformatics capacity developed for model-organism genomes will facilitate a better understanding of the wheat genome as a result of the high-quality chromosome-based genome assembly. By necessity, breeders work with the genome at the whole chromosome level, as each new cross involves the modification of genome-wide gene networks that control the expression of complex traits such as yield. With the annotated and ordered reference genome sequence in place, researchers and breeders can now easily access sequence-level information to precisely define the necessary changes in the genomes for breeding programs. This will be realized through the implementation of new DNA marker platforms and targeted breeding technologies, including genome editing.

33 thoughts on “A fully annotated wheat genome good be used to massively boost wheat crop yields”

  1. No comment on the wheat. But as for the previous article I have developed a strong aversion to EVER click on a “news” article that promises to surprise me. So I refuse to read it.

  2. No comment on the wheat. But as for the previous article I have developed a strong aversion to EVER click on a ews”” article that promises to surprise me. So I refuse to read it.”””

  3. Given the anti-gluten and anti-GMO hysteria that has possessed the minds and hearts of the voters and lawmakers in several parts across the world, it’s very unlikely we will ever see any big impact from this. Unless we stop being so foolish and easily manipulated with irrational fears. And probably the poor won’t see it either, because OMG, they also need to be saved from filthy GMOs and gluten. Hunger is of course, a secondary concern.

  4. The efficiency of photosynthesis limits the productivity of plants so all you can get is an incremental improvement in production.

  5. Given the anti-gluten and anti-GMO hysteria that has possessed the minds and hearts of the voters and lawmakers in several parts across the world it’s very unlikely we will ever see any big impact from this. Unless we stop being so foolish and easily manipulated with irrational fears.And probably the poor won’t see it either because OMG they also need to be saved from filthy GMOs and gluten. Hunger is of course a secondary concern.

  6. The efficiency of photosynthesis limits the productivity of plants so all you can get is an incremental improvement in production.

  7. It may not be that simple. There could be all sorts of other limits that the plant hits well before it hits photosynthesis limits (not talking specifically about wheat). Nutrient uptake, for example. In some cases it may be possible to increase the leaf area to get more photosynthesis. Under some special conditions, one might be able to coerce multiple harvests per year instead of just one. Etc.

  8. It may not be that simple. There could be all sorts of other limits that the plant hits well before it hits photosynthesis limits (not talking specifically about wheat). Nutrient uptake for example. In some cases it may be possible to increase the leaf area to get more photosynthesis. Under some special conditions one might be able to coerce multiple harvests per year instead of just one. Etc.

  9. It’s been in the past it has been easy to increase the “yield” of wheat but this does not mean that they increased the total amount of protein produced.

  10. Plants also only put a small proportion of their biomass into their grains. Which is the only part we care about. So there is scope there to improve.

  11. It’s been in the past it has been easy to increase the yield”” of wheat but this does not mean that they increased the total amount of protein produced.”””

  12. Plants also only put a small proportion of their biomass into their grains. Which is the only part we care about. So there is scope there to improve.

  13. What is really needed is genetic modification of both corn and wheat…possibly sovbeans….so that they produce a complete mix of amino acids. All of a sudden, the actual need for animal meat vanishes. Also and of course, less vine and more beans. That’s been the goal for a long time, and we can get more than “incrementally” better with it. Maybe extend temperature and salinity tolerances…. Oh, lots more.

  14. there is no GMO wheat, no need for it. Outside of very small hipster circles, 7.6bn humans don’t care about the gluten “problem”. But I get your point – hysteria is dangerous, especially virtue signaling dolts who force their views on others, especially developing countries.

  15. The headline doesn’t match the reality here. The IWGSC I think has done great work at sequencing the wheat genome. Not that easy to do (much more complex than human genome). Whether this will result in improved yields remains to be seen. It’s a map. It does provide growers with the tools to work on maximizing the right wheat for the right conditions. E.g., breeding the right stem solidity (solid stems for drier conditions). As for GMO, forget it, there isn’t any GMO wheat grown for consumption, anywhere. Not needed. What could result in higher yields is applying new techniques of better seed priming to the right kind of wheat strains. So the genome mapping could be very valuable there.

  16. What is really needed is genetic modification of both corn and wheat…possibly sovbeans….so that they produce a complete mix of amino acids. All of a sudden the actual need for animal meat vanishes.Also and of course less vine and more beans. That’s been the goal for a long time and we can get more than incrementally”” better with it.Maybe extend temperature and salinity tolerances….Oh”””” lots more.”””

  17. there is no GMO wheat no need for it. Outside of very small hipster circles 7.6bn humans don’t care about the gluten problem””. But I get your point – hysteria is dangerous”” especially virtue signaling dolts who force their views on others”” especially developing countries.”””

  18. The headline doesn’t match the reality here. The IWGSC I think has done great work at sequencing the wheat genome. Not that easy to do (much more complex than human genome). Whether this will result in improved yields remains to be seen. It’s a map. It does provide growers with the tools to work on maximizing the right wheat for the right conditions. E.g. breeding the right stem solidity (solid stems for drier conditions). As for GMO forget it there isn’t any GMO wheat grown for consumption anywhere. Not needed. What could result in higher yields is applying new techniques of better seed priming to the right kind of wheat strains. So the genome mapping could be very valuable there.

  19. Don’t forget rice, which mostly replaces wheat and corn for at least one or two billion people. But wheat, corn, and rice have fairly low protein content. Even if the amino acid profile is balanced, it may be difficult to supply enough of it to meet people’s dietary needs. You’d either end up consuming too much carbohydrates along with the protein, which means too many calories, which leads to obesity with all the associated health problems; or you’ll be changing the composition so much that it may taste completely differently, and may no longer be suitable for making many of the foods that are made from these grains today. Soy protein content is closer to that of meat, but not everyone likes soy.

  20. Don’t forget rice which mostly replaces wheat and corn for at least one or two billion people. But wheat corn and rice have fairly low protein content. Even if the amino acid profile is balanced it may be difficult to supply enough of it to meet people’s dietary needs. You’d either end up consuming too much carbohydrates along with the protein which means too many calories which leads to obesity with all the associated health problems; or you’ll be changing the composition so much that it may taste completely differently and may no longer be suitable for making many of the foods that are made from these grains today. Soy protein content is closer to that of meat but not everyone likes soy.

  21. Don’t forget rice, which mostly replaces wheat and corn for at least one or two billion people. But wheat, corn, and rice have fairly low protein content. Even if the amino acid profile is balanced, it may be difficult to supply enough of it to meet people’s dietary needs. You’d either end up consuming too much carbohydrates along with the protein, which means too many calories, which leads to obesity with all the associated health problems; or you’ll be changing the composition so much that it may taste completely differently, and may no longer be suitable for making many of the foods that are made from these grains today. Soy protein content is closer to that of meat, but not everyone likes soy.

  22. What is really needed is genetic modification of both corn and wheat…possibly sovbeans….so that they produce a complete mix of amino acids. All of a sudden, the actual need for animal meat vanishes.

    Also and of course, less vine and more beans. That’s been the goal for a long time, and we can get more than “incrementally” better with it.

    Maybe extend temperature and salinity tolerances….

    Oh, lots more.

  23. there is no GMO wheat, no need for it. Outside of very small hipster circles, 7.6bn humans don’t care about the gluten “problem”. But I get your point – hysteria is dangerous, especially virtue signaling dolts who force their views on others, especially developing countries.

  24. The headline doesn’t match the reality here. The IWGSC I think has done great work at sequencing the wheat genome. Not that easy to do (much more complex than human genome). Whether this will result in improved yields remains to be seen. It’s a map. It does provide growers with the tools to work on maximizing the right wheat for the right conditions. E.g., breeding the right stem solidity (solid stems for drier conditions). As for GMO, forget it, there isn’t any GMO wheat grown for consumption, anywhere. Not needed. What could result in higher yields is applying new techniques of better seed priming to the right kind of wheat strains. So the genome mapping could be very valuable there.

  25. It’s been in the past it has been easy to increase the “yield” of wheat but this does not mean that they increased the total amount of protein produced.

  26. Plants also only put a small proportion of their biomass into their grains. Which is the only part we care about. So there is scope there to improve.

  27. It may not be that simple. There could be all sorts of other limits that the plant hits well before it hits photosynthesis limits (not talking specifically about wheat). Nutrient uptake, for example. In some cases it may be possible to increase the leaf area to get more photosynthesis. Under some special conditions, one might be able to coerce multiple harvests per year instead of just one. Etc.

  28. Given the anti-gluten and anti-GMO hysteria that has possessed the minds and hearts of the voters and lawmakers in several parts across the world, it’s very unlikely we will ever see any big impact from this. Unless we stop being so foolish and easily manipulated with irrational fears.

    And probably the poor won’t see it either, because OMG, they also need to be saved from filthy GMOs and gluten. Hunger is of course, a secondary concern.

  29. No comment on the wheat. But as for the previous article I have developed a strong aversion to EVER click on a “news” article that promises to surprise me. So I refuse to read it.

Comments are closed.