Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer

Review Articles

Vol. 13 No. sp1 (2026): Recent Advances in Agriculture

Targeted genetic manipulation of phytic acid biosynthesis in cereal crops

DOI
https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.14142
Submitted
17 February 2026
Published
08-04-2026

Abstract

Phytic acid or myo-inositol hexakisphosphate (IP6) is the predominant storage form of phosphorus in cereal grains. It is considered a major anti-nutritional factor as it chelates essential nutrients such as iron, zinc, calcium and magnesium, thereby reducing their bioavailability in the human diet. This reduction in mineral uptake contributes to micronutrient deficiencies, commonly referred to as “hidden hunger”, which has become a major concern in many developing countries, despite significant efforts to enhance the nutritional quality of cereals. Elevated levels of phytic acid can exacerbate micronutrient malnutrition in populations heavily dependent on cereal-based diet. Traditionally, post-harvest processing techniques, such as soaking, fermentation, milling and conventional breeding approaches such as germplasm screening and the use of low phytate mutants were used to develop low phytic acid levels cereal varieties. Nevertheless, the agronomic and economic trade-offs of these methods created an urgent need to shift to genetically safe approaches. Genomic manipulation techniques, including marker-assisted breeding and genome editing tools such as CRISPR/Cas systems, offer significant potential to precisely target genes involved in phytic acid biosynthesis and transport. These techniques enable the development of low-phytic-acid cereal varieties with improved mineral bioavailability and enhanced nutritional quality. Recent studies have demonstrated the efficiency of these techniques in manipulation of MRP and IPK gene family resulting up to 85 % and 60 % phytic acid reduction in wheat and rice respectively. Since cereals play a significant role in food system transformation, this review emphasises the scope of these techniques in breeding low-phytic-acid cereals for global nutritional sustainability.

References

  1. 1. Neupane D, Adhikari P, Bhattarai D, Rana B, Ahmed Z, Sharma U, et al. Does climate change affect the yield of the top three cereals and food security in the world? Earth. 2022;3(1):45–71. https://doi.org/10.3390/earth3010004
  2. 2. CGIAR. Biofortified crops address the world’s hidden hunger. 2019. https://www.cgiar.org/news-events/news/biofortified-crops-address-the-worlds-hidden-hunger
  3. 3. Popova A, Mihaylova D. Antinutrients in plant-based foods: A review. Open Biotechnol J. 2019;13(1):68–76. https://doi.org/10.2174/1874070701913010068
  4. 4. Prasanna BM, Palacios-Rojas N, Hossain F, Muthusamy V, Menkir A, Dhliwayo T, et al. Molecular breeding for nutritionally enriched maize: Status and prospects. Front Genet. 2020;10:1392. https://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2019.01392
  5. 5. Stevens GA, Beal T, Mbuya MN, Luo H, Neufeld LM, Addo OY, et al. Micronutrient deficiencies among preschool-aged children and women of reproductive age worldwide: A pooled analysis of individual-level data from population-representative surveys. Lancet Glob Health. 2022;10(11):e1590–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(22)00367-9
  6. 6. Aslam MF, Ellis PR, Berry SE, Latunde-Dada GO, Sharp PA. Enhancing mineral bioavailability from cereals: Current strategies and future perspectives. Nutr Bull. 2018;43(2):184–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/nbu.12324
  7. 7. Prajapati M, Shah H. Impacts and industrial applications of phytic acid and phytase. J Pure Appl Microbiol. 2022;16(4) :2497–507. https://doi.org/10.22207/JPAM.16.4.16
  8. 8. Kumari A, Roy A. Enhancing micronutrient absorption through simultaneous fortification and phytic acid degradation. Food Sci Biotechnol. 2023;32(9):1235–56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10068-023-01255-8
  9. 9. Cominelli E, Pilu R, Sparvoli F. Phytic acid and transporters: What can we learn from low phytic acid mutants? Plants. 2020;9(1):69. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants9010069
  10. 10. Sareen B, Pudake RN, Sevanthi AM, Solanke AU. Biotechnological approaches to reduce the phytic acid content in millets to improve nutritional quality. Planta. 2024;260(4):99. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00425-024-04525-9
  11. 11. Silva VM, Putti FF, White PJ, Dos Reis AR. Phytic acid accumulation in plants: Biosynthesis pathway regulation and role in human diet. Plant Physiol Biochem. 2021;164:132–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plaphy.2021.04.035
  12. 12. Chawla S. Key anti-nutrients of millet and their reduction strategies: An overview. Acta Sci Nutr Health. 2021.
  13. 13. Samtiya M, Aluko RE, Dhewa T. Plant food anti-nutritional factors and their reduction strategies: An overview. Food Prod Process Nutr. 2020;2(1):6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43014-020-0020-5
  14. 14. Muthamilarasan M, Prasad M. Dissecting antinutrient traits using omics approaches. Front Plant Sci. 2023;14:1234245. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2023.1234245
  15. 15. Coulibaly A, Kouakou B, Chen CJ. Phytic acid in cereal grains: Structure, healthy or harmful ways to reduce phytic acid in cereal grains and their effects on nutritional quality. Am J Plant Nutr Fertil Technol. 2011;1(1):1–22. https://doi.org/10.3923/ajpnft.2011.1.22
  16. 16. Raboy V. Low phytic acid crops: Observations based on four decades of research. Plants. 2020;9(2):140. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants9020140
  17. 17. Shukla V, Srivastava S, Singh S, Mursal M, Hussain S. Unveiling the intricacies of phytate antinutrients in millets and their therapeutic implications in breast cancer. Intell Pharm. 2024;2(4):516–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipha.2023.12.005
  18. 18. Brouns F. Phytic acid and whole grains for health controversy. Nutrients. 2021;14(1):25. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu14010025
  19. 19. Al Hasan SM, Hassan M, Saha S, Islam M, Billah M, Islam S. Dietary phytate intake inhibits the bioavailability of iron and calcium in the diets of pregnant women in rural Bangladesh: A cross-sectional study. BMC Nutr. 2016;2(1):24. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40795-016-0064-8
  20. 20. Soni RK, Modi G. Innovative genetic approaches to minimize anti-nutritional compounds in staple crops for future food security. AGBIR. 2024;40:1198–205.
  21. 21. Pujol A, Sanchis P, Grases F, Masmiquel L. Phytate intake, health and disease: Let thy food be thy medicine and medicine be thy food. Antioxidants. 2023;12(1):146. https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox12010146
  22. 22. Chondrou T, Adamidi N, Lygouras D, Hirota SA, Androutsos O, Svolos V. Dietary phytic acid, dephytinization and phytase supplementation alter trace element bioavailability: A narrative review of human interventions. Nutrients. 2024;16(23):4069. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu16234069
  23. 23. Kumar P, Singh D, Tiwari SK, Chouayekh H, Singh B. Phytic acid: Biosynthesis, functional attributes and conventional vis-à-vis modern approaches for reduction. Food Biosci. 2025;71:107204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fbio.2025.107204
  24. 24. Qamar ZU, Uzair M, Hameed A, Zafar SA, Li X. Identification of a novel mutation in the OsMRP5 gene in low phytate Basmati rice mutant and development of CAPS marker for marker-assisted breeding. Front Plant Sci. 2024;15:1455219. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2024.1455219
  25. 25. Hídvégi M, Lásztity R. Phytic acid content of cereals and legumes and interaction with proteins. Period Polytech Chem Eng. 2002;46(1-2):59–64.
  26. 26. Sahu A, Verma R, Gupta U, Kashyap S, Sanyal I. An overview of targeted genome editing strategies for reducing the biosynthesis of phytic acid: An anti-nutrient in crop plants. Mol Biotechnol. 2024;66(1):11–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12033-023-00722-1
  27. 27. Sparvoli F, Cominelli E. Seed biofortification and phytic acid reduction: A conflict of interest for the plant? Plants. 2015;4(4):728–55. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants4040728
  28. 28. Aggarwal S, Kumar A, Bhati KK, Kaur G, Shukla V, Tiwari S, et al. RNAi-mediated downregulation of inositol pentakisphosphate kinase (IPK1) in wheat grains decreases phytic acid levels and increases Fe and Zn accumulation. Front Plant Sci. 2018;9:259. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2018.00259
  29. 29. Rasmussen SK, Ingvardsen CR, Torp AM. Mutations in genes controlling the biosynthesis and accumulation of inositol phosphates in seeds. Biochem Soc Trans. 2010;38(2):689–94. https://doi.org/10.1042/BST0380689
  30. 30. Aggarwal S, Shukla V, Bhati KK, Kaur M, Sharma S, Singh A, et al. Hormonal regulation and expression profiles of wheat genes involved during phytic acid biosynthesis pathway. Plants. 2015;4(2):298–319. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants4020298
  31. 31. Frittelli A, Botticella E, Palombieri S, Masci S, Celletti S, Fontanella MC, et al. The suppression of TdMRP3 genes reduces the phytic acid and increases the nutrient accumulation in durum wheat grain. Front Plant Sci. 2023;14:1079559. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2023.1079559
  32. 32. Perera I, Fukushima A, Akabane T, Horiguchi G, Seneweera S, Hirotsu N. Expression regulation of myo-inositol 3-phosphate synthase 1 (INO1) in determination of phytic acid accumulation in rice grain. Sci Rep. 2019;9(1):14866. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-51485-2
  33. 33. Burgos VE, Armada M. Implications of processing on the levels of antinutritional factors in cereal grains. CABI Rev. 2020;2019:1–20. https://doi.org/10.1079/PAVSNNR201914054
  34. 34. Hambidge KM, Miller LV, Mazariegos M, Westcott J, Solomons NW, Raboy V, et al. Upregulation of zinc absorption matches increases in physiologic requirements for zinc in women consuming high- or moderate-phytate diets during late pregnancy and early lactation. J Nutr. 2017;147(6):1079–85. https://doi.org/10.3945/jn.116.245902
  35. 35. Qamar ZU, Hameed A, Ashraf M, Rizwan M, Akhtar M. Development and molecular characterization of low phytate basmati rice through induced mutagenesis, hybridization, backcross and marker assisted breeding. Front Plant Sci. 2019;10:1525. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2019.01525
  36. 36. Reddy BH, Thankachan P, Hatakayama M, Hiremath N, Moretti D, Nanjareddy YA, et al. A natural low phytic acid finger millet accession significantly improves iron bioavailability in Indian women. Front Nutr. 2022;8:791392. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnut.2021.791392
  37. 37. Marathe A, Krishnan V, Mahajan MM, Thimmegowda V, Dahuja A, Jolly M, et al. Characterization and molecular modeling of inositol 1,3,4 tris phosphate 5/6 kinase-2 from Glycine max (L.) Merr.: Comprehending its evolutionary conservancy at functional level. 3 Biotech. 2018;8(1):50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13205-017-1076-z
  38. 38. Gyani PC, Bollinedi H, Gopala Krishnan S, Vinod KK, Sachdeva A, Bhowmick PK, et al. Genetic analysis and molecular mapping of the quantitative trait loci governing low phytic acid content in a novel LPA rice mutant, PLM11. Plants. 2020;9(12):1728. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants9121728
  39. 39. Yatou O, Aoki H, Aii J, Tanaka H. Selection of novel non-lethal, low phytic acid mutants and evaluation of their agronomic traits and mineral compositions in rice (Oryza sativa). Jpn Agric Res Q. 2018;52(1):39–47. https://doi.org/10.6090/jarq.52.39
  40. 40. Kishor DS, Lee C, Lee D, Venkatesh J, Seo J, Chin JH, et al. Novel allelic variant of Lpa1 gene associated with a significant reduction in seed phytic acid content in rice (Oryza sativa L.). PLoS One. 2019;14(3):e0209636. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0209636
  41. 41. Anter AS. Induced mutation to enhance plant biodiversity and genetic resources for intensification of crop production to mitigate climatic changes. In: Genetic Diversity – Recent Advances and Applications. IntechOpen. 2023. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.108117
  42. 42. Yugandhar P, Veronica N, Ai H, Goud MD, Wang X, Subrahmanyam D, et al. Gain-of-function NH787 ethylmethanesulfonate mutant of Nagina22 rice variety confers augmented PUE.
  43. 43. Rojaria V, Hossain F, Zunjare RU, Bhatt V, Katral A, Kasana RK, et al. Development and characterization of lpa1 and lpa2-based low phytate double mutants in maize for enhancing the nutritional quality of food and feed. J Food Compos Anal. 2024;136:106771. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfca.2024.106771
  44. 44. Manwaring HR, Bligh HF, Yadav R. The challenges and opportunities associated with biofortification of pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum) with elevated levels of grain iron and zinc. Front Plant Sci. 2016;7:1944. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2016.01944
  45. 45. Ramakrishna W, Ror P, Beniwal R. Phytic acid's innovative antinutrient reduction. In: Biofortification for nutrient-rich crops. CRC Press. 2024;219–34. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781032690636-14
  46. 46. Lin W, Bai M, Peng C, Kuang H, Kong F, Guan Y. Genome editing toward biofortified soybean with minimal trade-off between low phytic acid and yield. Abiotech. 2024;5(2):196–201. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42994-024-00158-4
  47. 47. Dubrovna OV, Mykhalska SI, Komisarenko AG. Use of RNA interference technology for improving economically valuable traits of cereal crops. Cytol Genet. 2023;57(6):587–610. https://doi.org/10.3103/S0095452723060026
  48. 48. Meena AK, Verma LK, Kumhar BL. RNAi, its mechanism and potential use in crop improvement: A review. Int J Pure Appl Biosci. 2017;5(2):294–311. https://doi.org/10.18782/2320-7051.2890
  49. 49. Elkonin LA, Panin VM, Kenzhegulov OA. RNAi-mutants of Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench with improved digestibility of seed storage proteins. Grain Seed Proteins Funct. 2021;143. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.96204
  50. 50. Karmakar A, Bhattacharya S, Sengupta S, Ali N, Sarkar SN, Datta K, et al. RNAi-mediated silencing of ITPK gene reduces phytic acid content, alters transcripts of phytic acid biosynthetic genes and modulates mineral distribution in rice seeds. Rice Sci. 2020;27(4):315–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rsci.2020.05.007
  51. 51. Ibrahim S, Saleem B, Rehman N, Zafar SA, Naeem MK, Khan MR. CRISPR/Cas9-mediated disruption of inositol pentakisphosphate 2-kinase 1 (TaIPK1) reduces phytic acid and improves iron and zinc accumulation in wheat grains. J Adv Res. 2022;37:33–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jare.2021.07.006
  52. 52. Jin H, Yu X, Yang Q, Fu X, Yuan F. Transcriptome analysis identifies differentially expressed genes in the progenies of a cross between two low phytic acid soybean mutants. Sci Rep. 2021;11(1):8740. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-88055-4
  53. 53. Roy C, Kumar S, Ranjan RD, Kumhar SR, Govindan V. Genomic approaches for improving grain zinc and iron content in wheat. Front Genet. 2022;13:1045955. https://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2022.1045955
  54. 54. Shahzad R, Jamil S, Ahmad S, Nisar A, Khan S, Amina Z, et al. Biofortification of cereals and pulses using new breeding techniques: Current and future perspectives. Front Nutr. 2021;8:721728. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnut.2021.721728
  55. 55. Kolanu ND. CRISPR–Cas9 gene editing: Curing genetic diseases by inherited epigenetic modifications. Glob Med Genet. 2024;11(1):113–22. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0044-1785234
  56. 56. Pramitha JL, Rana S, Aggarwal PR, Ravikesavan R, Joel AJ, Muthamilarasan M. Diverse role of phytic acid in plants and approaches to develop low-phytate grains to enhance bioavailability of micronutrients. Adv Genet. 2021;107:89–120.
  57. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.adgen.2020.11.003
  58. 57. Karmakar S, Das P, Panda D, Xie K, Baig MJ, Molla KA. A detailed landscape of CRISPR-Cas-mediated plant disease and pest management. Plant Sci. 2022;323:111376. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plantsci.2022.111376
  59. 58. Zafar K, Khan MZ, Amin I, Mukhtar Z, Yasmin S, Arif M, et al. Precise CRISPR-Cas9 mediated genome editing in super basmati rice for resistance against bacterial blight by targeting the major susceptibility gene. Front Plant Sci. 2020;11:575. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2020.00575
  60. 59. Van Eck J. Applying gene editing to tailor precise genetic modifications in plants. J Biol Chem. 2020;295(38):13267–76. https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.REV120.010850
  61. 60. Kamburova VS, Nikitina EV, Shermatov SE, Buriev ZT, Kumpatla SP, Emani C, et al. Genome editing in plants: An overview of tools and applications. Int J Agro. 2017;2017:7315351. https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.REV120.010850
  62. 61. Hillary VE, Ceasar SA. Application of CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing system in cereal crops. Open Biotechnol J. 2019;13(1). https://doi.org/10.2174/1874070701913010173
  63. 62. Doudna JA, Charpentier E. The new frontier of genome engineering with CRISPR-Cas9. Science. 2014;346(6213):1258096. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1258096
  64. 63. Ali N, Paul S, Gayen D, Sarkar SN, Datta K, Datta SK. Development of low phytate rice by RNAi mediated seed-specific silencing of inositol 1,3,4,5,6-pentakisphosphate 2-kinase gene (IPK1). PLoS One. 2013;8(7):e68161. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0068161
  65. 64. Yamaji N, Takemoto Y, Miyaji T, Mitani-Ueno N, Yoshida KT, Ma JF. Reducing phosphorus accumulation in rice grains with an impaired transporter in the node. Nature. 2017;541(7635):92–5. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature20610
  66. 65. Jiang M, Liu Y, Liu Y, Tan Y, Huang J, Shu Q. Mutation of inositol 1,3,4-trisphosphate 5/6-kinase6 impairs plant growth and phytic acid synthesis in rice. Plants. 2019;8(5):114. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants8050114
  67. 66. Bhati KK, Alok A, Kumar A, Kaur J, Tiwari S, Pandey AK. Silencing of ABCC13 transporter in wheat reveals its involvement in grain development, phytic acid accumulation and lateral root formation. J Exp Bot. 2016;67(14):4379–89. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erw224
  68. 67. Zhou L, Yao S. Recent advances in therapeutic CRISPR-Cas9 genome editing: Mechanisms and applications. Mol Biomed. 2023;4(1):10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43556-023-00115-5
  69. 68. Jinek M, Jiang F, Taylor DW, Sternberg SH, Kaya E, Ma E, et al. Structures of Cas9 endonucleases reveal RNA-mediated conformational activation. Science. 2014;343(6176):1247997. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1247997
  70. 69. Asmamaw M, Zawdie B. Mechanism and applications of CRISPR/Cas-9-mediated genome editing. Biologics Targets Ther. 2021;353–61. https://doi.org/10.2147/BTT.S326422
  71. 70. Miller V, Beying N, Schmidt C, Puchta H. Double strand break repair pathways in plants and their application in genome engineering. In: Genome editing for precision crop breeding. 2021;27–61. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003048237-3
  72. 71. Přibylová A, Fischer L. How to use CRISPR/Cas9 in plants: From target site selection to DNA repair. J Exp Bot. 2024;75(17):5325–43. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erae147
  73. 72. Gehrke F, Schindele A, Puchta H. Nonhomologous end joining as key to CRISPR/Cas-mediated plant chromosome engineering. Plant Physiol. 2022;188(4):1769–79. https://doi.org/10.1093/plphys/kiab572
  74. 73. Zhao B, Rothenberg E, Ramsden DA, Lieber MR. The molecular basis and disease relevance of non-homologous DNA end joining. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2020;21(12):765–81. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41580-020-00297-8
  75. 74. Sathee L, Jagadhesan B, Pandesha PH, Barman D, Adavi BS, Nagar S, et al. Genome editing targets for improving nutrient use efficiency and nutrient stress adaptation. Front Genet. 2022;13:900897. https://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2022.900897
  76. 75. Matres JM, Hilscher J, Datta A, Armario-Nájera V, Baysal C, He W, et al. Genome editing in cereal crops: An overview. Transgenic Res. 2021;30(4):461–98. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11248-021-00259-6
  77. 76. Khatoon G, Lal SK, Kumar S, Mehta S, Kumar M. Advances in genetic strategies for reducing phytic acid content in maize: From traditional mutants to CRISPR/Cas9 innovations. In: Wani SH, editor. Genome engineering for crop improvement. Singapore: Springer; 2024. p. 1–23.
  78. 77. Pandey AK, Aggarwal S, Meena V, Kumar A. Phytic acid reduction in cereal grains by genome engineering: Potential targets to achieve low phytate wheat. Genome Eng Crop Improv. 2021;146–56. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119672425.ch9
  79. 78. Gramazio P, Prohens J, Toppino L, Plazas M. Introgression breeding in cultivated plants. Front Plant Sci. 2021;12:764533. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2021.764533
  80. 79. Sureshkumar S, Tamilkumar P, Thangavelu AU, Senthil N, Nagarajan P, Vellaikumar S, et al. Marker-assisted introgression of lpa2 locus responsible for low-phytic acid trait into an elite tropical maize inbred (Zea mays L.). Plant Breed. 2014;133(5):566–78. https://doi.org/10.1111/pbr.12185
  81. 80. Tamilkumar P, Senthil N, Sureshkumar S, Thangavelu AU, Nagarajan P, Vellaikumar S, et al. Introgression of low phytic acid locus (lpa2-2) into an elite maize (Zea mays L.) inbred through marker-assisted backcross breeding. Aust J Crop Sci. 2014;8(8).
  82. 81. Yathish KR, Karjagi CG, Gangoliya SS, Kumar A, Preeti J, Yadav HK, et al. Introgression of the low phytic acid locus (lpa2) into elite maize (Zea mays L.) inbreds through marker-assisted backcross breeding (MABB). Euphytica. 2022;218(9):127. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10681-022-03076-y
  83. 82. Yathish KR, Karjagi CG, Gangoliya SS, Gadag RN, Mallikarjuna MG, Sekhar JC, et al. Development of low-phytate maize inbred lines through marker-assisted introgression of lpa1. Crop Pasture Sci. 2023;74(9):843–55. https://doi.org/10.1071/CP22238
  84. 83. Karjagi CG, Gangoliya SS, Gadag RN, Mallikarjuna MG, Sekhar JC, Das AK, et al. Development of low phytate maize (Zea mays) inbred lines through marker-assisted pyramiding of lpa1 and lpa2 genes. Plant Mol Biol Rep. 2025;43(3):1262–74. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11105-025-01540-2
  85. 84. Rimbach G, Pallauf J, Moehring J, Kraemer K, Minihane AM. Effect of dietary phytate and microbial phytase on mineral and trace element bioavailability: A literature review. Curr Top Nutraceutical Res. 2008;6(3)131–44.
  86. 85. Kumar V, Sinha AK, Makkar HP, Becker K. Dietary roles of phytate and phytase in human nutrition: A review. Food Chem. 2010;120(4):945–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2009.11.052
  87. 86. Faba-Rodriguez R, Gu Y, Salmon M, Dionisio G, Brinch-Pedersen H, Brearley CA, et al. Structure of a cereal purple acid phytase provides new insights to phytate degradation in plants. Plant Commun. 2022;3(2). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xplc.2022.100305
  88. 87. Ishii T, Araki M. Consumer acceptance of food crops developed by genome editing. Plant Cell Rep. 2016;35(7):1507–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00299-016-1974-2
  89. 88. Kato-Nitta N, Tachikawa M, Inagaki Y, Maeda T. Public perceptions of risks and benefits of gene-edited food crops: An international comparative study between the US, Japan and Germany. Sci Technol Hum Values. 2023;48(6):1360–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/01622439221123830
  90. 89. Ishii T. Consumer choices regarding genome-edited food crops: Lessons from Japan. Front Genome Ed. 2025;7:1672358. https://doi.org/10.3389/fgeed.2025.1672358
  91. 90. Velimirović A, Jovović Z, Berjan S, El Bilali H, Allahyari MS. Public perception of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in Montenegro: Insight for sustainable biotechnology and policy development. GM Crops Food. 2026;17(1):2620884. https://doi.org/10.1080/21645698.2026.2620884
  92. 91. Mitra-Ganguli T, Pfeiffer WH, Walton J. The global regulatory framework for the commercialization of nutrient enriched biofortified foods. Ann NY Acad Sci. 2022;1517(1):154–66. https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.14869
  93. 92. Dwivedi SL, Ortiz R. Food crops low in seed-phytate improve human and other non-ruminant animals’ health. Crop Breed Genet Genom. 2021;3(4).
  94. 93. Emami K, Mesbahi E, Al-Mrabeh A, Gatehouse AM, Shu QY, Golebiowska-Paluch G. 2-DE-based and shotgun proteomics approach in the analysis of the seed proteome of a low phytic acid rice (Oryza sativa ssp. japonica) mutant. J Cereal Sci. 2023;114:103801. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcs.2023.103801
  95. 94. Kumar S, Yadav RR, Nayak JK, Bisht H, Singh A, Shah I, et al. Genomic-assisted pyramiding of semi-dwarfism and micronutrient-enrichment traits for developing climate-smart wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). J Adv Biol Biotechnol. 2025;28(9):183–93. https://doi.org/10.9734/jabb/2025/v28i92871

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.