Alireza Afsharifar

Prof. Alireza Afsharifar

a Plant Virology Research Center, College of Agriculture, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

17Years (2010-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
8 April 2021 in Transgenic Research
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
AGAbozar Ghorbani
Abozar Ghorbani
SHShima Hadifar
Shima Hadifar
RSRoya Salari
Roya Salari
KIKeramatollah Izadpanah
Keramatollah Izadpanah
MBMichal Burmistrz
Michal Burmistrz
GNGreg Neely
Greg Neely
Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats (CRISPRs) together with CRISPR-associated (Cas) proteins have catalysed a revolution in genetic engineering. Native CRISPR-Cas systems exist in many bacteria and archaea where they provide an adaptive immune response through sequence-specific degradation of an invading pathogen’s genome. This system has been reconfigured for use in genome editing, drug development, gene expression regulation, diagnostics, the prevention and treatment of cancers, and the treatment of genetic and infectious diseases. In recent years, CRISPR-Cas systems have been used in the diagnosis and control of viral diseases, for example, CRISPR-Cas12/13 coupled with new amplification techniques to improve the specificity of sequence-specific fluorescent probe detection. Importantly, CRISPR applications are both sensitive and specific and usually only require commonly available lab equipment. Unlike the canonical Cas9 which is guided to double-stranded DNA sites of interest, Cas13 systems target RNA sequences and thus can be employed in strategies directed against RNA viruses or for transcriptional silencing. Many challenges remain for these approach, including issues with specificity and the requirement for better mammalian delivery systems. In this review, we summarize the applications of CRISPR-Cas systems in controlling mammalian viral infections. Following necessary improvements, it is expected that CRISPR-Cas systems will be used effectively for such applications in the future.

24 April 2025 in Applied Food Research
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
AGAli Akbar Gholami
Ali Akbar Gholami
Mohammad Sadegh TaghizadehMohammad Sadegh Taghizadeh
Mohammad Sadegh Taghizadeh
AAAlireza Afsharifar
Alireza Afsharifar
AMAli Moghadam
Ali Moghadam
ZMZohreh-Sadat Mortazavi
Zohreh-Sadat Mortazavi
ANAli Niazi
Ali Niazi

1 August 2022 in Biology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
YBYaser Biniaz
Yaser Biniaz
ATAhmad Tahmasebi
Ahmad Tahmasebi
ATAminallah Tahmasebi
Aminallah Tahmasebi
Benedicte Riber AlbrectsenBenedicte Riber Albrectsen
Benedicte Riber Albrectsen
Peter PoczaiPeter Poczai
Peter Poczai
AAAlireza Afsharifar
Alireza Afsharifar
Following a pathogen attack, plants defend themselves using multiple defense mechanisms to prevent infections. We used a meta-analysis and systems-biology analysis to search for general molecular plant defense responses from transcriptomic data reported from different pathogen attacks in Arabidopsis thaliana. Data from seven studies were subjected to meta-analysis, which revealed a total of 3694 differentially expressed genes (DEGs), where both healthy and infected plants were considered. Gene Ontology and Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes pathway enrichment analysis further suggested that the DEGs were involved in several biosynthetic metabolic pathways, including those responsible for the biosynthesis of secondary metabolites and pathways central to photosynthesis and plant–pathogen interactions. Using network analysis, we highlight the importance of WRKY40, WRKY46 and STZ, and suggest that they serve as major points in protein–protein interactions. This is especially true regarding networks of composite-metabolic responses by pathogens. In summary, this research provides a new approach that illuminates how different mechanisms of transcriptome responses can be activated in plants under pathogen infection and indicates that common genes vary in their ability to regulate plant responses to the pathogens studied herein.

12 February 2022 in Plants
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
YBYaser Biniaz
Yaser Biniaz
ATAminallah Tahmasebi
Aminallah Tahmasebi
AAAlireza Afsharifar
Alireza Afsharifar
ATAhmad Tahmasebi
Ahmad Tahmasebi
Peter PoczaiPeter Poczai
Peter Poczai
Environmental stresses adversely affect crop growth and yield, resulting in major losses to plants. These stresses occur simultaneously in nature, and we therefore conducted a meta-analysis in this study to identify differential and shared genes, pathways, and transcriptomic mechanisms involved in Arabidopsis response to biotic and abiotic stresses. The results showed a total of 436/21 significant up-/downregulated differentially expressed genes (DEGs) in response to biotic stresses, while 476 and 71 significant DEGs were respectively up- and downregulated in response to abiotic stresses in Arabidopsis thaliana. In addition, 21 DEGs (2.09%) were commonly regulated in response to biotic and abiotic stresses. Except for WRKY45 and ATXTH22, which were respectively up-/down- and down-/upregulated in response to biotic and abiotic stresses, other common DEGs were upregulated in response to all biotic and abiotic treatments. Moreover, the transcription factors (TFs) bHLH, MYB, and WRKY were the common TFs in response to biotic and abiotic stresses. In addition, ath-miR414 and ath-miR5658 were identified to be commonly expressed in response to both biotic and abiotic stresses. The identified common genes and pathways during biotic and abiotic stresses may provide potential candidate targets for the development of stress resistance breeding programs and for the genetic manipulation of crop plants.

16 August 2021 in Biomolecules
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
AMAtieh Moradi
Atieh Moradi
SDShuaijian DAI
Shuaijian DAI
EWEmily Oi Ying Wong
Emily Oi Ying Wong
GZGuang Zhu
Guang Zhu
FYFengchao Yu
Fengchao Yu
NLNing Li
Ning Li
Isotopically dimethyl labeling was applied in a quantitative post-translational modification (PTM) proteomic study of phosphoproteomic changes in the drought responses of two contrasting soybean cultivars. A total of 9457 phosphopeptides were identified subsequently, corresponding to 4571 phosphoprotein groups and 3889 leading phosphoproteins, which contained nine kinase families consisting of 279 kinases. These phosphoproteins contained a total of 8087 phosphosites, 6106 of which were newly identified and constituted 54% of the current soybean phosphosite repository. These phosphosites were converted into the highly conserved kinase docking sites by bioinformatics analysis, which predicted six kinase families that matched with those newly found nine kinase families. The overly post-translationally modified proteins (OPP) occupies 2.1% of these leading phosphoproteins. Most of these OPPs are photoreceptors, mRNA-, histone-, and phospholipid-binding proteins, as well as protein kinase/phosphatases. The subgroup population distribution of phosphoproteins over the number of phosphosites of phosphoproteins follows the exponential decay law, Y = 4.13e−0.098X − 0.04. Out of 218 significantly regulated unique phosphopeptide groups, 188 phosphoproteins were regulated by the drought-tolerant cultivar under the water loss condition. These significantly regulated phosphoproteins (SRP) are mainly enriched in the biological functions of water transport and deprivation, methionine metabolic processes, photosynthesis/light reaction, and response to cadmium ion, osmotic stress, and ABA response. Seventeen and 15 SRPs are protein kinases/phosphatases and transcription factors, respectively. Bioinformatics analysis again revealed that three members of the calcium dependent protein kinase family (CAMK family), GmSRK2I, GmCIPK25, and GmAKINβ1 kinases, constitute a phosphor-relay-mediated signal transduction network, regulating ion channel activities and many nuclear events in this drought-tolerant cultivar, which presumably contributes to the development of the soybean drought tolerance under water deprivation process.

1 March 2017 in Crop Protection
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
RRRasoul Rasoulpour
Rasoul Rasoulpour
AAAlireza Afsharifar
Alireza Afsharifar
KIKeramat Izadpanah
Keramat Izadpanah
MAMahmoud Aminlari
Mahmoud Aminlari