Ritika, Hanshika Pal, Shavi, Naresh L Selokar and MK Singh*

Embryo Biotechnology Lab, Animal Biotechnology Division,ICAR-National Dairy Research Institute, Karna, Haryana, India

*Corresponding Author: MK Singh, Embryo Biotechnology Lab, Animal Biotechnology Division,ICAR-National Dairy Research Institute, Karna, Haryana, India.

Received: July 03, 2025; Published: July 28, 2025

Abstract

Genome editing in mammals is becoming increasingly important due to its broad applications in agriculture, veterinary science, and human healthcare. Stem cells, including embryonic stem cells (ESCs), induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs), and adult stem cells, are central to this progress, offering valuable tools for understanding development, treating genetic disorders, and improving animal traits. The generation of iPSCs in various mammalian species provides an ethical alternative to ESCs, while adult stem cells, such as mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs), are widely used for tissue regeneration and enhancing livestock health. Although genome editing technologies like CRISPR hold significant potential, their use is still limited by technical issues such as low efficiency, off-target effects, mosaicism, and the high cost of stem cell maintenance. In addition, ethical concerns, animal welfare considerations, and strict regulatory frameworks present further obstacles. Despite these challenges, ongoing research continues to refine these methods, supporting their responsible application in both medicine and animal science.

Keywords:Genome Editing; Embryonic Stem Cells; Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells; Adult Stem Cells; CRISPR Cas9

References

1. Ledesma AV and Van Eenennaam AL. “Global status of gene-edited animals for agricultural applications”. The Veterinary Journal305 (2024):
2. Popova J., et al. “Perspectives in Genome-Editing Techniques for Livestock”. Animals13 (2023):
3. Aphkhazava D., et al. “Stem cell systems and regeneration”. Georgian Scientists7 (2025): 271-319.
4. Ghazimoradi MH., et al. “A critical review on induced totipotent stem cells: Types and methods”. Stem Cell Research63 (2022): 102857.
5. Tian Z., et al. “Introduction to stem cells”. Progress in Molecular Biology and Translational Science199 (2023): 3-32.
6. Rawat N and Singh MK. “Induced pluripotent stem cell: A headway in reprogramming with a promising approach in regenerative biology”. Veterinary World10 (2017): 640.
7. Weeratunga, et al. “Induced pluripotent stem cells from domesticated ruminants and their potential for enhancing livestock production”. Frontiers in Veterinary Science10 (2023): 1129287.
8. Su Y., et al. “Induced pluripotent stem cells from farm animals”. Journal of Animal Science98 (2020): 343.
9. Al O., et al. “Stem Cells in Veterinary Medicine”. Journal of Experimental and Basic Medical Sciences 5 (2024): 134-143.
10. Popova J., et al. “Perspectives in Genome-Editing Techniques for Livestock”. Animals13 (2023):
11. Ozawa M., et al. “Gene Targeting in Mouse Embryonic Stem Cells via CRISPR/Cas9 Ribonucleoprotein (RNP)-Mediated Genome Editing”. Methods in Molecular Biology2637 (2023): 87-97.
12. Mattar CN., et al. “Embryo and Fetal Gene Editing: Technical Challenges and Progress towards Clinical Applications”. Molecular Therapy Methods & Clinical Development 32 (2024): 101229.
13. Onichtchouk D and Driever W. “Zygotic Genome Activators, Developmental Timing, and Pluripotency”. Current Topics in Developmental Biology116 (2016): 273-297.
14. Mattar CN., et al. “Embryo and Fetal Gene Editing: Technical Challenges and Progress towards Clinical Applications”. Molecular Therapy Methods and Clinical Development 32 (2024): 101229.
15. Owen JR., et al. “One-step generation of a targeted knock-in calf using the CRISPR-Cas9 system in bovine zygotes”. BMC Genomics22 (2021): 1-11.
16. Li G., et al. “Base pair editing in goat: nonsense codon introgression into FGF 5 results in longer hair”. The FEBS Journal286 (2019): 4675-4692.
17. Wang X., et al. “Multiplex gene editing via CRISPR/Cas9 exhibits desirable muscle hypertrophy without detectable off-target effects in sheep”. Scientific Reports 6 (2016): 32271.
18. Hirata, et al. “Evaluation of multiple gene targeting in porcine embryos by the CRISPR/Cas9 system using electroporation”. Molecular Biology Reports 47 (2020): 5073-5079.
19. Whitworth, et al. “Use of the CRISPR/Cas9 system to produce genetically engineered pigs from in vitro-derived oocytes and embryos”. Biology of Reproduction91 (2014): 78-81.
20. Camargo LSA., et al. “Efficient one-step knockout by electroporation of ribonucleoproteins into zona-intact bovine embryos”. Frontiers in Genetics11 (2020): 570069.
21. Scarfone, et al. “The use of induced pluripotent stem cells in domestic animals: a narrative review”. BMC Veterinary Research16 (2020): 1-18.
22. Islam, et al. “Improvement of disease resistance in livestock: application of immunogenomics and CRISPR/Cas9 technology”. Animals10 (2020): 2236.
23. Punetha, et al. “Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells in the Era of Precise Genome Editing”. Current Stem Cell Research and Therapy19 (2024): 307-315.
24. Xie F., et al. “Seamless gene correction of β-thalassemia mutations in patient-specific iPSCs using CRISPR/Cas9 and piggyBac”. Genome Research24 (2014): 1526-1533.
25. Xu X., et al. “Reversal of phenotypic abnormalities by CRISPR/Cas9-mediated gene correction in Huntington disease patient-derived induced pluripotent stem cells”. Stem Cell Reports8 (2017): 619-633.
26. Zhou , et al. “A single-chain photoswitchable CRISPR-Cas9 architecture for light-inducible gene editing and transcription”. ACS Chemical Biology13 (2018): 443-448.
27. Gundry, et al. “Highly Efficient Genome Editing of Murine and Human Hematopoietic Progenitor Cells by CRISPR/Cas9”. Cell Reports17 (2016): 1453-1461.
28. Wang R., et al. “CRISPR/Cas9-targeting of CD40 in hematopoietic stem cells limits immune activation mediated by anti-CD40”. Plos One15 (2020): 0228221.
29. Hu X., et al. “CRISPR/Cas9-mediated reversibly immortalized mouse bone marrow stromal stem cells (BMSCs) retain multipotent features of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs)”. Oncotarget8 (2017): 111847.
30. Crippa, et al. “Mesenchymal stromal cells improve the transplantation outcome of CRISPR-Cas9 gene-edited human HSPCs”. Molecular Therapy 31 (2023): 230-248.
31. Vakulskas, et al. “A high-fidelity Cas9 mutant delivered as a ribonucleoprotein complex enables efficient gene editing in human hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells”. Nature Medicine24 (2018): 1216-1224.
32. Ruetz TJ., et al. “CRISPR–Cas9 screens reveal regulators of ageing in neural stem cells”. Nature 634 (2024): 1-10.
33. Hockemeyer D and Jaenisch R. “Induced pluripotent stem cells meet genome editing”. Cell Stem Cell18 (2016): 573-586.
34. Singh B., et al. “Stem cell therapies and benefaction of somatic cell nuclear transfer cloning in COVID-19 era”. Stem Cell Research and Therapy12 (2021): 283.
35. Zhao L., et al. “Establishment of bovine expanded potential stem cells”. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 118 (2021): 2018505118.
36. Malin K., et al. “The many problems of somatic cell nuclear transfer in reproductive cloning of mammals”. Theriogenology189 (2022): 246-254.
37. Chen L., et al. “Bovine Pluripotent Stem Cells: Current Status and Prospects”. International Journal of Molecular Sciences25 (2024): 2120.
38. Salvesen HA., et al. “Tackling mosaicism in gene-edited livestock”. Frontiers in Animal Science5 (2024): 1368155.
39. Verma R., et al. “iPSC technology: an innovative tool for developing clean meat, livestock, and frozen Ark”. Animals12 (2022): 3187.

Citation

Citation: MK Singh., et al. “CRISPR Mediated Genome Editing in Mammalian Stem Cells: Advances and Applications". Acta Scientific Veterinary Sciences 7.8 (2025): 60-67.

Copyright

Copyright: © 2025 MK Singh., et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.