A CRISPR way for accelerating cereal crop improvement: Progress and challenges
Open accessAbstract
Humans rely heavily on cereal grains as a key source of nutrients, hence regular improvement of cereal crops is essential for ensuring food security. The current food crisis at the global level is due to the rising population and harsh climatic conditions which prompts scientists to develop smart resilient cereal crops to attain food security. Cereal crop improvement in the past generally depended on imprecise methods like random mutagenesis and conventional genetic recombination which results in high off targeting risks. In this context, we have witnessed the application of targeted mutagenesis using versatile CRISPR-Cas systems for cereal crop improvement in sustainable agriculture. Accelerated crop improvement using molecular breeding methods based on CRISPR-Cas genome editing (GE) is an unprecedented tool for plant biotechnology and agriculture. The last decade has shown the fidelity, accuracy, low levels of off-target effects, and the high efficacy of CRISPR technology to induce targeted mutagenesis for the improvement of cereal crops such as wheat, rice, maize, barley, and millets. Since the genomic databases of these cereal crops are available, several modifications using GE technologies have been performed to attain desirable results. This review provides a brief overview of GE technologies and includes an elaborate account of the mechanisms and applications of CRISPR-Cas editing systems to induce targeted mutagenesis in cereal crops for improving the desired traits. Further, we describe recent developments in CRISPR-Cas-based targeted mutagenesis through base editing and prime editing to develop resilient cereal crop plants, possibly providing new dimensions in the field of cereal crop genome editing.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Several metal ions act as carcinogens and toxins to animals and are usually accumulated in food chains through anthropogenic activities.
“Several metal ions act as potent carcinogens and toxins to animals, usually accumulated in food chains through anthropogenic activities (Arora and Chauhan, 2021; Priyadarshanee et al., 2022; Basu et al., 2023).”
From Plant hyperaccumulators: a state-of-the-art review on mechanism of heavy metal transport and sequestration (2025) · cites this paper as Basu et al., 2023
The Introduction discusses cereal nutrition and crop stresses, while the Rice section mentions editing a cadmium-related gene. Neither passage addresses whether metal ions are carcinogenic or toxic to animals, or whether anthropogenic activities cause their accumulation in food chains. Searches for those terms and for heavy-metal bioaccumulation found no supporting passage in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.74)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 209 · Cited by 51
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- Endo M. Mikami M. Endo A. (2018). Genome editing in plants by engineered CRISPR- Cas9 recognizing NG PAM. Nat. Plants, 21– 27. 30531939
- Lee J. K. Jeong E. Lee J. Jung M. Shin E. Kim Y. H. (2018). Directed evolution of CRISPR-Cas9 to increase its specificity. Nat. Commun. 9 (1), 1– 10. 10.1038/s41467-018-05477-x 30082838 PMC6078992 · DOI · Paper page
- Zong Y. Song Q. Li C. Jin S. Zhang D. Wang Y. (2018). Efficient C-to-T base editing in plants using a fusion of nCas9 and human APOBEC3A. Nat. Biotechnol. 36 (10), 950– 953. 10.1038/nbt.4261 30272679 · DOI
- Authors
- Basu, U., Riaz Ahmed, S., Bhat, B. A., Anwar, Z., Ali, A., Ijaz, A., Gulzar, A., Bibi, A., Tyagi, A., Nebapure, S. M., Goud, C. A., Ahanger, S. A., Ali, S., & Mushtaq, M.
- Affiliations
- Indian Agricultural Research Institute (IN)
- University of Kashmir (IN)
- Pakistan Institute of Engineering and Applied Sciences (PK)
- Huazhong Agricultural University (CN)
- Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural Sciences and Technology of Kashmir (IN)
- University of Agriculture Faisalabad (PK)
- Yeungnam University (KR)
- Professor Jayashankar Telangana Agricultural University (IN)
- ICAR-National Bureau Of Plant Genetic Resources (IN)
- Corresponding author
- Ahanger, Shafat Ahmad
- Ali, Sajad
- Mushtaq, Muntazir
- ORCID
- Venue
- Frontiers in Genetics
- Publisher
- Frontiers Media SA
- Published
- 2023-01-06
- Volume
- 13
- Pages
- 866976-866976
- ISSN
- 1664-8021 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC9852743
- OpenAlex
- W4313649541
- Cited by
- 51
- References
- 209
- Citations by year
- 2026: 17 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 5
- FWCI
- 1.35
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Frontiers in Genetics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Funders
- University Grants Commission
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › CRISPR and Genetic Engineering
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Plant Genetic and Mutation Studies
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Genetically Modified Organisms Research
- Keywords
- CRISPR/Cas genome editing, cereals, targeted mutagenesis, food security, crop resilience, base editing, prime editing, wheat, rice, maize, barley, millet, off-target effects, molecular breeding
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review