Implementación de la tecnología CRISPR-Cas para el tratamiento de enfermedades en la acuicultura de peces: Revisión sistemática

Mighelangelo Santiago Arcila Quintero; Sara Michel Morales Polo

doi:10.17533/ udea.hm.v15n1a04

Autores/as

Mighelangelo Santiago Arcila Quintero Universidad de Antioquia https://orcid.org/0009-0004-8732-0409
Sara Michel Morales Polo Estudiante de pregrado de la escuela de microbiología

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17533/%20udea.hm.v15n1a04

Palabras clave:

acuicultura, control, crispr-cas, diagn´óstico temprano, enfermedades de los peces, tratamiento

Resumen

Introducción: Aproximadamente el 50% de la pérdida en la producción acuícola destinada al consumo humano se debe a enfermedades causadas por patógenos. Muchos tratamientos tradicionales para estas enfermedades están prohibidos debido a sus efectos negativos en el medio ambiente, la salud del consumidor o el crecimiento de los peces. La modificación genética, en particular mediante la tecnología CRISPR-Cas, ofrece una solución prometedora. Esta tecnología permite realizar modificaciones genéticas y detectar secuencias específicas con una precisión superior a otros métodos. Objetivo: Describir las aplicaciones de la tecnología CRISPR-Cas para el tratamiento de enfermedades de peces en la industria de la acuicultura. Metodología: Se realizó una búsqueda bibliográfica implementando los términos aquaculture, CRISPR, CRISPR-Cas, CRISPR-Cas Systems, diseases, fish disease, treatment, treatments, control en únicamente artículos originales publicados entre 2014 y 2024 en inglés, la búsqueda se realizó en ScienceDirect, Scopus y Google Scholar. Resultados: Los resultados muestran que China y Estados Unidos son líderes en este campo. Los patógenos más frecuentes en los estudios son virales, y los peces más estudiados son Ictalurus punctatus y Salmo salar. La aplicación más relevante es el diagnóstico de enfermedades virales y bacterianas mediante fluorescencia. CRISPR-Cas se está consolidando como una herramienta crucial para el diagnóstico temprano de enfermedades en peces. Su uso está en expansión para abordar tanto enfermedades bacterianas como virales, debido a la dificultad en su tratamiento y control. Conclusiones: Se requieren más investigaciones para confirmar su efectividad y sostenibilidad como alternativa viable para el tratamiento de enfermedades en la acuicultura.

|Resumen

= 9 veces | PDF

= 10 veces|

Descargas

Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.

Biografía del autor/a

Mighelangelo Santiago Arcila Quintero, Universidad de Antioquia

Estudiante de la escuela de microbiología

Citas

1.Assefa A, Abunna F. Maintenance of Fish Health in Aquaculture: Review of Epidemiological Approaches for Prevention and Control of Infectious Disease of Fish. Veterinary Medicine International 2018;2018:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/5432497.

2.Subasinghe R, Reantaso M, McGladdery S. Aquaculture Development, Health and Wealth n.d. https://www.fao.org/4/ab412e/ab412e09.htm.

3.Ikeogu FC, Nsofor CI, Ikpeze OO. A review of risk factors for fish diseases in aquatic environments. Proceedings of the 6th National Conference of the Society for Occupational Safety and Environmental Health (SOSEH) 2010:199–204.

4.Alfred O, Shaahu A, Orban DA, Egwenomhe M. Understanding The Basic Concept Of Diseases In Aquaculture. IRE Journals 2020;4:83–91.

5.Tort L. Stress and immune modulation in fish. Developmental & Comparative Immunology 2011;35:1366–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dci.2011.07.002.

6.Lieke T, Meinelt T, Hoseinifar SH, Pan B, Straus DL, Steinberg CEW. Sustainable aquaculture requires environmental‐friendly treatment strategies for fish diseases. Reviews in Aquaculture 2020;12:943–65. https://doi.org/10.1111/raq.12365.

7.Estadísticas de pesca y acuicultura 2014. Fisheries and Aquaculture 2016. https://www.fao.org/fishery/en/publication/27459.

8.Gutási A, Hammer SE, El-Matbouli M, Saleh M. Review: Recent Applications of Gene Editing in Fish Species and Aquatic Medicine. Animals 2023;13:1250. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13071250.

9.Merino G, Barange M, Blanchard JL, Harle J, Holmes R, Allen I, et al. Can marine fisheries and aquaculture meet fish demand from a growing human population in a changing climate? Global Environmental Change 2012;22:795–806. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2012.03.003.

10.Belmar R, Alfonso V. The CRISPR-Cas systems of microbial defense. Publicaciones Didácticas 2018;96:629–50.

11.Ford K, McDonald D, Mali P. Functional Genomics via CRISPR–Cas. Journal of Molecular Biology 2019;431:48–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmb.2018.06.034.

12.Terns MP, Terns RM. CRISPR-based adaptive immune systems. Current Opinion in Microbiology 2011;14:321–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mib.2011.03.005.

13.Tasan I, Zhao H. Targeting Specificity of the CRISPR/Cas9 System. ACS Synth Biol 2017;6:1609–13. https://doi.org/10.1021/acssynbio.7b00270.

14.Nambiar TS, Baudrier L, Billon P, Ciccia A. CRISPR-based genome editing through the lens of DNA repair. Molecular Cell 2022;82:348–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2021.12.026.

15.Li Y, Wang H, Zhang L, Ding Z, Xu S, Gu Z, et al. Efficient Genome Editing in Bacillus licheniformis Mediated by a Conditional CRISPR/Cas9 System. Microorganisms 2020;8:754. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms8050754.

16.Varshney GK, Pei W, LaFave MC, Idol J, Xu L, Gallardo V, et al. High-throughput gene targeting and phenotyping in zebrafish using CRISPR/Cas9. Genome Res 2015;25:1030–42. https://doi.org/10.1101/gr.186379.114.

17.Mejías Rodríguez I. Aspectos bioéticos de la edición genética. master thesis. Universidad Católica de Valencia, 2016.

18.Makarova KS, Haft DH, Barrangou R, Brouns SJJ, Charpentier E, Horvath P, et al. Evolution and classification of the CRISPR–Cas systems. Nat Rev Microbiol 2011;9:467–77. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrmicro2577.

19.Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. Declaración PRISMA 2020: una guía actualizada para la publicación de revisiones sistemáticas. Revista Española de Cardiología 2021;74:790–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.recesp.2021.06.016.

20.Robinson EH, Li MH. Channel catfish, Ictalurus punctatus , nutrition in the United States: A historical perspective. J World Aquaculture Soc 2020;51:93–118. https://doi.org/10.1111/jwas.12657.

21.Wise AL, LaFrentz BR, Kelly AM, Liles MR, Griffin MJ, Beck BH, et al. The Infection Dynamics of Experimental Edwardsiella ictaluri and Flavobacterium covae Coinfection in Channel Catfish (Ictalurus punctatus). Pathogens 2023;12:462. https://doi.org/10.3390/pathogens12030462.

22.Gross MR. One species with two biologies: Atlantic salmon ( Salmo salar ) in the wild and in aquaculture. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 1998;55:131–44. https://doi.org/10.1139/d98-024.

23.Setyawan A, Zuo S, Kania P, Buchmann K. Endoparasitic helminths in Baltic salmon Salmo salar: ecological implications. Dis Aquat Org 2019;135:193–9. https://doi.org/10.3354/dao03391.

24.Moran D, Fofana A. An economic evaluation of the control of three notifiable fish diseases in the United Kingdom. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 2007;80:193–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed.2007.02.009.

25.Coogan M, Alston V, Su B, Khalil K, Elaswad A, Khan M, et al. CRISPR/Cas-9 induced knockout of myostatin gene improves growth and disease resistance in channel catfish (Ictalurus punctatus). Aquaculture 2022;557:738290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2022.738290.

26.Wang J, Su B, Xing D, Bruce TJ, Li S, Bern L, et al. Generation of Eco-Friendly and Disease-Resistant Channel Catfish (Ictalurus punctatus) Harboring the Alligator Cathelicidin Gene via CRISPR/Cas9 Engineering. Engineering 2024;39:273–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eng.2023.12.005.

27.Wang J, Su B, Bruce TJ, Wise AL, Zeng P, Cao G, et al. CRISPR/Cas9 microinjection of transgenic embryos enhances the dual-gene integration efficiency of antimicrobial peptide genes for bacterial resistance in channel catfish, Ictalurus punctatus. Aquaculture 2023;575:739725. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2023.739725.

28.Simora RM. Transgene Insertion of Cathelicidin Gene in Channel Catfish Ictalurus punctatus using CRISPR/Cas9 Knock-in Technology and Cathelicidin Activity Against Catfish Pathogens 2020.

29.Ma J, Fan Y, Zhou Y, Liu W, Jiang N, Zhang J, et al. Efficient resistance to grass carp reovirus infection in JAM-A knockout cells using CRISPR/Cas9. Fish & Shellfish Immunology 2018;76:206–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsi.2018.02.039.

30.Wang J, Su B, Al-Armanazi J, Wise AL, Shang M, Bern L, et al. Integration of alligator cathelicidin gene via two CRISPR/Cas9-assisted systems enhances bacterial resistance in blue catfish, Ictalurus furcatus. Aquaculture 2023;576:739860. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2023.739860.

31.Zhang C, Tao Z, Ye H, Wang P, Jiang M, Benard K, et al. Development and validation of a CRISPR/Cas12a-based platform for rapid and sensitive detection of the large yellow croaker iridovirus. Aquaculture 2024;584:740658. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2024.740658.

32.Sukonta T, Senapin S, Meemetta W, Chaijarasphong T. CRISPR‐based platform for rapid, sensitive and field‐deployable detection of scale drop disease virus in Asian sea bass ( Lates calcarifer ). Journal of Fish Diseases 2022;45:107–20. https://doi.org/10.1111/jfd.13541.

33.Wang Q, Liu Y, Han C, Yang M, Huang F, Duan X, et al. Efficient RNA Virus Targeting via CRISPR/CasRx in Fish. J Virol 2021;95:e00461-21. https://doi.org/10.1128/JVI.00461-21.

34.Majeed M, Soliman H, Kumar G, El-Matbouli M, Saleh M. Editing the genome of Aphanomyces invadans using CRISPR/Cas9. Parasites Vectors 2018;11:554. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13071-018-3134-8.

35.Guang M, Zhang Q, Chen R, Li H, Xu M, Wu X, et al. Rapid and facile detection of largemouth bass ranavirus with CRISPR/Cas13a. Fish & Shellfish Immunology 2024;148:109517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsi.2024.109517.

36.Shanaka KASN, Jung S, Madushani KP, Wijerathna HMSM, Neranjan Tharuka MD, Kim M-J, et al. Generation of viperin-knockout zebrafish by CRISPR/Cas9-mediated genome engineering and the effect of this mutation under VHSV infection. Fish & Shellfish Immunology 2022;131:672–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsi.2022.10.040.

37.Strømsnes TAH. Targeted gene editing of an infectious salmon anemia (ISA)-relevant gene in salmonids cells using the CRISPR/Cas9 Ribonucleoprotein complex. Master thesis. UiT The Arctic University of Norway, 2022.

38.Kurup AR. CRISPR/Cas9 based knockout of genes in SHK-1 cell line, to investigate their role in development of Infectious salmon anemia virus infection. Master thesis. Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Ås, 2022.

39.Kim MS, Kim KH. Effect of CRISPR/Cas9-mediated knockout of either Mx1 or ISG15 gene in EPC cells on resistance against VHSV infection. Fish & Shellfish Immunology 2019;93:1041–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsi.2019.08.058.

40.Lv X, Cao W, Zhang H, Zhang Y, Shi L, Ye L. CE–RAA–CRISPR Assay: A Rapid and Sensitive Method for Detecting Vibrio parahaemolyticus in Seafood. Foods 2022;11:1681. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods11121681.

41.Huang R, Shi M, Luo L, Yang C, Ou M, Zhang W, et al. De novo screening of disease-resistant genes from the chromosome-level genome of rare minnow using CRISPR-cas9 random mutation. GigaScience 2021;10:giab075. https://doi.org/10.1093/gigascience/giab075.

42.Huang F, Shan J, Liang K, Yang M, Zhou X, Duan X, et al. A new method to detect red spotted grouper neuro necrosis virus (RGNNV) based on CRISPR/Cas13a. Aquaculture 2022;555:738217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2022.738217.

43.Qiu Y, Lin Z, Wang Y. Responses of fish production to fishing and climate variability in the northern South China Sea. Progress in Oceanography 2010;85:197–212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pocean.2010.02.011.

44.Pandian TJ, Marian LA. Problems and prospects of transgenic fish production. Current Science 1994;66:635–49.

45.Sundström LF, Devlin RH. Ecological implications of genetically modified fishes in freshwater fisheries, with a focus on salmonids. In: Craig JF, editor. Freshwater Fisheries Ecology. 1st ed., Wiley; 2015, p. 594–615. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118394380.ch46.

46.PREVENCION Y TRATAMIENTO DE ENFERMEDADES DE LOS PECES n.d. https://www.fao.org/fishery/static/FAO_Training/FAO_Training/General/x6709s/x6709s15.htm.

47.White CR, Davies SJ, Henry TB. Malachite Green Toxicity and Effects on Reproductive Success in Zebrafish Danio rerio. Zebrafish 2012;9:135–9. https://doi.org/10.1089/zeb.2012.0762.

48.Tacon AGJ. Trends in Global Aquaculture and Aquafeed Production: 2000–2017. Reviews in Fisheries Science & Aquaculture 2020;28:43–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/23308249.2019.1649634.

49.The ten leading countries in natural-sciences research. Nature 2020. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-01231-w.

50.Kearney M, Harris B, Hershbein B. What’s the Catch? Challenges and Opportunities of the U.S. Fishing Industry. Brookings 2014. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/whats-the-catch-challenges-and-opportunities-of-the-u-s-fishing-industry/.

51.Crespi V, New M. Ictalurus punctatus (Rafinesque, 1818) [Ictaluridae]. Cultured Aquatic Species Fact Sheets 2009. https://www.fao.org/fishery/docs/CDrom/aquaculture/I1129m/file/es/es_channelcatfish.htm.

52.Crespi V, New M. Salmo salar (Linnaeus, 1758) [Salmonidae]. Cultured Aquatic Species Fact Sheets 2009. https://www.fao.org/fishery/docs/CDrom/aquaculture/I1129m/file/en/en_atlanticsalmon.htm.

53.Scheld AM, Calhoun WR, Gilsinan CB, White SB. Market development for an invasive fish species: Blue catfish in the Chesapeake Bay, US. Fisheries Research 2024;278:107099. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fishres.2024.107099.

54.Ferdous MdA, Islam SI, Habib N, Almehmadi M, Allahyani M, Alsaiari AA, et al. CRISPR-Cas Genome Editing Technique for Fish Disease Management: Current Study and Future Perspective. Microorganisms 2022;10:2012. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms10102012.

55.Novoa B, Romero A, Mulero V, Rodríguez I, Fernández I, Figueras A. Zebrafish (Danio rerio) as a model for the study of vaccination against viral haemorrhagic septicemia virus (VHSV). Vaccine 2006;24:5806–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2006.05.015.

56.Jørgensen S, Afanasyev S, Krasnov A. Gene expression analyses in Atlantic salmon challenged with infectious salmon anemia virus reveal differences between individuals with early, intermediate and late mortality. BMC Genomics 2008;9:179. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2164-9-179.

57.Qiu M, Li P. CRISPR/Cas-based Diagnostics and Gene Therapy. BIOI 2021;2. https://doi.org/10.15212/bioi-2020-0048.

58.Waigmann E, Paoletti C, Davies H, Perry J, Kärenlampi S, Kuiper H. Risk assessment of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs). EFS2 2012;10. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2012.s1008.