Open access peer-reviewed chapter

A Review on the Cooking Attributes of African Yam Bean (Sphenostylis stenocarpa)

Written By

Ndenum Suzzy Shitta, Alex Chukwudi Edemodu, Wosene Gebreselassie Abtew and Abush Abebe Tesfaye

Submitted: 03 July 2021 Reviewed: 28 July 2021 Published: 21 December 2021

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.99674

From the Edited Volume

Legumes Research - Volume 2

Edited by Jose C. Jimenez-Lopez and Alfonso Clemente

Chapter metrics overview

829 Chapter Downloads

View Full Metrics

Abstract

African yam bean, an underutilized legume usually cultivated for its edible tubers and seeds, is known for its nutrition-rich qualities; however, the crop’s level of consumption is low. The underutilization of the crop could be attributed to several constraints, including long cooking hours of up to 24 hours. Cooking time is an important food trait; it affects consumers’ choices, nutrients content, and anti-nutrient conditions. Additionally, foods requiring long cooking hours are non-economical in terms of energy usage and preparation time. The prolonged cooking time associated with AYB places enormous limitations on the invaluable food security potentials of the crop. Therefore, the availability of AYB grains with a short cooking time could lift the crop from its present underused status. To efficiently develop AYB grains with reduced cooking time, information on the crop’s cooking variables is a prerequisite. This review presents available information on variations in cooking time, cooking methods, and processing steps used in improving cooking time and nutrient qualities in AYB. Likewise, the review brings to knowledge standard procedures that could be explored in evaluating AYB’s cooking time. This document also emphasizes the molecular perspectives that could pilot the development of AYB cultivars with reduced cooking time.

Keywords

  • Seed hardness
  • Mattson Bean Cooker
  • GWAS
  • QTL
  • Cooking Time

1. Introduction

Food and nutrition security which is part of livelihood, is notably attracting the attention of stakeholders, spanning across nations, research organizations, the general public, academic institutions, and policymakers. At present, the world population is estimated at 7 billion; however, by 2050, the population is expected to reach 9.3 billion. As of 2017, the number of food-insecure people worldwide was estimated at 690 million [1]; however, by 2050, a 70–85% increase in food production will be needed to feed the projected 9.3 billion people [2, 3]. Notwithstanding, upscaling the adoption and utilization of sustainable crops offers considerable potentials in boosting food production amidst the prevailing challenges.

Grain-Legumes are sustainable, capable of surviving under harsh climate conditions. The grain legumes require minimal fertilizer inputs because of their ability to fix atmospheric nitrogen through symbiosis with soil Rhizobia. Also, intercropping legumes with other crops has improved soil fertility and crop productivity [4, 5, 6]. Importantly, legumes are a good source of food and feed for humans and animals, respectively; crops within the legume category are nutritionally rich; most significantly, they provide affordable sources of protein [7, 8]. The contribution of legumes as food and feed differs across types, while some legumes are known worldwide and considerably utilized (soy bean) (Glycine max L), common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L), cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L.)) others are less known and underutilized (African yam bean (Sphenostylis stenocarpa Harms), lablab beans, (Lablab purpureus L) wing bean (Psophocarpus tetragonolabus L.). Adopting and accepting underutilized legumes such as African yam bean as a food crop is vital for their survival; nevertheless, AYB’s adoption and utilization is intertwined with several factors, including cooking time, nutrient potentials, palatability, and value-added products.

1.1 African yam bean

African yam bean which, is commonly referred to as AYB, is one among the underutilized grain legumes of tropical Africa. The crop is grown for its edible seeds and tuberous roots. Figure 1 presents AYB seeds harvested from a field evaluation in 2020. AYB seeds are enclosed in pods measuring about 3–15 cm long, such that a single pod can accommodate up to 30 seeds. The crop is a climber usually grown in mixed cropping with major crops [10, 11, 12]. AYB is locally adopted and has wide adaptability across diverse environmental conditions [13, 14]. Even though the crop is usually cultivated as an annual crop [15, 16, 17], some schools of thought consider it as perennial [18, 19, 20]. The cultivation of AYB majors among smallholder farmers across sub-Saharan Africa, of which Nigeria is one country prominent on the list [21]. The consumption of AYB is known to contribute to daily nutrition, food availability, and diet diversification to communities utilizing it; this date back to the Nigerian civil war of 1967–1970, where the crop’s food and nutritional potentials were efficiently utilized in fighting malnutrition and hunger [15, 22, 23, 24].

Figure 1.

Dried AYB seeds. (A) Non variegated seeds (B) Variegated seeds. Source: field evaluation (Shitta et al. [9]).

The seeds of AYB provide an affordable source of protein when compared with other plant sources and animal extract. Aside from its rich protein content, its high carbohydrate content [25, 26] is comparable to the amount reported in grain cereals. AYB’s amino acid (histidine, isoleucine, lysine, methionine) profile is more in quantity than the amount observed in soybean [27, 28, 29]. Likewise, several authors have reported the presence of essential nutrients in AYB’s seeds [25, 26, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36]. AYB tubers (Figure 2) contain considerable amount of magnesium (167 mg/100 g), potassium (1010 mg/100 g), protein (15–16%), and carbohydrate (67–68%) [34]. In addition to the crop’s nutritional qualities, the crop is flexible for use in various diets; it can be utilized as a condiment, or as a whole meal, or as a snack. The contribution of AYB in feeds enrichment is an added advantage of the crop’s food and nutrition attributes [37, 38].

Figure 2.

AYB tubers. Source: field evaluation (Shitta et al. [9]).

Considering the enormous potential of AYB and its role in some African traditions [39, 40, 41]; the efficient utilization of AYB can reduce hunger and nutritional challenges in sub-Saharan Africa. Nevertheless, the food potential of the crop remains widely untapped, which can be attributed to several constraints such as long cooking hours of up to 24 hours [41, 42, 43, 44], a long-maturity cycle of 9–10 months [16, 17, 45], and the abundance of anti-nutrition factors [35, 46, 47, 48, 49]. However, the genetic variability reported in the crop [9, 50, 51, 52, 53] provides a foundation for breeders to develop improved cultivars. In particular, the availability of AYB cultivars with reduced cooking time could boost the cultivation and consumption of the crop. Up-to-date information on cooking-related attributes is a prerequisite for improving cooking time trait. Keeping the above in view, the present review brings to knowledge cooking variables reported in AYB. Also, the review proposes the application of standard procedures and molecular technology for advanced studies. Furthermore, the present document is intended to stimulate more research interest towards improving cooking time in the crop.

1.2 Structure of African yam bean seeds

Past research investigations have explained the relationship between seed properties, variety type, seed storage conditions, and cooking time [54, 55]. Table 1 presents the physical properties reported in AYB seeds. AYB seeds are, dicot in nature and they can measure up to 10 mm in length and 7 mm in width and thickness[9, 50, 51, 52, 53, 56]. The seeds of AYB differ in texture across germplasm; they could be rough, wrinkled, or smooth. The electron microstructure study of seeds revealed the presence of smooth starch granules exhibiting different sizes and shapes [57]. The cells were bounded by cell walls same as observed in other legumes [58, 59]. Likewise, the round undulating surface observed in the cotyledon is similar in structure to that of cowpea [59, 60]. For seeds subjected to milling, the cotyledon and cell components showed structural change. Equally, cell wall materials and protein matrix were reduced to flakes and particles; however, the structure of starch granules remained unchanged. The micrographs of cotyledon, flour, and starch showed the size of starch granules within the range of 4–40 μm for lengths and 4–25 μm for diameter [57].

Seed thickness (mm)Seed length (mm)Seed width (mm)100 seed weight (g)References
8.906.9024.70[23]
6.998.696.8029.79[56]
6.668.576.7728.80[51]
6.308.2120.83[48]
6.228.066.3122.42[53]
6.208.406.3525.30[9]

Table 1.

Means of some physical properties reported in AYB seeds.

Advertisement

2. Cooking quality in African yam bean

Preparing and cooking food is an integral part of daily living [61, 62]. For example most grain legumes are subjected to cooking before consumed; the cooking process converts raw food into a ready-to-eat product. Also, cooking facilitates the destruction of foodborne pathogens, thereby eliminating microbial hazards and achieving quality [63]. Moreover, the physical and chemical changes that occur during cooking increases the digestibility and availability of nutrient for use and storage in the body [64]; through processes including inactivation of anti-nutrient, starch gelatinization, proteins denaturation, leaching of polyphenols and solubilization of polysaccharides among other factors [59, 65, 66]. Despite the importance of cooking in food and nutrition the cooking culture is dwindling, especially in industrialized societies where individuals are exposed to a busy lifestyle with little time at their deposal. To cope with busy schedules, consumptions are choosing convenience food that requires less cooking time. Also, reports have shown that consumers are ready to pay more in exchange for long cooking hours [67, 68].

Cooking time, an attribute of cooking quality is defined as the time from the beginning of cooking up to when the food becomes tender and suitable to eat [66, 69]. AYB, the same as most legumes is characterized by seed hardness, requiring long cooking hours of up to 24 hours (Table 2) in some scenarios [80]. Seed hardness has been identified as a heritable trait but also affected by seed composition, production, and, storage environment [54, 81, 82]. The mechanism by which seeds become hard-to-cook is categorized as a very complex phenomenon; it includes processes such as changes in the intracellular cell wall, middle lamella, polysaccharides, and other components. The hard-to-cook mechanism in seeds has been extensively reviewed by authors [83, 84, 85]. According to a particular study, an increase in calcium ion concentration led to a subsequent increase in seed hardness and a decrease in phytate concentration. It was also reported that a higher rate of leaching in phytate and peptic acid occurred in cooked and soaked hard-to-cook seeds than in fast-to-cook seeds [85].

SourceCooking methodCooking time (mins)End productReferences
Whole AYB seedsBoiling480Flour[70]
Whole AYB seedsBoiling228Paste[47]
Whole AYB seedsBoiling60Porridge[71]
Whole AYB seedsRoasting60Flour[47]
Whole AYB seedsRoasting10Flour[43]
Whole AYB seedsBoiling155[43]
Dehulled AYB and maize flourFrying10Kokoro[72]
Dehulled AYB wet flourFryingCheese[73]
Dehulled AYB-wheat flourBaking20Cookies[74]
Dehulled AYB cowpea flourSteaming50Moi-moi[75]
Dehulled AYB wet flourSteaming60Moi-moi[71, 76]
AYB-maize-coconut fiberRoasting5Flour blend[77]
Whole grainRoasting45Flour[78]
Whole grainRoasting300Flour[79]

Table 2.

Source, cooking method, cooking time, end product, and references reported in AYB cooking experiments.

Generally, grains with short cooking time are more preferred by consumers; because less time is invested in their preparation, and importantly less energy is spent when compared to energy requirements for grains with long cooking time. In addition, several studies have shown that nutrients such as minerals and proteins are conserved when grains are cooked over a short period. In contrast grains requiring long cooking hours usually lose a significant amount of nutrients [55, 86]. Cooking methods reported in AYB include boiling, steaming, roasting, and frying. However, advanced procedures including, sensory analysis: involving sensory panel [87, 88]; tactile method: [89] a method of compressing seeds within the thumb; texture analysis: [87] a method that measures the resistance of seed compression using a texture analyzer [90] have been investigated in major legumes.

2.1 Cooking method reported in AYB

2.1.1 Boiling

Boiling cooking method is a moist approach whereby the target food is submerged into a liquid. Cooking is achieved through the transfer of heat from the cooking equipment to the liquid in contact with the food. The food surface absorbs the heat and through conduction, the heat passes through to cook the food. The boiling method was experimented with selected AYB grains. The steps included boiling the grains in water for 480 minutes (Table 2) and thereafter oven drying for 24 hours before milling into flour [70]. In another report, AYB grains were boiled for 228 minutes. The analysis of the boiled seeds showed a reduction in phytate content and an increase in moisture content [47]. In addition, the boiling cooking method was reportedly used in preparing porridge. The procedure included presoaking seeds overnight and boiling them for 60 minutes. The porridge analysis showed an increase in carbohydrate, gross energy, fiber, lipid, water absorption capacity, oil absorption, bulk density, and gelation capacity however a decrease in protein and moisture content was observed [71].

2.1.2 Roasting

The roasting method is commonly used in preparing “roasted AYB grain,” a popular snack consumed in combination with other food in South-East Nigeria [19, 40, 43]. Roasting was effective in increasing the level of phosphorus and in-vitro protein digestibility of grains. An increase in phytic acid was also reported; however, the tannin level was shown to be at the barest minimum [43]. In the preparation of breakfast cereal from AYB grains in combination with maize and coconut fiber, the blends were roasted for 5 minutes at 2800c temperature. The formulated blends revealed a protein content of 18.26%, moisture content of 4.20%, ash content of 7.36%, and energy content of 339.47% [77]. The roasting approach was likewise used in preparing AYB flour. The grains were subjected to roasting for 45 minutes (Table 2) using firewood as the energy source. Then, the roasted grains were dehulled and milled. The analysis of the roasted flour showed a decrease of about 0.27 mg/100 g in the level of the tannin content [78]. In a separate study, AYB grains were roasted in an oven at 1200c for 300 minutes; and the roasted grains were dehulled and milled. The analysis of the dehulled flour showed a reduction in the emulsifying capacity, foam capacity, and stability of the flour, also the samples presented a high water and oil absorption capacity [79]. In a further experiment, researchers investigated the effect of roasting on the proximate, mineral, and anti-nutrient content of AYB grains. The study preceded the roasting of grains over firewood for 1 hour at 3000c temperature condition. An increase was reported in the levels of calcium, potassium, copper, iron, manganese, magnesium, phosphorus, and sodium, and a drastic reduction in the percentage level of phytate, oxalate, tannins, hydrogen cyanide, and trypsin inhibitor was reported. On the contrary, there was no significant increase in the nutrient content [47].

2.1.3 Steaming

The steaming approach involves the use of steam as the cooking medium; the steam is mostly generated from vigorously boiling water. Unlike reported in boiling method, the steaming procedure does not require submerging the food directly into the water; in steaming, the target food gets cooked as the result of the steam or vapors generated from the boiling water. Steam is considered a good heat conductor, nevertheless, the temperature release from steam does not exceed that of boiling water except in the pressure system [91]. Steaming was reported to have minimal effects on chlorophyll, soluble protein, sugar, vitamin c, and glucosinolates [92]. The steaming process helped preserve antioxidant properties and maintained the lowest biogenic amine content in bean varieties [93]. In AYB, the steaming approach was reportedly used in preparing a traditional snack called “Moi-Moi”. The procedure involved dehulling and wet milling of the grains accompanied by spicing. For the Moi-Moi to get cooked, it was steamed for about 60 minutes [71, 76]. The analysis of the AYB Moi-Moi showed a lower gelation capacity, higher water absorption capacity, lower oil absorption capacity when compared to Moi-Moi made from cowpea. The sensory analysis of AYB Moi-Moi showed no significant difference in color and flavor from Moi-Moi made from cowpea (cowpea is the most common grain for preparing Moi-Moi). Additionally, the acceptance level of the AYB Moi-Moi was similar to Moi-Moi constituted from cowpea [71]. Some researchers utilized the steaming cooking method in making Moi-Moi from AYB and cowpea blends, they reported a total steaming time of about 50 minutes [75].

2.1.4 Frying

Frying is one of the ancient and well-known cooking methods used for food preparation; the procedure is known for its ease, speed, and unique flavor and taste [94]; in addition, frying gives an attractive color, texture to food. The frying process involves the use of fat or oil which serves as the medium of direct heat transfer with the food [63, 95]. The transfer of heat, oil, and air during the frying process brings about changes like loss of moisture, oil uptake, starch gelatinization, aromatization, denaturation of protein, and changes in the color of the food. The changes in food and oil are largely dependent on the food property, the quality of oil, heating process, length of immersion, the rate at which air mixes with the oil, temperature, and the quality of the frying medium [96]. Frying could lead to the release of toxic products through oxidation, which usually occurs when oil is continuously used under high temperatures and atmospheric air [97]. The frying method of cooking was reportedly used in the preparation of traditional snacks commonly known as “akara” or “beans ball”, a snack widely eaten in Nigeria. The grains were soaked overnight and dehulled before wet milling (paste) and spicing. The frying medium (groundnut oil) was heated to 185-1900c, and the total frying time was about 5 minutes (Table 2). The end product (akara) showed an increase in carbohydrate, gross energy, water absorption capacity, oil absorption capacity, bulk density, and gelation capacity. Meanwhile, no significant difference was reported in accepting the AYB akara from the usual cowpea akara [71]. In like manner, the frying method was used in preparing Kokoro a popular snack in South-West Nigeria. The Kokoro process involved deep-frying the paste constituted from the AYB-Maize blend for about 10 minutes. The proximate analysis conducted on the Kokoro showed an increase in protein, sugar, ash, moisture, potassium, and calcium as the proportion of AYB flour increases. On the contrary, a decrease in fat and starch was observed with an increase in AYB flour [72]. Furthermore, the frying process was used to produce AYB cheese, using palm oil as the frying medium. The sensory evaluation indicated a general acceptance of the AYB cheese [73].

2.1.5 Baking

The baking process is a method whereby the raw dough is transformed into crumb and crust texture, under the influence of heat. During baking, the changes that occur include the crust formation, yeast inactivation, coagulation of protein, volume expansion, starch gelatinization, and moisture loss [98, 99, 100]. The baking approach was used in producing cookies from AYB-wheat composite flour. The cookies were baked for 20 minutes using an oven mark of 1800c. The nutritional analysis of the cookies showed an increase in protein content from 8.59 to 9.35% fat from 3.84 to 4.63%, ash from 4.84 to 5.21%, and crude fiber from 3.84 to 4.22%. An increase in mineral content corresponding to a percentage increase in the level of AYB flour was also observed [74].

2.2 Technological gap in the evaluation of AYB cooking time

In AYB, the majority of the cooking time investigations were conducted using basic approaches like firewood, gas, and kerosene stove. No information is documented on the use of standard equipment such as texture analyzer and Mattson bean cooker; however, the use of Matson bean cooker and texture have been reported in several legumes.

2.2.1 Mattson bean cooker

One standard method of measuring cooking time in pulses is to evaluate using a Mattson bean cooker [101]. The equipment is easy to use, cost-effective, and generates unbiased data compared to other methods [90]. The use of Mattson cooker is recommended in grain genetic improvement for evaluating new varieties [66]. Mattson first developed the Mattson bean cooker, having 100 plungers [102], but was later redesigned to have 25 plungers [103]. The usage of the equipment involves placing individual presoaked seeds on each of the saddle on the rack such that the tip of each plunger comes in contact with the surface of the seed. The weight of each plunger can be optimized to suit the size of the target grain by adjusting the number of lead buckshot inside each plunger. To initiate the cooking test, the lower part of the cooking rack is immersed in a boiling water bath up to half of its height. When a seed reaches tenderness, the plunger penetrates that particular seed and drops a short distance through the hole in the saddle. The top of a plunger that has dropped (penetrated a seed) will be lower than the top of the plungers which are yet to drop. The scenario makes it visibly easy to identify the plunger that has penetrated its seed [66, 90]. The cooking time for a set of seeds (25) has been explained differently by researchers; the cooking time was defined as the time required for 100% of the seeds to get penetrated [104]. In an additional study, the cooking time was recorded as the time 92% of seeds got penetrated [105]. Operating the Mattson cooker requires the uninterrupted attention of the user; the user manually records the time each plunger penetrates a seed the situation becomes more critical when multiple plungers penetrate at the same time. To overcome the bottleneck of manual recording several researchers have reported the use of an automated Mattson cooker where the cooking time is automatically recorded [66, 90, 106].

2.2.2 Texture analysis

The texture is an important trait of food characterized by its mechanical, geometrical, surface, and body attributes detected by senses of vision, hearing, touch, and kinesthetics [107, 108]. The mechanical attributes have to do with the qualities of the food under stress conditions; like hardness, cohesiveness, elasticity, and adhesiveness. In contrast, the geometrical attributes are related to the size, shape, and structural arrangement of the product. The surface attribute has to do with the sensations produced (in the mouth) around or in the surface of the product by moisture and fat or either of the two; similarly, the body attributes are related to the feelings produced in the mouth and how the moisture and fat or both are released [109]. Of recent, instrumental texture analysis has proven to be efficient in evaluating the mechanical and physical qualities of the raw and finished product, of which the application of texture analyzer is a well-established protocol. A texture analyzer is used for evaluating the hardness, fragility, adhesiveness, springiness, cohesiveness, gumminess, chewiness, and resilience of food [54, 88]. The instrument is easy to operate; it eliminates subjective judgment, as may be found in sensory evaluations [109]. The selection of a probe for use during analysis is dependent on the type of test, which could be a compression test, penetration (puncture) test, traction (tension). The different texture analysis test types were previously reviewed [109]. The texture analyzer has been applied in several texture studies in legumes, fruits, vegetables, meat, milk, among others [109, 110].

Advertisement

3. Methods of reducing cooking time in AYB

Several studies have reported a significant decrease in cooking time after seeds were subjected to processing methods like presoaking, dehulling, frying, steaming, and blanching [43, 71, 111, 112].

3.1 Presoaking of seeds

Presoaking is a long-age traditional practice used in homes to reduce cooking time, especially in grain legumes. The approach is flexible, simple, and common both at the domestic and industrial levels. The process involves the imbibition of water through the outer cuticle, the seed coat, and then into the cotyledons; [69, 113]. The first step in imbibition is the penetration of water by the seed, and the process can be through the seed coats since the seed coat has high fiber content and thus high-water holding capacity. Water inhibition can also occur through the micropyle or hilum; when the water reaches the cotyledons, the seed starts to absorb water and swell until the seeds attain their maximum water uptake capacity. Presoaking of seed before cooking enables the easy identification of unhydrated seeds, which can be discarded to achieve uniform cooking time. The procedure reduces cooking time because the hydrated seeds acquire a soft texture and thereby speeding up the cooking process and shortening the cooking time [114]. Also, soaking aid the easy identification of hydratable seeds and improves the nutrient quality of foods since the soaked content is usually discarded. Soaking grains before cooking is a good practice used traditionally in increasing food safety especially in situations when consumers have no idea of the storage preservatives used for the target grain.

The effect of presoaking in shortening the cooking time of AYB’s seed was reported by several authors. Presoaking AYB seeds in distilled water over a varying time of 6, 12, 18, and 24 hours reduced cooking time by 50%. The process also reduced the level of tannin and phytate, in addition to improving in-vitro protein digestibility. Soaking for 12 hours was the most effective in reducing cooking time, tannin, phytate, and in-vitro protein digestibility; however, soaking for 24 hours before dehulling was observed to significantly increase crude protein level by 16% [43]. In a similar study, AYB seeds were presoaked each in 0.20%, 0.40%, 0.60%, 0.80% and 1.00% of akanwu (sodium sesquicarbonate), and common salt (sodium chloride) and water for a duration of 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 hours. Seeds soaked for 6 hours in 0.060% akanwu and 1.00% common salt showed a 50% decrease in cooking time, while seeds soaked in tap water achieved a 50% reduction in cooking time after 24 hours of presoaking. Meanwhile, seeds presoaked in tap water took about 180 minutes to get tender [112]. According to a study, a 50% reduction in cooking time was achieved when seeds were presoaked for 12 hours in either 1% potash or 4% common salt. Seeds soaked for 12 hours in 4% common salt reached tenderness after 45 minutes of cooking however seeds that were not soaked remained hard even after 60 minutes of cooking [111]. In a similar experiment, presoaking seeds in a different medium (water, alkali, brine, alkaline-brine) reduced the cooking time to a considerable level; the most effective medium was alkaline-brine, with a maximum cooking time of 100 minutes as against 210 minutes reported for cooking dry raw seeds [115]. In a separate study, AYB grains soaked overnight reached tenderness after 60 minutes of cooking [71]. Notably, aside from reducing cooking time, presoaking is also effective in investigating nutrient and anti-nutrient content [15, 43, 116, 117, 118, 119].

3.2 Dehulling

Dehulling is a procedure through which seed coats or testa are removed either mechanically or using a machine. In most traditional setting, the process is carried out using either mortar and pestle or grinding stone, depending on the available option. Dehulled seeds have a good appearance in texture, cooking quality, palatability, and ease in digestibility. The approach reduces cooking time in grains legumes because during the dehulling process impermeable seed coats which usually prevent water uptake are removed [120]. Dehulled AYB grains showed the shortest cooking time of 35 minutes as against 80 and 150 minutes reported for whole seeds and soaked seeds, respectively [121]. The dehulling approach was observed to have a significant effect on the functional properties of AYB flour; a higher bulk density (0.93 g/cm3) was reported as against the bulk density (0.59 g/cm3) in cowpea and pigeon pea (0.70 g/cm3). Similarly, the swelling index (5.9 g/cm3) of dehulled AYB flour is more than the observed value in cowpea (3.7 g/cm3) and pigeon (4.1 g/cm3). The water absorption capacity (2.8 ml/h20/g) in dehulled AYB flour was also higher than the observed in cowpea (1.2 ml/h20/g) and pigeon pea (2.4 ml/h20/g) [122]. In a further experiment, a higher water capacity of 71 ml/g was observed for dehulled AYB than the value of 60 ml/g reported for raw samples [71].

About 80–90% of the total amount of potential anti-nutrient factors (polyphenols) in grain legumes are found in the seed coats, and thus dehulling has proven to be effective in reducing anti-nutrient contents especially those found in the seed coats [123, 124]. Authors reported a drastic reduction in oxalate, phytate, saponin, trypsin inhibitor, and tannin content of dehulled AYB flour [122]. Similarly, an increase in protein but a decrease in calcium and iron was reported for dehulled AYB flour [43]. In a separate study, the proximate analysis of dehulled AYB flour showed high protein content, high carbohydrate concentration, and sufficient level of amino acid [125].

3.3 Other processing methods in AYB

3.3.1 Fermentation

Fermentation increases the bioaccessibility and bioavailability of nutrients and sensory quality in addition to shelf life [126, 127]. The process involves the biochemical modification of food by microorganisms and their enzymes [128]; the process is capable of disrupting the activities of pathogens [126, 129]. The fermentation process was explored for the preparation of “tempeh” from AYB grains; tempeh is a traditional food usually made from fermented soybean or soybean already broken down by microorganisms. The procedures for making AYB tempeh included: cooking presoaked grains for 45 minutes at 1000c and inoculating the cooked grains with spore suspension to initiate fermentation. The inoculated grains were allowed to ferment over 42 hours. The final product showed significant changes in crude protein and carbohydrate. An increase in protein and amino nitrogen content was reported whereas a decrease in carbohydrates was observed. The quality of the AYB tempeh was acceptable to a large number of sensory panelists [130]. Meanwhile, some authors reported the minimal effect of fermentation on calcium, iron, magnesium, and zinc contents. However, they reported about a 34% reduction in phytate level and only tannin traces were detected [43]. Further research investigated the solid (3 days) and liquid (62 days) state fermentation approaches in making sauce from AYB grains. The prepared sauce revealed an increase of 11.94%, 4.85%, and 16.75% in ash, protein, and carbohydrate contents respectively. The sensory evaluation showed the acceptability of the AYB sauce was not significantly different from the level of acceptance of the commercial soy sauce in terms of color, aroma, and flavor [131].

Other studies used the fermentation process to formulate a yogurt-like product from dehulled and whole AYB grains. The process involved: the extraction of milk from grains which was followed by inoculation with a starter culture. For fermentation to occur, the inoculated milk was kept undisturbed over a time frame of 12 hours. The analysis of the formulated AYB yogurt presented a high total viable and Lactobacilli counts. As storage time increases, a decrease in the microbial load of the yogurt was observed [132]. In a similar experiment, raw AYB grains fermented for 48 hours showed an increase in protein and oil content [70]. “Dawa-Dawa” a traditional condiment was reportedly prepared through fermentation. The grains were boiled in water laced with “potash”, the boiled grains were later dehulled and allowed to ferment at room temperature for 72 hours. The proximate analysis of the “Dawa-Dawa” showed an increase in crude protein from 22.00 to 32.80% and crude fibers from 5.70 to 7.77%, ash content increased from 3.20 to 4.60%, and lipid from 1.20 to 1.38%. Nevertheless, a decrease in carbohydrates from 74.20 to 57.21% was observed in the product [133].

3.3.2 Germination

Germination is a complex process that involves a mature seed to make an immediate change from maturation to the germination-driven stage and prepare for seedling growth [134]. The stages of germination include uptake of water by the seeds (imbibition) and the second phase is the reinitiating of metabolic processes followed by the emergence of the radicle through the seed envelopes. The germination process was used to prepare flour from AYB grains. The grains were soaked in water at room temperature for 48 hours. After soaking, the grains were allowed to sprout for 96 hours and subjected to oven drying. The dried grains were further dehulled and milled into flour. The germinated AYB-wheat composite flour showed an increase in protein; for every increase in the percentage of AYB flour [74].

Advertisement

4. Molecular perspectives for shortening cooking time in AYB

4.1 Seed hardness attribute

Seed hardness is an important quality of grain legumes; the trait acts as a barrier against seed coat pathogens and seed damage. Likewise, it affects germination, seed processing, and cooking time [82, 135]. Seed hardness is heritable but can also be influenced by environmental conditions at production and storage time [81, 82]. The genetic factors responsible for seed hardness are not well understood; however, the roles of a few genes have been documented [82]. The influence of the environment on seed hardness is reflected in the hard-to-cook phenomenon, which is not also independent of genetic influence [82, 84]. Understanding the genetic basis of cooking time in AYB is a necessity for improving the trait. It is noteworthy that genetic architecture in cooking time is yet to be reported in AYB; thus, no molecular approach has been documented in studying AYB’s cooking time. Molecular techniques like GWAS and QTL could locate loci that controlled cooking time and thereby facilitate the identification of fast cooking lines. Likewise, new breeding techniques, including ZFNs, TALENS, and CRISPR/Cas9, have provided researchers the flexibility to insert desired traits precisely and quickly.

4.2 DNA technology

Previously, it would require about 7–10 years to transfer a target trait from a species to an adapted cultivar. The conventional process requires, handling a large number of progenies and several cycles of field evaluation. However, with molecular biology, a gene can be transferred in a single experiment, and within 5–6 years the new cultivar could exhibit a stable gene expression [136]. Presently, advances in plant molecular biology have provided processes and platforms through which the genetic architecture of traits can be well understood, manipulated, and transferred from different backgrounds [136, 137]. In addition, through DNA technology, gene sequences and functions can be accessed. Similarly, specific region (s) on the chromosome can be identified, molecular markers can be developed and genetic maps can be constructed, among many other possibilities. Genetic manipulation using physical, chemical, and biological mutagenesis presents added advantages with an enormous contribution to crop improvement. Among the widely used DNA technology reported in crop improvement programs are Genome-Wide Association Study (GWAS), Quantitative Trait Loci (QTL) Mapping, and Genome Editing.

4.2.1 GWAS

Over the years, GWAS has been implemented across a wide variety of crops such as soybean, maize, common bean, sorghum, and rice [55, 138, 139, 140, 141]. GWAS identifies genetic variants across the genome and associates the variants with the target phenotype. The commonly used GWAS approach involves identifying single nucleotide polymorphism (SNPs) markers and testing each marker for evidence of an association between the marker and the trait of interest. The marker-trait association approach relies on linkage disequilibrium (LD) between markers and causal polymorphisms [142, 143]. To minimize false genotype–phenotype association that may arise from population structure, a linear mixed model analysis option is usually implemented. The application of GWAS has contributed significantly to identifying candidate genes; identified markers can be mapped to reference genomes, and thereafter candidate genes can be identified [143]. Once genomic regions of a target trait and the corresponding alleles at each locus are identified, the allele can be incorporated into another variety through crosses. The resultant progenies with the desired allele combination can be subjected to marker-assisted selection. GWAS in combination with marker-assisted breeding offers great gains for improving quantitative traits with low heritability [136].

4.2.2 QTL mapping

QTLs are phenotypically defined regions on the chromosome that contribute to allelic variation for a biological trait [144]. QTL technique has become a popular approach [144, 145] used to study complex traits [146, 147]. The application of QTL analysis in crop improvement was reported by several authors [82, 148]. Regions on the chromosomes that significantly affect variations of quantitative traits are identifiable through QTL mapping. The ability to locate chromosomal region (s) is important in identifying target genes and in understanding the genetic mechanism of genetic variation. Majorly, QTL mapping reveals information on QTL’s having a significant effect on trait variation, and also answers the question to what extent is the variation due to additive, dominant, and epistasis effects of the QTL? The mapping of QTL also shows the genetic correlation of different traits and also answers the question does the QTL interact with the environment? [149]. The ability of QTL mapping to unravel and, at the same time provide answers to genetic questions makes it a powerful technique in crop improvement.

4.2.3 Genome editing

The discovery of genome editing technologies has revolutionized plant and animal research. Through genome editing, researchers can introduce sequence-specific modifications into the genome of different cell types and organisms. The site-specific nucleases (SSNs) have successfully been used in precise gene editing. The SSNs create double-stranded breaks (DSB) in the target DNA. The DSB is repaired through non-homologous end joining (NHEJ) or homolog-directed recombination (HDR) pathways resulting in insertion/deletion (INDELS) and substitution mutations in the target region (s), respectively [150, 151]. The technology produces defined mutant; also, the edited crops typically carry the desired trait [152]. Gene editing has been reported in plants including Arabidopsis [153], rice [154], and other crops, The genome editing techniques include meganucleases, zinc finger nucleases (ZFNs), transcription activator-like effector nucleases (TALENs), clustered regularly interspaced palindromic repeats (CRISPR/Cas9). These techniques have been extensively reviewed [151, 155].

Advertisement

5. Conclusion

Despite the unique attribute of AYB as a seed and tuber producing crop, the crop is underutilized due to identified limitations, including long cooking hours and the abundance of anti-nutrition. Different cooking hours have previously been reported for AYB grains; the lengthiest cooking duration was 24 hours. The cooking hours were observed to be dependent on the cooking methods used, the energy source, and the germplasm considered. The boiling cooking method presented the most prolonged cooking hours (24) while roasting gave rise to the least cooking time of 5 minutes. The diverse cooking methods experimented within AYB effectively reduced the level of anti-nutrient content in the grains. Nevertheless, processing methods such as presoaking and dehulling were observed as the most effective in improving both cooking time and nutritional contents. Fermentation and germination likewise showed positive effects in enhancing the nutrient quality of AYB food products.

Furthermore, the application of recommended equipment like the Mattson bean cooker and texture analyzer could efficiently evaluate cooking time and seed hardness across AYB germplasm. The adequate phenotyping of cooking traits using basic and standard equipment will provide definite baseline information that breeders could use to select parental materials for hybridization and genetic improvement of cooking traits. Additionally, DNA technology which has proven to be effective in providing solutions to complex problems could be exploited through GWAS, QTL mapping, and genome editing for the improvement of AYB’s cooking attributes. Conclusively, the present review is targeted at stimulating researchers’ interest in developing AYB cultivars with reduced cooking time.

Advertisement

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1. Unicef. 2020. Available from: https://www.unicef.org/reports/state-of-food-security-and-nutrition-2020 [Accessed 2021-06-04]
  2. 2. FOA. 2017. The future of food and agriculture—Trends and challenges. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2017). Available from: http://www.fao/3/i6583e.pdf [Accessed 2021-06-23]
  3. 3. Ray DK, Mueller ND, West PC, Foley JA. Yield trends are insufficient to double global crop production by 2050. PLoS one. 2013;8.e66428. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0066428
  4. 4. Cazzato E, Laudadio V, Stellacci AM, Ceci E, Tufarelli V. Influence of sulphur applicationon protein quality, fatty acid composition and nitrogen fixation of white lupin (Lupinus albus L.). European Food Research Technology. 2012;235:963-969. DOI: 10.1007/s00217-012-1817-5
  5. 5. Ntatsi G, Karkanis A, Yfantopoulos D, Olle M, Travlos I, Thanopoulos R, Bilalis D, Bebeli P, Savvas D. Impact of variety and farming practices on growth, yield, weed flora and symbiotic nitrogen fixation in faba bean cultivated for fresh seed production. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica Section B-Soil and Plant Science. 2018; 38:619-630. DOI: 10.1080/09064710.2018.14522286
  6. 6. Maitra S, Shankar T, Banerjee P. Potential and advantages of maize-legume intercropping system. In: Hossain A, editor. Maize Production and Use. London: IntechOpen; 2020. p. 1-14. DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.91722
  7. 7. Cakir O, Ucarli C, Tarhan C, Pekmez M, Turgut-kara N. Nutritional and health benefits of legumes and their distinctive genomic properties. 2019;39:1-12. Food Science and Technology. DOI: 10.1590/fst.42117
  8. 8. Alemneh AA, Zhou Y, Ryder MH, Denton MD. Mechanism in plant growth-promoting rhizobacter that enhance legume-rhizobial symbioses. Journal of Applied Microbiology. 2020;129:1133-1156. DOI: 10.1111/jam.14754
  9. 9. Shitta NS, Abtew WG, Ndlovu N, Oselebe HO, Edemodu AC, Abebe AT. Morphological characterization and genotypic identity of African yam bean (Sphenostylis stenocarpa Hochst ex.A. Rich. Harms) germplasm from diverse ecological zones. Plant Genet. Resources Characterization and Utilization. DOI: 10.1017/s1479262121000095
  10. 10. Amoatey HM, Klu GYP, Bansa D, Kumaga FK, Aboagye LM, Benett-larley SO, Gamedoagbao DK (2000) African yam bean (Sphenostylis stenocarpa) A neglected crop in Ghana. West African Journal of Applied Ecology. 2000; 1:53-60. DOI: 10.4314/wajae.v1i1.40570
  11. 11. Saka JO, Adeniyan ON, Akande SR, Balogun MO. An economic evaluation of intercropping African yam bean, Kenaf and Maize in the rain forest zone of Nigeria. Middle East Journal of Scientific Research 2007;2:1-8
  12. 12. Adewale BD, Odoh NC. A review on genetic resources, diversity, and agronomy of African yam bean (Sphenostylis stenocarpa (Hochst. ex A. Rich.) Harms): A potential future food crop. Sustainable Agriculture Research. 2013;2:32-43. DOI: 10.5539/sar.v2n1p32
  13. 13. Aremu CO, Ariyo OJ, Adewale BD. Assessment of selection techniques in genotypes × environment interaction in cowpea Vigna unguiculata (L) walp. African Journal of Agricultural Research. 2007;2:352-355
  14. 14. Malumba P, Denis BM, Joseph KK, Doran L, Danthine S, Bera F. Structural and physicochemical characterization of Sphenostylis stenocarpa (Hochst. ex A. Rich.) Harms tuber starch. Food Chemistry. 2016;212:305-312. DOI: 1016/j.foodchem.2016.05.181
  15. 15. Nwokolo E. African yam bean (Sphenostylis stenocarpa (Hoechst ex. A. Rich) Harms.) In: Nwokolo E, Smart J, editors. Food and Feed from Legumes and Oilseed, Boston: Springer; 1996. p. 182-188. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4613-0433-3_18
  16. 16. Afolabi CG, Ogunsanya OM, Lawal OI. Evaluation of some African yam bean (Sphenostylis stenocarpa (Hochst. Ex A. Rich) accessions for resistance to flower bud and pod rot diseases. Current Plant Biology. 2019;20:1-5. DOI: 10.1016/j. cpb.2019.100126
  17. 17. Ecocrop.Ecocrop database, FAO.2009. Available from: http://ecocrop.fao.org/ecocrop/srv/en/home. [Accessed: 2020-08-23]
  18. 18. Verdcourt B, Doygaard S. Sphenostylis E. Mey. In: Pope GV, Polhill RM, editors. Flora Zambesiaca. London: Kew; 2001.p. 68-73
  19. 19. Nwosu JN. Evaluation of the proximate composition and antinutritional properties of African yam bean (Sphenostylis sternocarpa) using malting treatment. International Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences. 2013;2:157-169
  20. 20. Nnamani CV, Ajayi SA, Oselebe HO, Atkinson CJ, Igboabuchi AN, Ezigbo EC. Sphenostylis stenocarpa (ex. A. Rich.) Harms a fading genetic resource in a changing climate: prerequisite for conservation and sustainability. Plants. 2017;6:1-16. DOI: 10.3390/plants6030030
  21. 21. Adewale BD, Kehinde OB, Odu BO, Dumet DJ. The potentials of African yam bean (Sphenostylis stenocarpa Hochst. ex. A. Rich) Harms in Nigeria: character distribution and genetic diversity. In: Smart J, Haq N Editors. New Crops and Uses: their role in a rapidly changing world. Chichester: RPM; 2008. p. 265-276
  22. 22. Ukom AN, Ndudim S, Nwanagba LN. Effects of fermentation periods on the nutrient quality and sensory acceptability of African yam bean (Sphenostylis stenocarpa) porridge. Nigerian Journal of Biotechnology. 2019;36:9-16. DOI: 10.4314/njb.v36i1.2
  23. 23. Adewale BD. Genetic diversity, stability and reproductive biology of African yam bean Sphenostylis stenocarpa (Hochst. ex A.Rich) Harms [thesis]. Abeokuta: University of Agriculture; 2011
  24. 24. Soetan KO, Olaiya CO, Karigidi KO. Comparative invitro antioxidant activities of six accessions of African yam beans (Sphenostylis stenocarpa) Annals. Food Science and Technology. 2018;19:455-446
  25. 25. Baiyeri SO, Uguru MI, Ogbonna PE, Samuel-Baiyeri CCA, Okechukwu R, Kumaga FK, Amoatey C. Evaluation of the nutritional composition of the seeds of some selected African yam bean (Sphenostylis stenocarpa Hochst ex. A. Rich (Harms) accessions. Journal of Tropical Agriculture, Food, Environment and Extension. 2018;17:37-44. DOI: 10.4314/as.v17i2.5
  26. 26. Adegboyega TT, Abberton MT, Abdelgadir AH, Dianda M, Maziya-Dixon B, Oyatomi OA, Ofodile S, Babalola OO. Evaluation of nutritional and anti-nutritional properties of African yam bean (Sphenostylis stenocarpa (Hochst ex.A.Rich.) Harms.) seeds. Journal of Food Quality. 2020;20:1-11. DOI:10.1155/2020/6569420
  27. 27. Abbey BW, Berezi PE. Influence of processing on the digestibility of African yam bean Sphenostylis stenocarpa(Hochst Ex A. Rich) Harms. Nutrition Reports International. 1988;37:819-827
  28. 28. National Research Council (NRC). Lost Crops of Africa: Volume II: Vegetables, Development, Security, and Cooperation. Washington D.C; National Academy of Science. 322-344 p. DOI. 2007;10:17226/11763
  29. 29. Ohanmu EO, Ikhajiagbe B, Edegbai BO. Nitrogen distribution pattern of African yam bean (Sphenostylis stenocarpa) exposed to cadminum stress. Journal of Applied Sciences and Environmental Management. 2018;22:1053-1057. DOI: 10.4314/jasem.v22i7.10
  30. 30. Dukes JA. Handbook of legumes of world economic importance. New York: Plenum Press; 1981. 1-354 p. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4684-8151-8
  31. 31. Uguru MI, Madukaife SO. Studies on the variability in agronomic and nutritive characteristics of African yam bean (Sphenostylis stenocarpa Hochst. Ex. A. Rich Harms). Plant Production and Research Journal. 2001;6:10-19
  32. 32. Akande SR, Olakojo SA, Ajayi SA, Owolade OF, Adetumbi JA, Adeniyan ON, Ogunbodede BA. 2012. Planting date effects cowpea seed yield and quality at southern guinea savanna of Nigeria. Seed Technology. 2012;34:51-60. Available from: http://jstor.org/stable/23433635 [Accessed: 2021-03-12]
  33. 33. Oagile O, Mmolotsi R, Segwagwe A, Babili TP. African yam bean (Sphenostylis stenocarpa) nodulates promiscuously with rhizobium indigenous to soils of Botswana. Journal of Plant Studies. 2012;1:109-113. DOI:10.5539/jps.vIn2p109
  34. 34. Ojuederie OB, Balogun MO. Genetic variation in nutritional properties of African yam bean (Sphenostylis stenocarpa Hochst ex. A. Rich. Harms) accessions. Nigerian Journal of Agriculture Food and Environment. 2017;13:180-187
  35. 35. Anya MI, Ozung PO. Proximate, mineral and anti-nutritional composition of raw and processed African yam bean (Sphenostylis stenocarpa) seeds in Cross River state, Nigeria. Global Journal of Agricultural Sciences 2019;18:19-29. DOI: 10.4314/gjass.v18i1.3
  36. 36. Konyeme TE, Nyananyo BL, Tanee FBG. Diversity in proximate analysis of tubers of some African yam bean (Sphenostylis stenocarpa) (Hochst Ex. A. Rich.) Harms (Fabaceae) accessions. Journal of Applied Sciences and Environmental Management. 2020;24:1787-1793. DOI: 10.4314/jasem.v24i10.12
  37. 37. Onuoha CH, Harry BJ, Eze SO. Evaluation of nutrients and anti-nutritional factors of different species of African Yam Bean (Sphenostylis stenocarpa). European Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences. 2017;4:1-8
  38. 38. Ojuederie OB, Ajiboye JA, Babalola OO. Biochemical and histopathological studies of key tissues in healthy male wistar rats fed on African yam bean seed and tuber meals. Journal of Food Qulaity. 2020;20:1-10. DOI: 10.1155/2020/8892618
  39. 39. Potter D. Economic Botany of Sphenostylis (Leguminosae). Economic Botany 1992;46: 262-275. DOI: 10.1007/bf02866625
  40. 40. Nnamani CV, Atkinson CJ, Nwite JE. Etymology of folk nomenclatures for Sphenostylis stenocarpa (Hochst ex A. Rich) Harms. Preprints. 2019;1-19. DOI: 10.20944/preprints201903.0044.V1
  41. 41. KIu GYP, Amoatey HM, Bansa D, Kumaga FK. Cultivation and use of African yam bean (Sphenostylis stenocarpa) in the Volta Region of Ghana. Journal of Food Technology in Africa. 2001;6:74-77. DOI: 10.4314/jfta.v6i3.19292
  42. 42. Okigbo BN. Introducing the yam bean (Sphenostylis sternocarpa) (Hochst.ex A. Rich) Harms. In: Proceedings of the first IITA Grain Legume Improvement Workshop 29 October-2 November 1973; Nigeria. IITA: Ibadan; 1973. p. 224-238
  43. 43. Ene-Obong HN, Obizoba IC. Effect of domestic processing on the cooking time, nutrients, anti-nutrients and in vitro protein digestibility of the African yam bean (Sphenostylis stenocarpa). Plant Foods for Human Nutrition. 1996;49:43-52. DOI: 10.1007/BF01092521
  44. 44. Njoku HO, Ofuya CO. Effect of pretreatment on the cooking time of the African yam bean (Sphenostylis stenocarpa) Journal of Food Science. 1989;54:758-759. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2621.1989.tb04700.x
  45. 45. Ezueh MI. African yam bean as a crop in Nigeria. World Crops. 1984;36:199-200
  46. 46. Ajibade SR, Balogun MO, Afolabi OO, Ajomale KO, Fasoyiro SB. Genetic variation in nutritive and antinutritive content of African yam bean. Tropical Science 2005;5:144-148. DOI: 10.1002/ts.14
  47. 47. Ndidi US, Ndidi CU, Abbas O, Aliyu M, Francis GB, Oche O. Proximate, antinutrients and mineral composition of raw and processed (Boiled and Roasted) Sphenostylis stenocarpa seeds from Southern Kaduna, Northwest Nigeria. International Scholarly Research Notices. 2014;2014:1-9. DOI: 10.1155/2014/280837
  48. 48. Ajibola GO, Olapade AA. Physical, proximate and anti-nutritional composition of African yam bean (Sphenostylis stenocarpa) seeds varieties. Journal of Food Research. 2016;5:67-72. DOI: 10.55539/jfr.v5n2p67
  49. 49. Sam SM. Nutrient and anti-nutrient constituents in seeds of Sphenostylis stenocarpa (Hochst. Ex. A. Rich.) Harms. African Journal of Plant Science. 2019;13:107-112. DOI: 10.5897/AJS2019.1763
  50. 50. Adewale BD, Vroh-Bi I, Dumet DJ, Nnadi S, Kehinde OB, Ojo DK, Adegbite AE, Franco J. Genetic Diversity in African yam bean accessions based on AFLP markers: towards a platform for germplasm improvement and utilization. Plant Genetic Resources Characterization and Utilization.2015;13:111-118. DOI: 10.1017/S1479262114000707
  51. 51. Ojuederie OB, Balogun MO, Akande SR, Korie S, Omodele T. Intraspecific variability in agro-morphological traits of African yam bean Sphenostylis stenocarpa (Hochst ex. A. Rich) Harms. Journal of Crop Science and Biotechnology. 2015;18:53-62. DOI: 10.1007/s12892-014-0109-y
  52. 52. Agbolade JO, Popoola JO, Kioko JI, Adewale BD, Ajiboye AA, Ajewole TO, David OA, Komolafe RJ. Comparative genetic variability and traits heritability in vegetative and floral characters in accessions of two minor legumes. Indian Journal of Agricultural Research. 2018;53:78-183
  53. 53. Aina IA, Ilori CO, Ekanem UO, Oyatomi O, Potter D, Abberton MT. Morphological Characterization and Variability Analysis of African Yam Bean (Sphenostylis stenocarpa Hochst. ex. A. Rich) Harms. International Journal of Plant Research. 2020;3:45-52. DOI: 10.5923/j.plant.20201003.01
  54. 54. Wani IA, Sogi DS, Wani AA, Gill BS. Physical and cooking characteristics of some Indian bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) cultivars. Journal of the Saudi Society of Agricultural Sciences. 2017;16:7-15. DOI: 10.1016/j.jssas.2014.12.002
  55. 55. Diaz S, Ariza-Suarez D, Ramdeen R, Aparicio J, Arunachalam N, Hernandez C, Diaz H, Ruiz H, Piopho HP, Raatz B. Genetic architecture and genomic prediction of cooking time in common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Frontiers in Plant Science. 2021;11:622213. DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2020.622213
  56. 56. Popoola JO, Adegbite AE, Adewale BD, Odu BO. Morphological intraspecific variabilities in African yam bean (Sphenostylis stenocarpa Hochst. Ex. A. Rich) Harms. Scientific Research Essays. 2011;6:507-515
  57. 57. Enwere NJ, Hung YC, Ngoddy PO. Texture and microstructure of African yam bean (Sphenostylis sternocarpa) products. Journal of Texture Studies 1990;21:377-394. DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-4603-1990.TB00489.X
  58. 58. Silva HC, Luh BS. Scanning electron microscope studies on starch granules of red kidney beans and bean sprouts. Journal of Food Science. 1978;43:1405-1408. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2621.1978.tb02503.x
  59. 59. Sefa-Dedeh S, Stanley DW. Textural implications of the microstructure of legumes. Food Technol. 1979;33:77-83
  60. 60. Avanza MV, Chaves MG, Acevedo BA, Anon MC. Functional properties and microstructure of cowpea cultivated in north-east Argentina. LWT-Food Science and Technology. 2012;49:123-130. DOI: 10.1016/j.lwt.2012.04.015
  61. 61. Mechling LC, Gast DL, Fields EA. Evaluation of a portable DVD player and system of least prompts to self-prompt cooking task completion by young adults with moderate intellectual disabilities. The Journal of Special Education. 2008;42: 179-190. DOI: 10.1177/0022466907313348
  62. 62. McGowan L, Caraher M, Raats M, Lavelle F, Hollywood L, McDowell D, Spence M, McCloat A, Mooney E, Dean M. Domestic cooking and food skills: a review. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition. 2017;57:2412-2243. DOI: 10.1080/10408398.2015.1072495
  63. 63. Pathare PB, Roskilly AP. Quality and energy evaluation in meat cooking. Food Engineering Reviews. 2016;8:435-447. DOI: 10.1007/s12393-016-9143-5
  64. 64. Gibson R. The role of diet and host related factors in nutrient bioavailability. Food and Nutrition Bulletin. 2007;28:S77-100. 10.1177/15648265070281S108
  65. 65. Siddiq M, Uebersax MA editors. Dry beans and pulses: Production, processing and nutrition. Hoboken: Wiley; 2012. 379 p. DOI: 10.1002/9781118448298
  66. 66. Sabadoti VD, Miano AC, Augusto PED. Automation of Mattson bean cooker: A simple and a low-cost approach. Journal of food processing and preservation. 2020;44:e14769:1-10. DOI: 101111/jfpp.14769
  67. 67. Faye M, Fulton J, Ibro G, Dushwaha S, Lowenberg-DeBoer J. Developing cowpea market opportunities in West Africa. Bean/Cowpea CRSP, Regional project research and training annual technical progress reports. Bean/Cowpea CRSP 2004, pp. 5-13
  68. 68. Yeung H, Ehlers JD, Waniska RD, Alviola JN, Rooney LW. Rapid screening methods to evaluate cowpea cooking characteristics. Field Crops Research. 2009;112:245-252. DOI; 10.1016/j.fcr.2009.03.010
  69. 69. Wood JA. Evaluation of cooking time in pulses: A review. Cereal Chemistry Journal. 2016;94:32-48. DOI: 10.1094/CCHEM-05-16-0127-FI
  70. 70. Obatolu VA, Fasoyiro SB, Ogunsunmi L. Processing and functional properties of yam bean (Sphenostylis stenocarpa). Journal of Food Processing and Preservation. 2007;31:240-249. DOI: 10.1111j.1745-4549.2007.00112.x
  71. 71. Achinewhu, S., Akah, G (2003) Chemical, functional and sensory properties of processed African yam beans (Sphenostylis stenocarpa) and cowpeas (Vigna unguiculata). Plant Foods for Human Nutrition. 2003;58:1-6. DOI: 10.1023/B:QUAL.0000040364.74521.d8
  72. 72. Idowu AO. Nutrient composition and sensory properties of kokoro (a Nigerian snack) made from maize and African yam bean flour blends. International Food Research Journal. 2015;22:739-744
  73. 73. Yusufu MI, Ikya JK, Gwaza TT. Production and quality evaluation of African yam bean cheese and cow milk cheese in different palm oil samples. International Journal of Innovative Food Science and Technology. 2018;1:20-27. DOI: 10.25218/IJIFST.2018.01.001.03
  74. 74. Okoye JI, Obi CD (2017) Chemical composition and sensory properties of wheat-African yam bean composite flour cookies. Discourse Journal of Agriculture and Food Sciences 5:21-27
  75. 75. Nwosu JN, Onuegbu NC, Ogueke CC, Kabuo NO, Omeire GC. Acceptability of moin-moin produced from blends of African yam bean (Sphenostylis stenocarpa) and cowpea (Vigna unguiculata). International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Science. 2014; 5:996-1004
  76. 76. Frank-Peterside, N., Dosumu, DO, Njoku HO. Sensory evaluation and proximate analysis of African yam bean (Sphenostylis stenocarpa Harms) moimoi. Journal of Applied Sciences and Environmental Management. 2002;6:43-48. DOI: 10.4314/jasem.v6i2.17175
  77. 77. Okafor GI, Usman GO. Production and evaluation of breakfast cereals from blends of African yam bean (Sphenostylis stenocarpa), maize (Zea mays) and defatted coconut (cocus nucifera). Journal of food processing and preservation. 2013;38: 1037-1043. DOI: 10.1111/jfpp.12060
  78. 78. Obasi NE, Uchechukwu N, Eke-Obia E. Production and evaluation of biscuits from Africa yam bean (Sphenostylis stenocarpa) and wheat (Triticum aestivum) flours. Food science and quality management. 2012;7:5-12
  79. 79. Eke OS, Akobundu ENT. Functional properties of African yam bean (Sphenostylis stenocarpa) seed flour as affected by processing. Food Chemistry. 1993;48:337-340. DOI: 10.1016/0308-8146(93)90314-6
  80. 80. Ene-Obong HN. Nutritional evaluation, consumption pattern and processing of the African yam bean (Sphenostylis stenocarpa) [Thesis]. Nsukka: University of Nigeria;1992
  81. 81. Argel PJ, Paton CJ. Overcoming legume hard seededness. In: Loch DS, Ferguson JE, editors. Forage seed production: Tropical and Subtropical Species. Wallingford, CAB International; 1999. p. 247-265
  82. 82. Sandhu KS, You FM, Conner RL, Balasubramanian PM, Hou A (2018) Genetic analysis and QTL mapping of the seed hardness trait in a black common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) recombinant inbred line (RIL)population. Molecular Breeding 2018;38:34:1-13. DOI: 10.1007/s11032-018-0789-y
  83. 83. Medoua GN, Mbone IL, Agbor-Egbe T, Mbofung CMF. Study of the hard-to-cook property of stored yam tubers (Dioscorea dumetorum) and some determining biochemical factors. Food Research International. 2005;38:143-149. DOI: 10.1016/j.foodres.2004.09.005
  84. 84. Shiga TM, Lajolo FM, Filisetti TMCC. Changes in the cell wall polysaccharides during storage and hardening of beans. Food Chemistry. 2004;84:53-64. DOI: 10.1016/s0308-8146(03)00166-3
  85. 85. Galiotu-Panayotou M, NB Kyriakidis, Margaris I. Phytase-phytate-pectin hypothesis and quality of legumes cooked in calcium solutions. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture. 2008;88:355-361. DOI: 10.1002/jsfa.2973
  86. 86. Chinedum E, Sanni S, Theressa N, Ebere A. Effect of domestic cooking on the starch digestibility, predicted glycemic indices, polyphenol contents and alpha amylase inhibitory properties of beans (Phaseolis Vulgaris) and breadfruit (Treculia Africana). International Journal of Biological Macromolecules. 2018;106, 200-206. DOI: 10.1016/j,ijbionmac.2017.08.005
  87. 87. Pevicharova G, Sofkova-Bobcheva S, Zsivanovits G. Sensory and instrumental texture of snap bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). International Journal of Food Properties. 2015;18:1169-1180. DOI: 10.1080/10942912.2014.891610
  88. 88. Erkan SB, Gurler HN, Bilgin DG, Germec M, Turhan I. Production and characterization of tempehs from different sources of legume by Rhizopus oligosporus. LWT-Food Science and Technology. 2020;119:108880. DOI: 10.1016/j.IWT.2019.108880
  89. 89. Kinyanjui P, Njoroge D,Makokha A, Christiaens S, Sila D, Hendrickx M. Quantifying the effects of postharvest storage and soaking pre-treatments on the cooking quality of common beans (Phaseolus Vulgaris). Journal of Food Processing and Preservation. 2017;41;1-10. DOI: 10.1111/jfpp.13036
  90. 90. Wang N, Daun JK. Determination of cooking times of pulses using an automated Mattson cooker apparatus. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture. 2005;85:1631-1635. DOI: 10.1002/jsfa.2134
  91. 91. Schock DR, Harrison DL, Anderson LL. Effect of dry and moist heat treatments on selected beef quality factors. Journal of Food Science. 1970;35:195-198. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2621.1970.tb12137.x
  92. 92. Yuan GF, Sun B, Yuan J, Wang OM. Effects of different cooking methods on health-promoting compounds of broccoli Journal of Zhejiang University Science. 2009;10:580-588. Doi 10.1631/jzus.B0920051
  93. 93. Preti R, Rapa M, Vinci G (2017) Effect of steaming and boiling on the antioxidant properties and biogenic amines content in green bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) varieties of different colours. Journal of Food Quality. 2017;2017. DOI: 10.1155/2017/5329070
  94. 94. Ngadi M, Xue J, Food Frying: Modifying the Functional Properties of Batters. In: Ahmed J, Ramaswamy HA, Kasapis S, Boye JI, editors. Novel Food Processing: Effects on Rheological and Functional Properties. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2009. p. 437-457
  95. 95. Singh RP. Energy in food processing. Drying Technology. New York: Elsevier; 1989. 839 p. DOI: 10.1080/07373938908916635
  96. 96. Bordin K, Kunitake MT, Aracava KK, Trindade CSF. Changes in food caused by deep fat frying-A review. Archivos Latinoamericanos De Nutricion. 2013;63:5-13
  97. 97. Del Ré PV, Jorge N. Behavior of vegetable oils for frying discontinuous frozen pre-fried products. Food Science and Technology.2006;26: 56-53
  98. 98. Pyler EJ. Baking Science and Technology. 3rd ed. Kansas: Sosland Company; 1988. 1359 p
  99. 99. Eliasson AC, Larsson K. Cereals in Breadmaking: A Molecular Colloidal Approach. Ist ed. CRC; 1993. 392 p
  100. 100. Therdthai N, Zhou W. Recent advances in the studies of bread baking process and their impacts on the bread baking technology. Food Science Technology Research. 2003;9:219-226. Available from: http://scholarbank,nus.edu.sg/handle/10635/77644 [Accessed: 2021-04-25]
  101. 101. Carvalho B, Patto, M, Vieira I Barbosa A. New strategy for evaluating grain cooking quality of progenies in dry bean breeding programs. Crop Breeding and Applied Biotechnology. 2017;17:115-123. DOI; 10.1590/1984-70332017v17n2a18
  102. 102. Mattson S. The cookability of yellow peas. A colloid-chemical and biochemical study. Acta Agriculturae Suecana. 1946;2:185-231
  103. 103. Jackson GM, Varriano-Marston E. Hard-to-cook phenomenon in beans: effect of accelerated storage on water absorption and cooking time. Journal of Food Science. 1981;46:799-803. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2621.1981.tb15351.x
  104. 104. Hsieh HM, Pomeranz Y, Swanson BG. Composition, cooking time, and maturation of azuki (Vigna angularis) and common beans (Phaseolus vulgaris). Cereal Chemistry. 1992;69:244-248
  105. 105. Proctor J, Watts B. Development of a modified Mattson bean cooker procedure based on sensory panel cookability evaluation. Canadian Institute of Food Science and Technology Journal. 1987;20:9-14. DOI:10.1016/S0315-5463(87)70662-2
  106. 106. De Oliveira JP, Inês, T, De Souza M, Pereira S, Chauca MNC (2015). Cozedor de mattson adaptado monitorado pela Plataforma arduino. In Congresso Técnico Científico da Engenharia e da Agronomia, Fortaleza, Brasil
  107. 107. Szezesniak AS. Texture is a sensory property. Food Quality Preference. 2002;13:215-225. DOI:10.1016/S0950-3293(01)00039-8
  108. 108. IOS (International Organization for Standardization). Sensory Analysis–Vocabulary. 2nd ed. 2008. 107. p
  109. 109. Rolle L, Siret R, Segade SR, Maury C, Gerbi V, Jourjon F. Instrumental texture analysis parameters as markers of Table-grape and wine-grape quality: A Review. American Journal for Enology and Viticulture. 2012;63:11-28. DOI: 10,5344/ajev.2011.11059
  110. 110. Shimelis EA. Nutrient dense dairy product diversification and quality evaluation. East African Journal of Sciences. 2019;13:195-206
  111. 111. Njoku HO, Ofuya CO. Effect of pretreatment on the cooking time of the African yam bean (Sphenostylis stenocarpa). Journal of Food Science. 1989;54:758-759. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2621.1989.tb04700.x
  112. 112. Onyeike EN, Uzogara SG. Effects of soaking in salt solutions on water absorption, PH and cooking time of African yam bean seeds (Sphenostylis stenocarpa hochst ex. A, rich harms). Global Journal of Pure and Applied Sciences. 2000;6:67-73. DOI: 10.4314/gjpas.v6i1.16079
  113. 113. Wood JA, Harden S. A method to estimate the hydration and swelling properties of chickpeas (Cicer arietinum L.). Journal of Food Science. 2006;71:E190-E195. DOI: 10.1111/j.1750-3841.2006.00009.x
  114. 114. Vasanthakaalam H, Karayire A, Nyagahungu I. Hydration and culinary profile of improved common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L) cultivars. Rwanda Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 2020;2:68-75
  115. 115. Agunbiade SO. Cookability of African yam bean, Sphenostylis stenocarpa (Hochst ex. A. Rich) Harms. Nahrung. 1996;40:37-40
  116. 116. Aminigo ER, Metzger LE. Pretreatment of African yam bean (Sphenostylis stenocarpa): effect of soaking and blanching on the quality of African yam bean. Plant Foods for Human Nutrition. 2005;60:165-171. DOI: 10.1007/s11130-005-9551-4
  117. 117. Adeye EI, Agesin OO. Dehulling the African yam bean (Sphenostylis stenocarpa Hochst. Ex.A, Rich seeds: Any nutritional importance? Note I. Bangladesh Journal of Scientific and Industrial Research. 2007;42:163-174. DOI: 10.3329/bjsir.v42i2.469
  118. 118. Oke MO, Sobowale SS, Ogunlakin GO. Evaluation of the Effect of Processing Methods on the Nutritional and Anti-nutritional Compositions of Two Under-utilized Nigerian Grain Legumes. Pakistan Journal of Biological Sciences. 2013;16:2015-2020. DOI: 10.3923/pjbs.2013.2015.2020
  119. 119. Ihemeje A, Nwanekezi EC, Odimegwu EN, Ekwe CC. Effect of processing methods of toasting, soaking, boiling, sprouting on dietary fiber and anti-nutrient contents of African yam bean and red kidney bean flour. European Journal of Food Science and Technology. 2018;6:40-48
  120. 120. Williams PC, Nakoul H, Singh KB. Relationship between cooking time and some physical characteristics in chickpeas (Cicer arietinum L.). Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture. 1983;34:492-496. DOI: 10.1002/jsfa.2740340510
  121. 121. Obizoba IC, Souzey J. The nutritive value of African yam bean (Sphenostylis stenocarpa): nitrogen and mineral utilization. Ecology of food and nutrition. 1989;22:297-305. DOI: 10.1080/03670244.1989.9991078
  122. 122. Abiodun OA, Adeleke RO. Effect of dehulling/soaking on the chemical, functional and anti-nutritional contents of three varieties of beans. Nutrition and Food Science. 2011;41:117-122. DOI: 10.1108/00346651111117382
  123. 123. Rao W, Dcosthale YG. Tannin contents of pulses: Varietal differences and effects of cooking and germination. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture.1982;33:1013-1016. DOI: 10.1002/jsfa.2740331012
  124. 124. Singh U. Methods for dehulling of pulses: A critical appraisal. Journal of Food Science Technology. 1995;32:81-93
  125. 125. Adeyeye EI. Amino acid composition of six varieties of dehulled African yam bean (Sphenostylis stenocarpa) flour. International Journal of Food Sciences and Nutrition. 1997;48:345-351. DOI: 10.3109/09637489709028581
  126. 126. Li S, Tayie FAK, Young MF, Rocheford T, White WS. Retention of provitamin A carotenoids in high β-carotene maize (Zea mays) during traditional African household processing. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry. 2007;55: 10744-10750. 10.1021/jf071815v
  127. 127. Chaves-Lopez C, Serio A, Grande-Tovar CD, Cuervo-Mulet R, Delgado-Ospina J, Paparella A. Traditional fermented foods and beverages from a microbiological and nutritional perspective: The Colombian Heritage. Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety. 2014;13:1031-1048. DOI: 10.1111/1541-4337.12098
  128. 128. Kahajdova Z, Karovicova J. Fermentation of cereals for specific purpose. Journal of Food and Nutrition Research. 2007;46:51-57
  129. 129. Nkhata SG, Ayua E, Kamau EH, Shingiro JB. Fermentation and germination improve nutritional value of cereals and legumes through activation of endogenous enzymes. Food Science and Nutrition. 2018;6:2446-2458. DOI:10.1002/fsn3.846
  130. 130. Njoku HO, Ofuya CO, Ogbulie JN. Production of tempeh from the African yam bean (Sphenostylis stenocarpa Hams). Food Microbiology. 1991;8:209-214
  131. 131. Arisa NU, Ogbuele OC. Production quality assessment and acceptability of African yam bean (Sphenostylis stenocarpa) sauce. Journal of food processing and preservation. 2007;31:771-778. DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-4549.2007.00152.x
  132. 132. Amakoromo ER, Innocent-Adiele HC, Njoku HO (2012) Microbiological quality of yogurt-like product from African yam bean. Nature Science. 2012;10:6-9
  133. 133. Wokoma EC, Aziagba GC (2001) Microbiological, physical and nutritive changes occurring during the natural fermentation of African yam bean into dawa-dawa.Global Journal of Pure and Applied Sciences. 2001;7:219-224. DOI: 10.4314/gjpas.v7i2.16233
  134. 134. Nonogaki H, Bassel GW, Bewley JD. Germination—still a mystery. Plant Science. 2010;179:574-581. DOI: 10.1016/j.plantsci.2010.02.010
  135. 135. Zhang X, Zhao J, Bu Y, Xue D, Liu Z, Li X, Guo N, Wang H, Xing H, Qiu L. Genome -wide association studies of soybean seed hardness in the Chinese mini core collection. Plant Molecular Biology Reporter. 2018;36, 605-617. DOI: 10.1007/s11105-018-1102-2
  136. 136. Sharma HC, Crouch JH, Sharma KK, Seetharama N, Hash CT. Applications of biotechnology for crop improvement: prospects and constraints. Plant Science. 2002;163:381-395. DOI: 10.1016/50168-9452(02)00133-4
  137. 137. Karp A, Edwards KJ, Bruford M, Funk S, Vosman B, Morgante M, Seberg O, Kremer A, Boursot P, Arctander P, Tautz D, Hewitt GM. Molecular technology for biodiversity evaluation: Opportunities and challenges. Nature Biotechnology. 1997;15: 625-628. DOI: 10.1038/nbt0797-625
  138. 138. Fang C, Ma Y, Wu S, Liu Z, Wang Z, Yang R, Hu G, Zhou Z, Yu H, Zhang M, Pan Y, Zhou G, Ren H, Du W, Yan H, Wang Y, Han D, Shen Y, Liu S, Liu T, Zhang J, Qin H, Yuan J, Yuan X, Kong F, Liu B, Li J, Zhang Z, Wang G, Zhu B, Tian Z. Genome-wide association studies dissect the genetic networks underlying agronomical traits in soybean. Genome Biology. 2017;18:1-13. DOI: 10.1186/s13059-017-1289-9
  139. 139. Jiang S, Zhang H, Ni P, Yu S, Dong H, Zhang A, Cao H, Zhang L, Ruan Y, Cui Z. Genome-wide association study dissects the genetic architecture of maize husk tightness. Frontiers in Plant Science. 2020;11:1-12. DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2020.00861
  140. 140. Kimani W, Zhang LM, Wu XY, Hao HQ, Jing HC. Genome-wide association study reveals that different pathways contribute to grain variation in sorghum (Sorghum bicolor). BMC Genomics. 2020; 21:1-19. DOI: 10.1186/s12864-020-6538-8
  141. 141. Volante A, Tondelli A, Desiderio F, Abbruscato P, Barbara M, Biselli C, Cassella L, Singh N, McCouch SR, Tharreau D, Zampieri E, Cattivelli L, Vale G. Genome wide association studies for japonica rice resistance to blast in field and controlled conditions. Rice. 2020;13:1-17. DOI: 10.1186/s12284-020-00431-2
  142. 142. Khan MA, Korban SS. Association mapping in forest trees and fruit crops. Journal of Experimental Botany. 2012;63:4045-4060. DOI: 10.1093/jxb/ers105
  143. 143. O’Connor K, Hayes B, Hardner C, Nock C, Baten A, Alam M, Henry R, Topp B. Genome-wide association studies for yield component traits in a macadamia breeding population. BMC Genomics. 2020;21:1-12. DOI: 10.1186/s12864-020-6575-3
  144. 144. Kumar S, Hash CT, Nepolean T, Satyavathi T, Singh G, Mahendrakar MD, Yadav RS, Srivastava RK. Mapping QTLs controlling flowering time and important agronomic traits in pearl millet. Frontiers in Plant Science. 2017;8:1-13. DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2017.11731
  145. 145. Holland JB. Genetic architecture of complex traits in plants. Current Opinion in Plant Biology. 2007;10:156-161. DO: 1016/j.pbi.2007.01.003
  146. 146. Doerge RW. Mapping and analysis of quantitative trait loci in experimental populations. Nature Reviews Genetics. 2002;3:43-52. DOI: 10.1038/nrg703
  147. 147. Jansen RC, Jannink JL, Beavis WD. Mapping quantitative trait loci in plant breeding populations: use of parental haplotype sharing. Crop Science 2003;43:829-834
  148. 148. Zhang B, Tamura M, Berger-Doyle J, Chen P. Comparison of instrumental methods for measuring seed hardness o food-grade soybean. Journal Texture Studies. 2008;39:28-39. DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-4603.2007.00128.x
  149. 149. Zeng ZB. QTL mapping. In: Maloy S, Hughes K editors. Brenner’s Encyclopaedia of Genetics. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier; 2001. p. 587-1593
  150. 150. Jinek M, Chylinski K, Fonfara I, Hauer M, Doudna JA, Charpentier E. A programmable dual-RNA–guided DNA endonuclease in adaptive bacterial immunity. Science. 2012;337:816-821. DOI: 101126/science.1225829
  151. 151. Jaganathan D, Ramasamy K, Sellamuthu G, Jayabalan S, Venkataraman CRISPR for crop improvement: An update review. Frontiers in Plant Science. 2018;9:1-7. DOI: 103389/fpls.2018.00985
  152. 152. Malzahn A, Lowder L, Qi Y. Plant genome editing with TALEN and CRISPR. Cell and Bioscience. 2017;7:1-18. DOI: 10.1186/s13578-017-0148-4
  153. 153. Cermak T, Doyle EL, Christian M, Wang L, Zhang Y, Schmidt C, Baller JA, Somia NV, Bogdanove AJ, Voytas DF. Efficient design and assembly of custom TALEN and other TAL-effector based constructs for DNA targeting. Nucleic Acids Research. 2011;39:e82. DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkr218
  154. 154. Li T, Liu B, Spalding MH, Weeks DP, Yang B. High-efficiency TALEN-based gene editing produces disease-resistant rice. Nature Biotechnology. 2012;30:390-392. DOI: 10.1038/nbt.2199
  155. 155. Gaj T, Gersbach CA, Barbas CFIII. ZFN, TALEN, and CRISPR/Cas-based methods for genome engineering. Trends in Biotechnology. 2013;31:397-405. DOI: 10.1016/j.tibtech.2013.04.004

Written By

Ndenum Suzzy Shitta, Alex Chukwudi Edemodu, Wosene Gebreselassie Abtew and Abush Abebe Tesfaye

Submitted: 03 July 2021 Reviewed: 28 July 2021 Published: 21 December 2021