Back

Rice bacterial blight resistance in Burkina Faso through genome editing: Evaluating pathogen and agro-morphological compatibility of genome-edited elite rice varieties

Kone, S.;Konate, A.;Barro, A.;Frommer, W.;Szurek, B.;Loo, E.;Wonni, I.

2026-06-26 Plant Biology
10.64898/2026.06.24.734420 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Bacterial leaf blight (BB), caused by Xanthomonas oryzae pv. oryzae (Xoo), causes yield losses exceeding 50% in affected areas, including the Bagre rice plain in Burkina Faso. Genome-edited (GEd) rice lines have been successful in tackling BB. Modifications in the Xoo virulence protein target site upstream of three SWEET susceptibility genes in two elite rice varieties, IR64 and Ciherang-Sub1, have been demonstrated to confer broad-spectrum resistance to Asian and East African Xoo strains. Here, we evaluate the potential of the GEd lines as a solution for BB management in Burkina Faso. We challenged the GEd lines against five locally collected Burkinabe Xoo strains under controlled green-house conditions and assessed their agro-morphological performance under field conditions representative of local agroecological conditions. Greenhouse pathogen assays demonstrated that GEd IR64 and Ciherang-Sub1 lines were resistant to all tested local Xoo strains across three successive generations. We identified TalC as the primary disease-causing effector in the local Xoo populations. Irrigated field trials conducted over two seasons in the Kou Valley, Burkina Faso, revealed absence of agro-morphological penalties in GEd lines compared to their parental wild-type lines. Observed trait variation was attributable to environmental fluctuations rather than genomic modifications. Collectively, our findings demonstrate that genome editing of the rice lines does not impose growth penalties, and support the suitability of GEd IR64 and Ciherang-Sub1 for large-scale adoption in Burkina Faso, pending multi-location validation and introgression into locally adapted varieties.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 11%
15.8%
2
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 5%
9.3%
3
Frontiers in Plant Science
256 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
8.2%
4
Plant Disease
23 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.2%
5
Evolutionary Applications
108 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
6.5%
6
Phytopathology®
31 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.6%
50% of probability mass above
7
Plant Biotechnology Journal
64 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
3.6%
8
G3: Genes|Genomes|Genetics
35 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.3%
9
BMC Plant Biology
57 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
2.6%
10
Pest Management Science
36 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.2%
11
The Plant Genome
57 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.6%
12
Theoretical and Applied Genetics
49 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.4%
13
BMC Genomics
406 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.4%
14
G3: Genes, Genomes, Genetics
252 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.4%
15
Plant Physiology
238 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.2%
16
Plant Direct
95 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.2%
17
Plants
43 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.2%
18
Molecular Plant Pathology
25 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.1%
19
GENETICS
483 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.1%
20
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2444 papers in training set
Top 37%
1.1%
21
Molecular Plant-Microbe Interactions®
57 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.1%
22
Communications Biology
993 papers in training set
Top 25%
1.0%
23
Journal of Experimental Botany
219 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.0%
24
New Phytologist
346 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
25
eLife
5828 papers in training set
Top 63%
0.9%
26
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 55%
0.9%
27
Horticulture Research
47 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.9%
28
International Journal of Biological Macromolecules
76 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
29
PLOS Pathogens
820 papers in training set
Top 10%
0.6%
30
PLOS Genetics
862 papers in training set
Top 13%
0.6%