Biomics

Appearance in the middle of 1990s the phrase "post-genomic era" was premature, since sequenced at that time (and for the most part now) the so-called complete genomes of higher organisms are, according to the current definition of the term "genome", DNA sequences of a half set of chromosomes, moreover, assembled from fragments of paired chromosomes, joined in a chaotic manner, which allows them to be considered "quasi-haploid" genomes or "quasigenomes", giving only half genetic information about a particular organism, whereas its the phenotype determines only the complete set of chromosomes, and thus for the whole set of DNA in all chromosome it is proposed to use the new term "dinome". In biological science (physico-chemical biology), it is possible to distinguish the "pre-nucleic" and "nucleic" eras, the boundary between which is the epoch-making article by F.Miescher far ahead of its time. Mischer discovered in 1869 an unknown substance rich in phosphorus, which he called "nuclein", and which became known much later as DNA. The "nucleic era", in turn, can be divided into a number of periods: "tetrad", "pre-spiral", "pre-genomic", "quasigenomic", "pangenomic", "genomic" or more precisely "dinomic", which is just beginning. Despite the reduction in the cost of whole genome sequencing and the acceleration of this process over the past couple of decades by approximately millions of times, as well as despite a noticeable increase in its accuracy, a radical change in the worldview of scientists due to the urgent need to sequence diploid genomes and assemble their nucleotide sequences in a phased/haplotyped format has not yet occurred, and number of similar dinomes including such for plants have been sequenced extremely little yet. And this requires an ideologically new approach to sequencing nuclear DNA from the entire set of chromosomes. It should be recognized that dinomes are the future due to the fact that with quasi-haploid sequencing it is often impossible to determine the cis- and transpositions of individual nucleotide substitutions and, accordingly, to establish the true protein sequences encoded by them, which can lead to a misconception about their catalytic or other features. There is also an understanding that the so-called reference or reference genomes of higher organisms do not provide complete information about the variations of nucleotide sequences inherent in different representatives of a particular species/varieties /lines in this connection, a new trend is gaining strength in the form of sequencing of pangenomes of the species (biological) or super-pangenomes of the genus (biological), which allow identifying characteristic core genes for all, as well as some additional genes inherent in some, the ratio of which in the dinome for individual samples may be almost equal. Moreover, the sequencing of pangenomes is extremely important since the information obtained can be used to improve crops to increase their yield, including for the purpose of creating cisgenic plants based on such data, under certain conditions (in the absence of foreign DNA in the form of marker and selective genes, as well as other auxiliary sequences) aren’t GMO. Knowledge of pangenomes of various lines can contribute to the production of highly heterotic hybrids of agronomically important plants, the hybrid power in which (so far theoretically) can be fixed with the help of artificial apomixis using CRISPR/Cas genomic editing technology. At the same time, the sequencing of pangenomes sheds light on the emergence of the hybrid force effect, which gives reason to put forward the "pangenomic theory of heterosis", since in this case, due to crossing over, according to unknown laws, a certain (successful) consolidation of heterogeneous genomes occurs. 

DNA, whole genome sequencing, genome, pangenome, super-pangenome, mini-pangenome, quasigenome, diploid genome, dinome, transgenic plants, cisgenic plants, intragenic plants, GMO, heterosis, pangenomic theory of heterosis

1. Abondio P, Cilli E, Luiselli D. Human Pangenomics: Promises and Challenges of a Distributed Genomic Reference. Life (Basel). 2023. V.13(6). 1360. doi: 10.3390/life13061360

2. Baymiev Al.Kh., Kuluev A.R., Matniyazov R.T., Garafutdinov R.R., Bayimiev An.Kh., Gimalov F.R., Chemeris D.A., Kuluev B.R., Chemeris A.V. The variety of quantitative estimates of the DNA content in plant nuclei and their dispersion, some terms and concepts (genome, C-value, pangenome). Biomics. 2022. V.14(1). P. 79-100. doi: 10.31301/2221-6197.bmcs.2022-6 (In Russian)

3. Barlow A, Hartmann S, Gonzalez J, Hofreiter M, Paijmans JLA. Consensify: A Method for Generating Pseudohaploid Genome Sequences from Palaeogenomic Datasets with Reduced Error Rates. Genes (Basel). 2020. V.11(1). 50. doi: 10.3390/genes11010050

4. Bayer PE, Golicz AA, Scheben A, Batley J, Edwards D. Plant pan-genomes are the new reference. Nat Plants. 2020. V.6(8). P.914-920. doi: 10.1038/s41477-020-0733-0

5. Birchler JA, Yao H, Chudalayandi S. Unraveling the genetic basis of hybrid vigor. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2006. V.103(35). P.12957-12958. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0605627103

6. Birchler JA, Yao H, Chudalayandi S, Vaiman D, Veitia RA. Heterosis. Plant Cell. 2010. V.22(7). P.2105-2112. doi: 10.1105/tpc.110.076133

7. Bouwman BAM, Crosetto N, Bienko M. The era of 3D and spatial genomics. Trends Genet. 2022. 6. S0168-9525(22)00118-4. doi: 10.1016/j.tig.2022.05.010

8. Bruskin C.A. Adjustment of the concepted apparatus in the field of gene engenireeing for the formation of product-oriented legislation. Proceedings Intern. Forum “Biotechnology state art persp”. 2020. P. 338-339. doi: 10.37747/2312-640X-2020-19-338-339 (In Russian)

9. Byrne J., Dahm R. Friedrich Miescher and the 150th anniversary of the discovery of DNA. Biomics. 2019. V.11(3). P. 249-258. DOI: 10.31301/2221-6197.bmcs.2019-23

10. Cabrera-Ponce J.L., Barraza, A., AlvarezVenegas, R. Cisgenic Crops: Major Strategies to Create Cisgenic Plants Based on Genome Editing. In: Chaurasia, A., Kole, C. (eds) Cisgenic Crops: Potential and Prospects. Springer, Cham. 2022. P. 213-235. doi:
10.1007/978-3-031-06628-3_11

11. Chan A.P., Choi Y, Rangan A, Zhang G, Podder A, Berens M, Sharma S, Pirrotte P, Byron S, Duggan D, Schork NJ. Interrogating the Human Diplome: Computational Methods, Emerging Applications, and Challenges. Methods Mol Biol. 2023. V.2590. P.1-30. doi: 10.1007/978-1-0716-2819-5_1

12. Chargaff E. What really is DNA? Remarks on the changing aspects of a scientific concept. Prog. Nucl. Acid Res. Mol. Biol. 1968. V.8. P.297-333. 10.1016/s0079-6603(08)60549-8

13. Chaurasia A., Kole C. (eds.) Cisgenic Crops: Potential and Prospects. Springer Cham. 2022. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-031-06628-3

14. Chemeris A.V., Akhunov E.D., Vakhitov V.A. DNA sequencing. Moscow. Nauka. 1999. 429 p.

15. Chemeris A.V., Aminev F.G., Garafutdinov R.R. i dr. // DNK-kriminalistika. M.: Nauka. 2022. 466 S. [DNA-criminalistics] (In Russian)

16. Chemeris A.V., Bikbulatova S.M., Chemeris D.A., Baymiev Al.K., Knyazev A.V., Kuluev B.R., Maksimov I.V. Should beware of the GMOs? On-site observers view on the hysteria around. Biomics. 2014. V.6(2). P.77-138. (In Russian)

17. Chemeris A.V., Chemeris D.A., Baymiev Al.K., Knyazev A.V., Kuluev B.R., Maksimov I.V. The fight against GMO is neolysenkoism. Biomics. 2015. V.7(1). P.1-39. (In Russian)

18. Chemeris A.V., Garafutdinov R.R., Sakhabutdinova A.R., Morozov R.A., Matniyazov R.T., Gerashchenkov G.A., Kuluev B.R., Baymiev An.Kh., Baymiev Al.Kh., Chemeris D.A. Did Neanderthals interbreed en masse with Cro-Magnons? (From a paleodilettantish point of view but taking into account the data of whole genome sequencing of modern and ancient DNA specimens as well as knowledge of the technologies used for this). Biomics. 2022. V.14(1). P. 156-179. DOI: 10.31301/2221-6197.bmcs.2022-12 (In Russian)

19. Chibage F.C., Nyoni C., Murashiki T.C., Samukange V.C., Muzerengwa R., Mahuni C., Savadye D.T. Cisgenesis and Intragenesis: Innovative Tools for Crop Improvement. In: Chaurasia, A., Kole, C. (eds.) Cisgenic Crops: Potential and Prospects. Springer, Cham. 2022. P. 43-64. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-06628-3_3

20. Christiansen L., Amini S, Zhang F, Ronaghi M, Gunderson KL, Steemers FJ. Contiguity-Preserving Transposition Sequencing (CPT-Seq) for Genome-Wide Haplotyping, Assembly, and Single-Cell ATAC-Seq. Methods Mol Biol. 2017. V.1551. P.207-221. doi:
10.1007/978-1-4939-6750-6_12

21. Collins FS, Patrinos A, Jordan E, Chakravarti A, Gesteland R, Walters L. New goals for the U.S. Human Genome Project: 1998-2003. Science. 1998. V.282(5389). P.682-689. doi: 10.1126/science.282.5389.682

22. Darwin C.R. The effects of cross and self fertilisation in the vegetable kingdom. London: John Murray. 1876. 520 P.23. Della Coletta R, Qiu Y, Ou S, Hufford MB, Hirsch CN. How the pan-genome is changing crop genomics and improvement. Genome Biol. 2021. V.22(1). 3. doi: 10.1186/s13059-020-02224-8

24. Di Donato A, Filippone E, Ercolano MR, Frusciante L. Genome Sequencing of Ancient Plant Remains: Findings, Uses and Potential Applications for the Study and Improvement of Modern Crops. Front Plant Sci. 2018. V.9. 441. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2018.00441

25. Dmitriev AA, Pushkova EN, Melnikova NV. Plant Genome Sequencing: Modern Technologies and Novel Opportunities for Breeding. Mol Biol (Mosk). 2022. V.56(4). P.531-545. doi: 10.1134/S0026893322040045

26. Domb K, Wang N, Hummel G, Liu C. Spatial Features and Functional Implications of Plant 3D Genome Organization. Annu Rev Plant Biol. 2022. V.73. P.173-200. doi: 10.1146/annurev-arplant-102720-022810

27. Dvoryaninova E.M., Bol'sheva N.L., Borhert E.V., Novakovskij R.O. i dr. Na puti k sozdaniju pangenoma l'na // Sbornik tezisov III Vserossijskoj konferencii Vysokoproizvoditel'noe sekvenirovanie v genomike (HSG-2022). Novosibirsk, 2022. S. 19. [On the way to creating a flax pangenome] (In Russian)

28. Dudziak K., Sozoniuk M., Kowalczyk K., Nowak M. Cisgenesis as a novel prospect for crop improvement. A review. Agronomy Science. 2019. V.74(2). P.7-14. DOI: 10.24326/as.2019.2.1

29. Ebler J, Haukness M, Pesout T, Marschall T, Paten B. Haplotype-aware diplotyping from noisy long reads. Genome Biol. 2019. V.20(1). 116. doi: 10.1186/s13059-019-1709-0

30. EFSA Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO). Scientific opinion addressing the safety assessment of plants developed through cisgenesis and intragenesis. EFSA Journal. 2012. V.10(2). E2561. DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2012.2561

31. EFSA GMO Panel (EFSA Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms). Statement on criteria for risk assessment of plants produced by targeted mutagenesis, cisgenesis and intragenesis. EFSA Journal. 2022. V.20(10): e07618. doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7618

32. EFSA Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO). Updated scientific opinion on plants developed through cisgenesis and intragenesis. EFSA J. 2022a. V.20(10). e07621. doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7621

33. Espinoza C, Schlechter R, Herrera D, Torres E, Serrano A, Medina C, Arce-Johnson P. Cisgenesis and intragenesis: new tools for improving crops. Biol Res. 2013. V.46(4). P.323-331. doi: 10.4067/S0716-97602013000400003

34. Forbes E, Wulff-Vester AK, Hvoslef-Eide TAK. Will genetically modified late blight resistant potatoes be the first GM crops to be approved for commercial growing in Norway? Front Plant Sci. 2023. V.14. 1137598. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2023.1137598

35. Fu H, Dooner HK. Intraspecific violation ofgenetic colinearity and its implications in maize. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2002. V.99(14). P.9573-9578. doi: 10.1073/pnas.132259199

36. Gerashchenkov G.A., Chemeris D.A., Vershinina Z.R., Gimalov F.R., Sakhabutdinova A.R., Rozhnova N.A., Mikhailova E.V., Baymiev An.Kh., Kuluev B.R., Baymiev Al.Kh., Chemeris A.V. The Genius of Gregor Mendel and the genome of the first geneticist. Biomics. 2023. V.15(2). P.96-138. DOI: 10.31301/2221-6197.bmcs.2023-13 (In Russian)

37. Golicz AA, Bayer PE, Barker GC et al. The pangenome of an agronomically important crop plant Brassica oleracea. Nat Commun. 2016. V.7. 13390. doi: 10.1038/ncomms13390

38. Gowen J.W. (ed.) Heterosis. Ames, Iowa: Iowa State College Press. 1952. 552 P.

39. Green E.D., Gunter C., Biesecker L.G. et al. Strategic vision for improving human health at The Forefront of Genomics. Nature. 2020. V.586(7831). P.683-692. doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2817-4

40. He G, He H, Deng XW. Epigenetic variations in plant hybrids and their potential roles in heterosis. J Genet Genomics. 2013. V.40(5). P.205-210. doi: 10.1016/j.jgg.2013.03.011

41. Hirsch CN, Foerster JM, Johnson JM. Et al. Insights into the maize pan-genome and pantranscriptome. Plant Cell. 2014. V.26(1). P.121-135. doi: 10.1105/tpc.113.119982

42. Hameed A, Poznanski P, Nadolska-Orczyk A, Orczyk W. Graph Pangenomes Track Genetic Variants for Crop Improvement. Int J Mol Sci. 2022. V.23(21). 13420. doi: 10.3390/ijms232113420

43. Herschel J.F.W. A Preliminary Discourse on the Study of Natural Philosophy. 1830. 372 P.

44. Holme IB, Wendt T, Holm PB. Intragenesis and cisgenesis as alternatives to transgenic crop development. Plant Biotechnol J. 2013. V.11(4). P.395-407. doi: 10.1111/pbi.12055

45. Hou H, Atlihan N, Lu ZX. New biotechnology enhances the application of cisgenesis in plant breeding. Front Plant Sci. 2014. V.5. 389. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2014.00389

46. Hu H, Yu F. A CRISPR/Cas9-Based System with Controllable Auto-Excision Feature Serving Cisgenic Plant Breeding and Beyond. Int J Mol Sci. 2022. V.23(10). 5597. doi: 10.3390/ijms23105597

47. Hufford MB, Seetharam AS, Woodhouse MR. et al. De novo assembly, annotation, and comparative analysis of 26 diverse maize genomes. Science. 2021. V.373(6555). P.655-662. doi: 10.1126/science.abg5289

48. Jacobsen E, Schouten HJ. Cisgenesis strongly improves introgression breeding and induced translocation breeding of plants. Trends Biotechnol. 2007. V.25(5). P.219-223. doi: 10.1016/j.tibtech.2007.03.008

49. Jander G, Norris SR, Rounsley SD, Bush DF, Levin IM, Last RL. Arabidopsis map-based cloning in the post-genome era. Plant Physiol. 2002. V.129(2). P.440-450. doi: 10.1104/pp.003533

50. Jarvis ED, Formenti G, Rhie A et al. Human Pangenome Reference Consortium. Semi-automated assembly of high-quality diploid human reference genomes. Nature. 2022. V.611(7936). P.519-531. doi: 10.1038/s41586-022-05325-5

51. Jin X., Du, H., Zhu, C. et al. Haplotype-resolved genomes of wild octoploid progenitors illuminate genomic diversifications from wild relatives to cultivated strawberry. Nat. Plants. 2023. V.9. P. 1252–1266. DOI: 10.1038/s41477-023-01473-2

52. Jin M, Liu H, He C, Fu J, Xiao Y, Wang Y, Xie W, Wang G, Yan J. Maize pan-transcriptome provides novel insights into genome complexity and quantitative trait variation. Sci Rep. 2016. V.6. 18936. doi: 10.1038/srep18936

53. Jerkovic I, Cavalli G. Understanding 3D genome organization by multidisciplinary methods. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2021. V.22(8). P.511-528. doi: 10.1038/s41580-021-00362-w

54. Jochemsen H., Schouten H.J. Ethische beoordeling van genetische modificatie. P. 88–95. In: Jochemsen H (ed.) Toetsen en Begrenzen. Een Ethische en Politieke Beoordeling van de Moderne Biotechnologie. Buijten and Schipperheijn, Amsterdam, 2000

55. Kaeppler S. Heterosis: Many Genes, Many Mechanisms—End the Search for an Undiscovered Unifying Theory. International Scholarly Research Notices. 2012. V.2012, Article ID 682824. doi: 10.5402/2012/682824

56. Karetnikov D.I. Sborka, annotacija i analiz tetraploidnogo pangenoma Solanum tuberosum // Materialy 60-j Mezhdunarodnoj nauchnoj studencheskoj konferencii. Novosibirsk, 2022. S. 18. [Assembly, abstract and analysis of the tetraploid pangenome of  Solanum tuberosum] (In Russian)

57. Karetnikov D.I. Genaev M.A., Nesterov M.A., Ibragimova S.M. i dr. Rekonstrukcija i analiz pangenoma kartofelja Solanum tuberosum sortov sibirskoj selekcii // Tezisy dokladov III Mezhdunarodnoj nauchnoprakticheskoj konferencii «Kletochnaja biologija i
biotehnologija rastenij». Minsk, 2022. S.21. [Reconstruction and analysis of the potato pangenome of Solanum tuberosum varieties of Siberian breeding] (In Russian)

58. Khan AW, Garg V, Roorkiwal M, Golicz AA, Edwards D, Varshney RK. Super-Pangenome by Integrating the Wild Side of a Species for Accelerated Crop Improvement. Trends Plant Sci. 2020. V.25(2).P.148-158. doi: 10.1016/j.tplants.2019.10.012

59. Khan A., Carey SB, Serrano A, Zhang H, Hargarten H, Hale H, Harkess A, Honaas L. A phased, chromosome-scale genome of 'Honeycrisp' apple (Malus domestica). GigaByte. 2022. gigabyte69. doi: 10.46471/gigabyte.69

60. Khodorenko A.V., Krinichnaya N.V., Kas’yanenko V.A. Terms of “dominance” and “superdominance”. Heterosis theories. Selkhoz. Biol. 2005. V.40(5). P.15-22. (In Russian)

61. Khotyleva L.V., Kilchevsky A.V., Shapturenko M.N. Theoretical aspects of heterosis. Vavilov Journal of Genetics and Breeding. 2016. V.20(4). P.482-492. DOI: 10.18699/VJ16.174 (In Russian)
62. Kim, D., Bae, S., Park, J. et al. Digenome-seq: genome-wide profiling of CRISPR-Cas9 off-target effects in human cells. Nat Methods. 2015. V.12. P. 237–243. doi: 10.1038/nmeth.3284

63. Kölreuter J. Uchenie o pole i gibridizacii rastenij // OGIZ – Sel'hozgiz. M., L. 1940. 246 S. [The doctrine of the field and hybridization of plants] (In Russian)

64. Kong W, Jiang M, Wang Y, Chen S, Zhang S, Lei W, Chai K, Wang P, Liu R, Zhang X. Pantranscriptome assembly combined with multiple association analysis provides new insights into the regulatory network of specialized metabolites in the tea plant Camellia sinensis. Hortic Res. 2022. 9:uhac100. doi: 10.1093/hr/uhac100

65. Koren S, Rhie A, Walenz BP, Dilthey AT, Bickhart DM, Kingan SB, Hiendleder S, Williams JL, Smith TPL, Phillippy AM. De novo assembly of haplotype-resolved genomes with trio binning. Nat Biotechnol. 2018. V. 22. 10.1038/nbt.4277. doi: 10.1038/nbt.4277

66. Kuluev B.R., Baymiev An.Kh., Gerashchenkov G.A., Yunusbaev U.B., Garafutdinov R.R., Alekseev Ya.I., Baymiev Al.Kh., Chemeris A.V. One hundred years of haploid genomes. Now time comes for diploid genomes. Biomics. 2020. Vol. 12(4). P. 411-434. DOI: 10.31301/2221-6197.bmcs.2020-33 (In Russian)

67. Kuluev B.R., Gumerova G.R., Mikhaylova E.V., Gerashchenkov G.A., Rozhnova N.A., Vershinina Z.R., Khyazev A.V., Matniyazov R.T., Baymiev A.K., Chemeris A.V. Delivery of CRISPR/Cas components into higher plant cells for genome editing // Russian Journal of Plant Physiology. 2019. Т. 66. № 5. С. 694-706. doi: 10.1134/S102144371905011X

68. Lai J, Li R, Xu X et al. Genome-wide patterns of genetic variation among elite maize inbred lines. Nat Genet. 2010. V.42(11). P.1027-1030. doi: 10.1038/ng.684

69. Lam H.M., Xu X., Liu X. et al. Resequencing of 31 wild and cultivated soybean genomes identifies patterns of genetic diversity and selection. Nat Genet. 2010. V.42. P.1053–1059. doi: 10.1038/ng.715

70. Lamalakshmi Devi E., Chongtham S.K. Holeyachi P., Kousar N., Singh M., Behera C., Telem R.S., Singh N.B., Wani S.H. Cisgenesis and Intragenesis: Twin Sisters for Crop Improvement. Res. J. Agriculture & Forestry Sci. 2013. V.1(10). P.22-26.

71. Lander ES, Linton LM, Birren B, et al. International Human Genome Sequencing Consortium. Initial sequencing and analysis of the human genome. Nature. 2001. V.409(6822). P.860-921. doi:  10.1038/35057062

72. Lederberg J., McCray A.T. 'Ome Sweet 'Omics - A Genealogical Treasury of Words. Scientist. 2001. V.15(7). P.8.

73. Lee JS, Jahani M, Huang K, Mandel JR, Marek LF, Burke JM, Langlade NB, Owens GL, Rieseberg LH. Expression complementation of gene presence/absence polymorphisms in hybrids contributes importantly to heterosis in sunflower. J Adv Res. 2022. V.42. P.83-98. doi: 10.1016/j.jare.2022.04.008

74. Levy S., Sutton G, Ng PC et al. The diploid genome sequence of an individual human. PLoS Biol. 2007. V.5(10). e254. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.0050254

75. Li N, He Q, Wang J et al. Building the sequence map of the human pan-genome. Nat Biotechnol. 2010. V.28(1). P.57-63. doi: 10.1038/nbt.1596

76. Li Z, Jiang F, Gao J et al. Super-pangenome analyses highlight genomic diversity and structural variation across wild and cultivated tomato species. Nat Genet. 2023. V.55(5). P.852-860. doi: 10.1038/s41588-023-01340-y

77. Li W., Liu J., Zhang H. et al. Plant pangenomics: recent advances, new challenges, and roads ahead. J Genet Genomics. 2022. V.49(9). P.833-846. doi: 10.1016/j.jgg.2022.06.004

78. Liao WW, Asri M, Ebler J. et al. A draft human pangenome reference. Nature. 2023. V.617(7960). P.312-324. doi: 10.1038/s41586-023-05896-x

79. Liu Y, Tian Z. Super graph-based pan-genome: Bringing rice functional genomic study into a new dawn. Mol Plant. 2022. V.15(9). P.1409-1411. doi: 10.1016/j.molp.2022.07.005

80. Liu W, Zhang Y, He H, He G, Deng XW. From hybrid genomes to heterotic trait output: Challenges and opportunities. Curr Opin Plant Biol. 2022. V.66. 102193. doi: 10.1016/j.pbi.2022.102193

81. Mao J, Wang Y, Wang B et al. High-quality haplotype-resolved genome assembly of cultivated octoploid strawberry. Hortic Res. 2023. V.10(1). uhad002. doi: 10.1093/hr/uhad002

82. Matveeva T.V. Not exactly transgenic plants. Zaschchita rasteniy. 2016. No.3(89). P.106-108. (In Russian)

83. Mendel G. Versuche über Pflanzen-Hybriden. Verhandlungen des Naturforschenden Vereins zu Brünn. 1866. V.4. P. 3-47

84. Menzel M.Y. A Cytological Method for Genome Analysis in Gossypium. Genetics. 1955. V.40. P.214-223.

85. Michael T.P., VanBuren R. Building nearcomplete plant genomes. Curr Opin Plant Biol. 2020 V.54. P.26-33. doi: 10.1016/j.pbi.2019.12.009

86. Miga K.H., Wang T. The Need for a Human Pangenome Reference Sequence. Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet. 2021. V.22. P.81-102. doi: 10.1146/annurevgenom-120120-081921

87. Mohanta TK, Mishra AK, Al-Harrasi A. The 3D Genome: From Structure to Function. Int J Mol Sci. 2021. V.22(21). 11585. doi: 10.3390/ijms222111585

88. Montenegro J.D., Golicz AA, Bayer PE, Hurgobin B, Lee H, Chan CK, Visendi P, Lai K, Doležel J, Batley J, Edwards D. The pangenome of hexaploid bread wheat. Plant J. 2017. V.90(5). P.1007-1013. doi: 10.1111/tpj.13515

89. Morgante M, De Paoli E, Radovic S. Transposable elements and the plant pan-genomes. Curr Opin Plant Biol. 2007 Apr;10(2):149-55. doi: 10.1016/j.pbi.2007.02.001

90. Naithani S, Deng CH, Sahu SK, Jaiswal P. Exploring Pan-Genomes: An Overview of Resources and Tools for Unraveling Structure, Function, and Evolution of Crop Genes and Genomes. Biomolecules. 2023. V.13(9). 1403. doi: 10.3390/biom13091403

91. Nielsen KM. Transgenic organisms--time for conceptual diversification? Nat Biotechnol. 2003. V.21(3). P.227-228. doi: 10.1038/nbt0303-227 92. Nowak R. Entering the postgenome era. Science. 1995. V.270. P.368-371.

93. Ouyang W, Xiong D, Li G, Li X. Unraveling the 3D Genome Architecture in Plants: Present and Future. Mol Plant. 2020. V.13(12). P.1676-1693. doi: 10.1016/j.molp.2020.10.002

94. Pardy F., Hynst J., Fialová D., Brzobohatá K., Hejtmánek L., Pospishilová S. Reconstructing the genome of Gregor Johann Mendel using state-of-the-art molecular and bioinformatics tools. Folia Mendeliana. 2022. V.58(1). P.53-60.

95. Petek M, Zagorščak M, Ramšak Ž, Sanders S, Tomaž Š, Tseng E, Zouine M, Coll A, Gruden K. Cultivar-specific transcriptome and pan-transcriptome reconstruction of tetraploid potato. Sci Data. 2020. V.7(1). 249. doi: 10.1038/s41597-020-00581-4 

96. Petereit J, Bayer PE, Thomas WJW, Tay Fernandez CG, Amas J, Zhang Y, Batley J, Edwards D. Pangenomics and Crop Genome Adaptation in a Changing Climate. Plants (Basel). 2022. V.11(15). 1949. doi: 10.3390/plants11151949

97. Piet Q, Droc G, Marande W et al. A chromosome-level, haplotype-phased Vanilla planifolia genome highlights the challenge of partial endoreplication for accurate whole-genome assembly. Plant Commun. 2022. V.3(5). 100330. doi: 10.1016/j.xplc.2022.100330

98. Podevin N, Devos Y, Davies HV, Nielsen KM. Transgenic or not? No simple answer! New biotechnology-based plant breeding techniques and the regulatory landscape. EMBO Rep. 2012. V.13(12). P.1057-1061. doi: 10.1038/embor.2012.168

99. Pronozin A.Yu., Bragina M.K., Salina E.A. Crop pangenomes. Vavilov Journal of Genetics and Breeding. 2021. V.25(1). P:57-63. DOI 10.18699/VJ21.007

100. Qi W, Lim YW, Patrignani A et al. The haplotype-resolved chromosome pairs of a heterozygous diploid African cassava cultivar reveal novel pan-genome and allele-specific transcriptome features. Gigascience. 2022. 11. giac028. doi: 10.1093/gigascience/giac028 

101. Raza A, Bohra A, Garg V, Varshney RK. Back to wild relatives for future breeding through superpangenome. Mol Plant. 2023. V.16(9). P.1363-1365. doi: 10.1016/j.molp.2023.08.005

102. Razduyev A.V., Simonova E.A. — Specificity of term formation in the fields of Genetics and Genetic Engineering (based on the English, Spanish and Russian language materials). SENTENTIA. European Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences. 2020. No 1. P.65 - 75. DOI: 10.25136/1339-3057.2020.1.31882

103. Roach M.J., ohnson DL, Bohlmann J, van Vuuren HJJ, Jones SJM, Pretorius IS, Schmidt SA, Borneman AR. Population sequencing reveals clonal diversity and ancestral inbreeding in the grapevine cultivar Chardonnay. PLoS Genet. 2018. V.14(11). e1007807. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1007807

104. Roberts N.J., Vogelstein JT, Parmigiani G, Kinzler KW, Vogelstein B, Velculescu VE. The predictive capacity of personal genome sequencing. Sci Transl Med. 2012. V.4(133). 133ra58. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.3003380

105. Rommens CM, Haring MA, Swords K, Davies HV, Belknap WR. The intragenic approach as a new extension to traditional plant breeding. Trends Plant Sci. 2007. V.12(9). P.397-403. doi: 10.1016/j.tplants.2007.08.001

106. Rommens CM, Humara JM, Ye J, Yan H, Richael C, Zhang L, Perry R, Swords K. Crop improvement through modification of the plant's own genome. Plant Physiol. 2004. V.135(1). P.421-431. doi: 10.1104/pp.104.040949

107. Rousselière D, Rousselière S. Is biotechnology (more) acceptable when it enables a reduction in phytosanitary treatments? A European comparison of the acceptability of transgenesis and cisgenesis. PLoS One. 2017. V.12(9). e0183213. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0183213

108. Schaart JG, Mehli L, Schouten HJ. Quantification of allele-specific expression of a gene encoding strawberry polygalacturonase-inhibiting protein (PGIP) using Pyrosequencing. Plant J. 2005. V.41(3). P.493-500. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-313X.2004.02299.x

109. Schnable PS, Ware D, Fulton RS et al. The B73 maize genome: complexity, diversity, and dynamics. Science. 2009. V.326(5956). P.1112-1125. doi: 10.1126/science.1178534

110. Schouten, H.J. The Origin of Cisgenesis, and Its Evolving Definition. In: Chaurasia, A., Kole, C. (eds.) Cisgenic Crops: Potential and Prospects. Springer, Cham. 2022. P.1-12. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-06628-3_1

111. Schouten HJ, Krens FA, Jacobsen E. Do cisgenic plants warrant less stringent oversight? Nat Biotechnol. 2006. V.24(7). P. 753. doi: 10.1038/nbt0706-753 112. Schouten HJ, Krens FA, Jacobsen E. Cisgenic plants are similar to traditionally bred plants: international regulations for genetically modified organisms should be altered to exempt cisgenesis. EMBO Rep. 2006. V.7(8). P.750-753. doi: 10.1038/sj.embor.7400769

113. Schouten HJ, Jacobsen E. Cisgenesis and intragenesis, sisters in innovative plant breeding. Trends Plant Sci. 2008. V.13(6). P.260-261. doi: 10.1016/j.tplants.2008.04.005

114. Schwessinger B., Rathjen J.P. Extraction of High Molecular Weight DNA from Fungal Rust Spores for Long Read Sequencing. Methods Mol Biol. 2017. V.1659. P.49-57. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4939-7249-4_5

115. Shang L, Li X, He H et al. A super pan-genomic landscape of rice. Cell Res. 2022. V.32(10). P.878-896. doi: 10.1038/s41422-022-00685-z

116. Shi J, Tian Z, Lai J, Huang X. Plant pangenomics and its applications. Mol Plant. 2023 Jan 2;16(1):168-186. doi: 10.1016/j.molp.2022.12.009

117. Shull G.H. Duplicate genes for capsule-form in Bursa bursa-pastoris. Zeitschrift für induktive Abstammungs- und Vererbungslehre. 1914. V.12. P. 97–149. doi: 10.1007/BF01837282

118. Shull G.H. What is “heterosis”? Genetics. 1948. V.33. P.439-446. doi: 10.1093/genetics/33.5.439

119. Springer NM, Ying K, Fu Y, Ji T, Yeh CT, Jia Y, Wu W, Richmond T, Kitzman J, Rosenbaum H, Iniguez AL, Barbazuk WB, Jeddeloh JA, Nettleton D, Schnable PS. Maize inbreds exhibit high levels of copy number variation (CNV) and presence/absence variation (PAV) in genome content. PLoS Genet. 2009. V.5(11). e1000734. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1000734

120. Staden R. A new computer method for the storage and manipulation of DNA gel reading data. Nucl. Acids Res. 1980. V.8. P.3673-94. doi: 10.1093/nar/8.16.3673

121. Sun S, Zhou Y, Chen J et al. Extensive intraspecific gene order and gene structural variations between Mo17 and other maize genomes. Nat Genet. 2018. V.50(9). P.1289-1295. doi: 10.1038/s41588-018-0182-0

122. Sun Y., Shang L., Zhu Q.H., Fan L., Guo L. Twenty years of plant genome sequencing: achievements and challenges. Trends Plant Sci. 2022. V.27(4). P.391-401. doi: 10.1016/j.tplants.2021.10.006

123. Takeuchi T. et al. A high-quality, haplotypephased genome reconstruction reveals unexpected haplotype diversity in a pearl oyster. DNA Res. 2022. V.29(6). dsac035. doi: 10.1093/dnares/dsac035

124. Tay Fernandez CG, Nestor BJ, Danilevicz MF, Gill M, Petereit J, Bayer PE, Finnegan PM, Batley J, Edwards D. Pangenomes as a Resource to Accelerate Breeding of Under-Utilised Crop Species. Int J Mol Sci. 2022. V.23(5). 2671. doi: 10.3390/ijms23052671

125. Telem RS, Wani SH, Singh NB, Nandini R, Sadhukhan R, Bhattacharya S, Mandal N. Cisgenics - a sustainable approach for crop improvement. Curr Genomics. 2013. V.14(7). P.468-476. doi: 10.2174/13892029113146660013

126. Tets V.V. Pangenom. Tsitilogiya. 2003. V.45(5). P.526-531. (In Russian)

127. Tettelin H., Masignani V., Cieslewicz M.J. et al. Genome analysis of multiple pathogenic isolates of Streptococcus agalactiae: implications for the microbial "pan-genome". Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2005. V.102(39). P.13950-13955. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0506758102

128. van Hove L, Gillund F. Is it only the regulatory status? Broadening the debate on cisgenic plants. Environ Sci Eur. 2017. V.29(1). 22. doi: 10.1186/s12302-017-0120-2

129. Vazquez-Vilar M, Fernandez-Del-Carmen A, Garcia-Carpintero V et al. Dually biofortified cisgenic tomatoes with increased flavonoids and branched-chain amino acids content. Plant Biotechnol J. 2023. doi: 10.1111/pbi.14163

130. Venter J.C. Multiple personal genomes await. Nature. 2010. V.464. P.676-677. doi: 10.1038/464676a 131. Venter JC, Adams MD, Myers EW et al. The sequence of the human genome. Science. 2001. V.291(5507). P.1304-1351. doi: 10.1126/science.1058040

132. Venter JC, Smith HO, Hood L. A new strategy for genome sequencing. Nature. 1996. V.381(6581). P.364-366. doi: 10.1038/381364a0

133. Vershinina Z.R., Kuluev B.R., Maksimov I.V., Mikhaylova, E.V., Gumerova G.R., Maleev G.V., Knyazev A.V., Baymiev An.Kh., Baymiev Al.Kh., Chemeris A.V. To prohibit GMOs impossible to resolve! Biomics. 2020. V.12(1). P. 80-120. DOI: 10.31301/2221-
6197.bmcs.2020-6 (In Russian)

134. Vu TV, Nguyen NT, Kim J, Hong JC, Kim JY. Prime editing: Mechanism insight and recent applications in plants. Plant Biotechnol J. 2023. doi: 10.1111/pbi.14188

135. Walsh J.B., Marks J. Sequencing the human genome. Nature. 1986. V.322. P. 590. 136. Wang J, Yang W, Zhang S et al. A pangenome analysis pipeline provides insights into functional gene identification in rice. Genome Biol. 2023. V.24(1). 19. doi: 10.1186/s13059-023-02861-9

137. Wang S, Qian YQ, Zhao RP, Chen LL, Song JM. Graph-based pan-genomes: increased opportunities in plant genomics. J Exp Bot. 2023. V.74(1). P.24-39. doi: 10.1093/jxb/erac412

138. Wang T., Antonacci-Fulton L., Howe K. et al. The Human Pangenome Project: a global resource to map genomic diversity. Nature. 2022. V.604(7906). P.437-446. doi: 10.1038/s41586-022-04601-8

139. Wheeler D.A., Srinivasan M., Egholm M. et al. The complete genome of an individual by massively parallel DNA sequencing. Nature. 2008. V.452(7189). P.872-876. doi: 10.1038/nature06884

140. Winkler H. 7. Über Parthenogenesis bei Wikstroemia indica (L.) C. A. Mey. Annales du Jardin botanique de Buitenzorg. 1906. V.20. P. 208-276.

141. Winkler H. Verbreitung und Ursache der Parthenogenesis im Pflanzen- und Tierreiche. 1920. Jena: Gustav Fischer Verlag. 250 s.

142. Wu Q, Tong W, Zhao H, Ge R, Li R, Huang J, Li F, Wang Y, Mallano AI, Deng W, Wang W, Wan X, Zhang Z, Xia E. Comparative transcriptomic analysis unveils the deep phylogeny and secondary metabolite evolution of 116 Camellia plants. Plant J. 2022. V.111(2). P.406-421. doi: 10.1111/tpj.15799

143. Wu S, Sun H, Gao L, Branham S, McGregor C, Renner SS, Xu Y, Kousik C, Wechter WP, Levi A, Fei Z. A Citrullus genus super-pangenome reveals extensive variations in wild and cultivated watermelons and sheds light on watermelon evolution and domestication. Plant Biotechnol J. 2023. V.21(10). P.1926-1928. doi: 10.1111/pbi.14120

144. Xiong J, Hu F, Ren J, Huang Y, Liu C, Wang K. Synthetic apomixis: the beginning of a new era. Curr Opin Biotechnol. 2023. V.79. 102877. doi: 10.1016/j.copbio.2022.102877

145. Xu S, He Z, Zhang Z et al. The origin, diversification and adaptation of a major mangrove clade (Rhizophoreae) revealed by whole-genome sequencing. Natl Sci Rev. 2017. V.4(5). P.721-734. doi: 10.1093/nsr/nwx065

146. Yeo M., Mauricio IL, Messenger LA et al. Multilocus sequence typing (MLST) for lineage assignment and high resolution diversity studies in Trypanosoma cruzi. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2011. V.5(6).e1049. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0001049

147. Yu D, Gu X, Zhang S, Dong S, Miao H, Gebretsadik K, Bo K. Molecular basis of heterosis and related breeding strategies reveal its importance in vegetable breeding. Hortic Res. 2021. V.8(1). 120. doi: 10.1038/s41438-021-00552-9

148. Zhang Y, Fu J, Wang K et al. The telomere-totelomere gap-free genome of four rice parents reveals SV and PAV patterns in hybrid rice breeding. Plant Biotechnol J. 2022. V.20(9). P.1642-1644. doi: 10.1111/pbi.13880

149. Zhuang Y, Wang X, Li X et al. Phylogenomics of the genus Glycine sheds light on polyploid evolution and life-strategy transition. Nat Plants. 2022. V.8(3). P.233-244. doi: 10.1038/s41477-022-01102-4

150. Zubov V.V., Chemeris D.A., Vasilov R.G., Kurochkin V.E., Alekseev Ya.I. Brief history of highthroughput nucleic acid sequencing methods. Biomics. 2021. V.13(1). P. 27-46. DOI: 10.31301/2221-6197.bmcs.2021-4 (In Russian)