Genome projects and gene pools: New germplasm for plant breeding?

Crop gene pools have adapted to and sustained the demands of agricultural systems for thousands of years. Yet, very little is known about their content, distribution, architecture, or circuitry. The presumably shallow elite gene pools often continue to yield genetic gains while the exotic pools remain mostly untapped, uncharacterized, and underutilized. The concept and content of a crop’s gene pools are being changed by advancements in plant science and technology. In the first generation of plant genomics, DNA markers have refined some perceptions of genetic variation by providing a glimpse of a primary source, DNA polymorphism. The markers have provided new and more powerful ways of assessing genetic relationships, diversity, and merit by infusing genetic information for the first time in many scenarios or in a more comprehensive manner for others. As a result, crop gene pools may be supplemented through more rapid and directed methods from a greater variety of sources. Previously limited by the barriers of sexual reproduction, the native gene pools will soon be complemented by another gene pool (transgenes) and perhaps by other native exotic gene pools through comparative analyses of plants’ biological repertoire. Plant genomics will be an important force of change for crop improvement. The plant science community and crop gene pools may be united and enriched as never before. Also, the genomes and gene pools, the products of evolution and crop domestication, will be reduced and subjected to the vagaries and potential divisiveness of intellectual property considerations. Let the gains begin.

Analysis of genomic alterations in benign, atypical, and anaplastic meningiomas: Toward a genetic model of meningioma progression

Nineteen benign [World Health Organization (WHO) grade I; MI], 21 atypical (WHO grade II; MII), and 19 anaplastic (WHO grade III; MIII) sporadic meningiomas were screened for chromosomal imbalances by comparative genomic hybridization (CGH). These data were supplemented by molecular genetic analyses of selected chromosomal regions and genes. With increasing malignancy grade, a marked accumulation of genomic aberrations was observed; i.e., the numbers (mean ± SEM) of total alterations detected per tumor were 2.9 ± 0.7 for MI, 9.2 ± 1.2 for MII, and 13.3 ± 1.9 for MIII. The most frequent alteration detected in MI was loss on 22q (58%). In MII, aberrations most commonly identified were losses on 1p (76%), 22q (71%), 14q (43%), 18q (43%), 10 (38%), and 6q (33%), as well as gains on 20q (48%), 12q (43%), 15q (43%), 1q (33%), 9q (33%), and 17q (33%). In MIII, most of these alterations were found at similar frequencies. However, an increase in losses on 6q (53%), 10 (68%), and 14q (63%) was observed. In addition, 32% of MIII demonstrated loss on 9p. Homozygous deletions in the CDKN2A gene at 9p21 were found in 4 of 16 MIII (25%). Highly amplified DNA sequences were mapped to 12q13–q15 by CGH in 1 MII. Southern blot analysis of this tumor revealed amplification of CDK4 and MDM2. By CGH, DNA sequences from 17q were found to be amplified in 1 MII and 8 MIII, involving 17q23 in all cases. Despite the high frequency of chromosomal aberrations in the MII and MIII investigated, none of these tumors showed mutations in exons 5–8 of the TP53 gene. On the basis of the most common aberrations identified in the various malignancy grades, a model for the genomic alterations associated with meningioma progression is proposed.