Biofortified Products: History
View Latest Version
Please note this is an old version of this entry, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Subjects: Agriculture, Dairy & Animal Science
Contributor:
Claudio Bellia

Biofortification is widely regarded as a very valuable technique that increases the availability of micronutrients (vitamin A, selenium, zinc, iron and other micronutrients) absorbed by plants and transferred from them to consumers.

  • biofortification
  • marketing
  • economic approaches
  • health
  • innovation
  • nutrition

1. Introduction

The main objective of agricultural innovations, whether technological, agronomic or genetic, has been to increase the final yields. Until the 1990s, limited attention was given to improving nutritional qualities. In recent years, increasing attention has been paid to “hidden hunger,” two research terms used to indicate people around the world who suffer from vitamin and micronutrient deficiencies. Unfortunately, malnutrition is still a global health problem with many related diseases [1]. This phenomenon has a significant socio-economic impact and has contributed, together with difficult social and environmental conditions to the current situation in low- and middle-income countries [2][3]. In 2015, the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) [4] aimed to eradicate health and poverty problems, world hunger, reduce child and maternal mortality, and overcome malnutrition resulting from a scarcity of food resources [5]. Biofortification can be useful in combating malnutrition, which is a major challenge, particularly in developing countries [6][7].

In this context, plant biotechnology applied to biofortification of staple crops has offered a powerful tool to counteract these deficiencies by providing nutritionally enhanced crops. The availability of foods enriched with beneficial substances such as antioxidants, vegetable fibers, vitamins, and minerals has increased, as consumers [8] are attracted to labels such as “low fat,” “low sugar,” “no hydrogenated fats,” “low sodium,” in parallel with the promotion of a healthy lifestyle. All these different products have in common the fact that they provide health benefits and as such have been classified as functional food [9][10]. In recent years, the subject has become highly topical, in accordance with the new requirements expressed by an increasingly globalized market. Although there has been increasing discussion of biofortified products for some years now, there is some confusion, especially regarding the definition, which generates a lot of uncertainty for consumers and operators in the sector [11][12]. The lack of an unambiguous interpretation of the term often leads to confusion between the concept of biofortified products and other products, such as GMOs (genetically modified organisms), which they are increasingly referred to. Over the years, the various strands of research have addressed this issue, each with their own expertise, highlighting the specificities and peculiarities of these products, paving the way for further developments [13][14].

2. The Complexity of Dimensions of the Biofortified Products

2.1. Biofortification, Human Health and Reducing Hunger

Biofortification is considered a new method to support public health to combat major nutritional deficiencies (vitamin A, iron, zinc), especially in developing countries. Food crops such as rice, wheat, maize, and potatoes are enriched with micronutrients through cultivation techniques [15][16][17]. A distinction is then made between poor and rich countries. This is because the huge majority of the world′s population consumes foods composed of cereals (rice, corn, wheat, soya, cassava), the so-called “staple crops.” These crops basically meet the caloric requirements, but have a low bioavailability of essential trace elements. In underdeveloped countries, this limitation is particularly widespread, as a varied and balanced diet, with a daily intake of fruit, vegetables, meat and fish, sufficient to provide the necessary doses of vitamins and minerals, is not always possible [5][18][19]. In industrialized countries, the situation is different, as inadequate nutrition is not linked to a lack of food, but rather to its misuse. In addition to vitamins and minerals, which are necessary for good health, there are compounds such as “phytonutrients,” which help our bodies to increase cell metabolism [20][21]. The carotenoids and polyphenols are often linked together in an antioxidant diet [22][23].

2.2. Biofortification and Technical-Normative Definition

The techniques for obtaining biofortified products, such as enriched products, inevitably lead to several elements of contact with functional food [24]. On the basis of this consideration, it is necessary to attribute the possible classifications of functional products, which can take the form of fortified food (foods obtained through a technological process of fortification that makes them more nutritious), enriched food (in which the percentage of one or more nutrients already present in nature is increased), supplementary food (subcategory of fortified foods) [9][10].

The definition of functional foods, produced at institutional level (e.g., ILSI Europe in the context of the European Concerted Action on Functional Food Science—Concert Action “FUFOSE”) is not, as is well-known, unambiguous, to the point that it has led to the inclusion in the sector of products that are not (e.g., pharmaceutical and herbal products with common beneficial/curative properties) and that cannot boast these characteristics [25][26]. Today functional foods are considered as such if they represent “a normal daily food” (they are not food supplements or a medicine, nutraceuticals or herbal products in tablet form); if they are presented to the consumer in a manner consistent with the content of EU Regulation 1924/2006 on nutrition and health claims made on foods; if they contain claims relating to the improvement of a biological function or claims relating to the reduction of the risk of disease occurrence [27][28].

2.3. Biofortification, Economy, and Market

Given the nutritional benefits of biofortification, most consumers want all foods in their diet to be biofortified [29][30]. A consumer choice tool may be the label. Food labels are, as are well-known, the means by which the producer communicates useful information about the food to the consumer. The label, is identified as a guarantee of quality and a certain, beneficial effect [31][32][33][34][35]. Therefore, the terms “biofortification” and “biofortified food” on the product label are important elements of consumer assessment [36].

2.4. Biofortification, Cultivation, Factors Influencing Agronomic Technical Choices

The international scientific community has intensified its efforts to promote development and dissemination of biofortified crops. According to an estimate conducted by HarvestPlus in 2017 (see Figure 2), there are currently more than 150 biofortified varieties, bundled in 12 crops, that have been authorized in 30 countries [37][38][39][40].

Asi 04 00030 g002 550

Figure 2. In purple, crops currently released commercially. In lilac, crops being tested [37].

Biofortification of staple crops can be achieved through three different approaches, transgenic, conventional, and agronomic, based on biotechnology, breeding, and the use of mineral fertilizers, respectively [2][41]. Regardless of the method used, only with a multidisciplinary approach is it possible to “measure the nutritional value of biofortified products such as bio-accessibility and bio-availability [42][43].

In Figure 3, as highlighted by Garg, M.; it can be seen that several biofortified crops, including wheat, rice, maize, potato, and tomato were obtained through the application of all three strategies listed above [2][44].

Asi 04 00030 g003 550

Figure 3. Biofortified crops harvested through the three different approaches: agronomic; traditional breeding; transgenic [2].

The current results in genomic biofortification are certainly useful for the development of biofortified products as a sustainable solution to the problem of “hidden hunger,” to solve the lack of micronutrients, thus serving for human health and as an economic saver [44][45][46][47][48][49].

In this context, the new perspective of biofortification is that of “tailor-made plant nutrition” to obtain products for specific population groups, so-called “tailored foods.” In order to achieve this objective, the most suitable cultivation systems seem to be those without soil, because they allow a more appropriate management of plant nutrition, regulating the presence of the main nutrients in the plants by regulating the presence of the main mineral elements (calcium, iodine, zinc, selenium, silicon, iron, silicon, iron, etc.,) which are beneficial to human health or which may sometimes be harmful to consumers with specific metabolic alterations [42][50][51][52].

3. Future Research

tThe interest in biofortified products and their effects on consumers in emerging countries is gradually growing [53][54]. In fact, in several developing countries, biofortification is considered a valuable tool to counteract food insecurity issues, although in these countries biofortification requires increasing public investment in agricultural research and infrastructure to be successful [11][12][55].

This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/asi4020030

References

  1. Yan, L.; Kerr, P.S. Genetically Engineered Crops: Their Potential use for improvment human nutrition. Nutr. Rev. 2002, 60, 135–141.
  2. Garg, M.; Sharma, N.; Sharma, S.; Kapoor, P.; Kumar, A.; Chunduri, V.; Arora, P. Biofortified Crops Generated by Breeding, Agronomy, and Transgenic Approaches Are Improving Lives of Millions of People around the World. Front. Nutr. 2018, 5, 12.
  3. Garcia-Casal, M.N.; Pena-Rosas, P.J.; Giyose, B.; De Steur, H.; Van Der Straeten, D. Staple crops biofortified with increased vitamins and minerals: Considerations for a public health strategy. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 2017, 1390, 3–13.
  4. United Nations. The Millennium Development Goals Report. 2015. Available online: (accessed on 2 July 2020).
  5. Meyer, J.E.; Pfeiffer, W.H.; Beyer, P. Biofortified crops to alleviate micronutrient malnutrition. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 2008, 11, 166–170.
  6. Adeyeye, S.; Ayofemi, O.; Idowu-Adebayo, F. Genetically modified and biofortified crops and food security in developing countries. Nutr. Food Sci. 2019, 49, 978–986.
  7. FAO. The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World. 2019. Available online: (accessed on 17 September 2020).
  8. Scuderi, A.; Bellia, C.; Foti, V.T.; Sturiale, L.; Timpanaro, G. Evaluation of consumers’ behavior in the online purchasing process of organic agrifood products. Aims Agric. Food 2019, 4, 251–265.
  9. Benini, F. Nuovi trend nei consumi alimentari. Largo Consumo 2005, 3, 12–13.
  10. Kim, S.S.; Rogers, B.L.; Coates, J.; Gilligan, D.O.; Sarriot, E. Building evidence for sustainability of food and nutrition intervention programs in developing countries. Adv. Nutr. 2013, 4, 524–526.
  11. Chowdhury, S.; Meenakshi, J.V.; Tomlins, K.I.; Owori, C. Are consumers in developing countries willing to pay more for micronutrient-dense biofortified foods? Evidence from a field experiment in Uganda. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 2011, 93, 83–97.
  12. Mejia, L.A.; Dary, O.; Boukerdenna, H. Global regulatory framework for production and marketing of crops biofortified with vitamins and minerals. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 2017, 1390, 47–58.
  13. Michel-Villarreal, R.; Hingley, M.; Canavari, M.; Bregoli, I. Sustainability in Alternative Food Networks: A Systematic Literature Review. Sustainability 2019, 11, 859.
  14. Meenakshi, J.V.; Johnson, N.L.; Manyong, V.M.; DeGroote, H.; Javelosa, J.; Yanggen, D.R.; Meng, E. How cost-effective is biofortification in combating micronutrient malnutrition? An ex ante assessment. World Dev. 2010, 38, 64–75.
  15. Hefferon, K.L. Crops With Improved Nutritional Content Though Agricultural Biotechnology. In Plant Micronutrient Use Efficiency-Molecular and Genomic Perspectives in Crop Plants; Hossain, A.M., Kamiya, T., Burritt, D.J., Tran, L.-S.P., Fujiwara, T., Eds.; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2018; pp. 279–294.
  16. Haas, J.H.; Miller, D.D. Overview of experimental biology 2005 symposium: Food fortification in developing countries. J. Nutr. 2006, 136, 1053–1054.
  17. Saltzman, A.; Birol, E.; Bouis, H.E.; Boy, E.; Moura, F.; Islam, Y.; Pfeiffer, W. Biofortification: Progress toward a more nourishing future. Glob. Food Secur. 2013, 2, 9–17.
  18. Dubock, A. An overview of agriculture, nutrition and fortification, supplementation and biofortification: Golden Rice as an example for enhancing micronutrient intake. Agric. Food Secur. 2017, 6, 1–20.
  19. Zhao, K.; Tung, C.W.; Eizenga, G.; Wright, M.H.; Ali, M.L.; Price, A.H.; Norton, G.J.; Islam, R.; Reynolds, A.; Mezey, J.; et al. Genome-wide association mapping reveals a rich genetic architecture of complex traits in Oryza sativa. Nat. Commun. 2011, 2, 467.
  20. Birla, D.S.; Malik, K.; Sainger, M.; Chaudhary, D.; Jaiwal, R.; Jaiwal, P.K. Progress and challenges in improving the nutritional quality of rice (Oryza sativa L.). Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2017, 57, 2455–2481.
  21. Sanahuja, G.; Farré, G.; Berman, J.; Zorrilla-López, U.; Twyman, R.M.; Capell, T.; Christou, P.; Zhu, C.A. question of balance: Achieving appropriate nutrient levels in biofortified staple crops. Nutr. Res. Rev. 2013, 26, 235–245.
  22. Tian, L. Carotenoids, genetically modified foods, and vitamin A nutrition. In Genetically Modified Organisms in Food: Production, Safety, Regulation and Public Health; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2015; pp. 353–360.
  23. Martin, C.; Butelli, E.; Petroni, K.; Tonelli, C. How Can Research on Plants Contribute to Promoting Human Health? Plant Cell 2011, 23, 1685–1699.
  24. Cannella, C.; Giusti, A.M.; Pinto, A. Dal Cibo Per Tutti Agli Alimenti Personalizzati (From Food to All to Personalised Foodstuffs); Pensiero Scientifico Editore: Rome, Italy, 2007.
  25. Pray, C.E.; Huang, J. Biofortification for China: Political responses to food fortification and GM technology, interest groups, and possible strategies. AgBioForum 2007, 10, 161–169.
  26. Klepacka, J.; Gujska, E.; Michalak, J. Phenolic compounds as cultivar-and variety-distinguishing factors in some plant products. Plant Foods Hum. Nutr. 2011, 66, 64–69.
  27. De Steur, H.; Blancquaert, D.; Strobbe, S.; Lambert, W.; Gellynck, X.; Van Der Straeten, D. Status and market potential of transgenic biofortified crops. Nat. Biotechnol. 2015, 33, 25–29.
  28. Araya-Quesada, M.; Mezzetti, B.; Tzotzos, G. Food safety considerations for the assessment of a genetically modified tomato fortified for folate production. Mediterr. J. Nutr. Metab. 2010, 3, 1–8.
  29. Birol, E.; Meenakshi, J.V.; Oparinde, A.; Pérez, S.; Tomlins, K. Developing country consumers’ acceptance of biofortified. Food Sec. 2015, 7, 555–568.
  30. Talsma, E.F.; Melse-Boonstra, A.; Brouwer, I.D. Acceptance and adoption of biofortified crops in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review. Nutr. Rev. 2017, 75, 798–829.
  31. Huffman, W.; McCluskey, J. Food labels, information, and trade in GMOs. J. Agric. Food Ind. Organ. 2017, 15, 20160038.
  32. De Groote, H.; Kimenju, S.C.; Morawetz, U.B. Estimating consumer willingness to pay for food quality with experimental auctions: The case of yellow versus fortified maize meal in Kenya. Agric. Econ. 2011, 42, 1–16.
  33. Vaiknoras, K.; Larochelle, C.; Birol, E.; Asare-Marfo, D.; Herrington, C. Promoting rapid and sustained adoption of biofortified crops: What we learned from iron-biofortified bean delivery approaches in Rwanda. Food Policy 2019, 83, 271–284.
  34. Mogendi, J.B.; De Steur, H.; Makokha, A.; Gellynck, X. Integration and validation of an SMS-based bidding procedure of eliciting consumers’ willingness-to-pay for food. Br. Food J. 2016, 118, 2200–2217.
  35. Korzycka Iwanow, M.; Zboralska, M. Never-ending Debate on Food Supplements: Harmonization or Disharmonization of the Law? Eur. Food Feed Law Rev. 2010, 3, 131.
  36. Campos-Bowers, M.H.; Wittenmyer, B.F. Biofortification in China: Policy and practice. Health Res. Policy Syst. 2007, 5, 10.
  37. Bouis, H.E.; Saltzman, A. Improving nutrition through biofortification: A review of evidence from HarvestPlus, 2003 through 2016. Glob. Food Secur. 2017, 12, 49–58.
  38. Nestel, P.; Bouis, H.E.; Meenakshi, J.; Pfeier, W. Biofortification of staple foodcrops. J. Nutr. 2006, 136, 1064–1067.
  39. Bouis, H.E.; Saltzman, A.; Low, J.; Ball, A.; Covic, N. An overview of the landscape and approach for biofortification in Africa. Afr. J. Foodagriculturenutrition Dev. 2017, 17, 11848–11864.
  40. La Frano, M.R.; de Moura, F.F.; Boy, E.; Lönnerdal, B.; Burri, B.J. Bioavailability of iron, zinc, and provitamin A carotenoids in biofortified staple crops. Nutr. Rev. 2014, 72, 289–307.
  41. Saeid, A. Food Biofortification Technologies; CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2017.
  42. D’Imperio, M.; Renna, M.; Cardinali, A.; Buttaro, D.; Santamaria, P.; Serio, F. Silicon biofortification of leafy vegetables and its bioaccessibility in the edible parts. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2016, 96, 751–756.
  43. Piątkowska, E.; Kopeć, A.; Bieżanowska-Kopeć, R.; Pysz, M.; Kapusta-Duch, J.; Koronowicz, A.A.; Maślak, E. The impact of carrot enriched in iodine through soil fertilization on iodine concentration and selected biochemical parameters in wistar rats. PLoS ONE 2016, 11, e0152680.
  44. De Valença, A.W.; Bake, A.; Brouwer, I.D.; Giller, K.E. Agronomic biofortification of crops to fight hidden hunger in sub-Saharan Africa. Glob. Food Secur. 2017, 12, 8–14.
  45. Khush, G.S.; Lee, S.; Cho, J.I.; Jeon, J.S. Biofortification of crops for reducing malnutrition. Plant Biotechnol. Rep. 2012, 6, 195–202.
  46. Tanumihardjo, S.A.; Bouis, H.; Hotz, C.; Meenakshi, J.V.; McClafferty, B. Biofortification of staple crops: An emerging strategy to combat hidden hunger. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 2008, 7, 329–334.
  47. Saini, D.K.; Devi, P.; Kaushik, P. Advances in genomic interventions for wheat biofortification: A review. Agronomy 2020, 10, 62.
  48. Bouis, H.E.; Welch, R.M. Biofortification—A sustainable agricultural strategy for reducing micronutrient malnutrition in the global south. Crop Sci. 2010, 50, S-20–S-32.
  49. Wambugu, F.; Obukosia, S.; Gaffney, J.; Kamanga, D.; Che, P.; Albertsen, M.C.; Zhao, Z.Y.; Ragland, L.; Yeye, M. Is there a place for nutrition-sensitive agriculture? Proc. Nutr. Soc. 2015, 74, 441–448.
  50. Giordano, M.; El-Nakhel, C.; Pannico, A.; Kyriacou, M.C.; Stazi, S.R.; De Pascale, S.; Rouphael, Y. Iron biofortification of red and green pigmented lettuce in closed soilless cultivation impacts crop performance and modulates mineral and bioactive composition. Agronomy 2019, 9, 290.
  51. Ayetigbo, O.; Latif, S.; Abass, A.; Müller, J. Comparing characteristics of root, flour and starch of biofortified yellow-flesh and white-flesh cassava variants, and sustainability considerations: A review. Sustainability 2018, 10, 3089.
  52. Candan, N.; Cakmak, I.; Ozturk, L. Zinc-biofortified seeds improved seedling growth under zinc deficiency and drought stress in durum wheat. J. Plant Nutr. Soil Sci. 2018, 181, 388–395.
  53. Ashwell, M. Concepts of Functional Foods; ILSI—International LIfe Sciences Institute: Brussels, Swizerland, 2002.
  54. Verbeke, W. Consumer acceptance of functional foods: Socio-demographic, cognitive and attitudinal determinants. Food Qual. Prefer. 2005, 16, 45–57.
  55. Johns, T.; Eyzaguirre, P.B. Biofortification, biodiversity and diet: A search for complementary applications against poverty and malnutrition. Food Policy 2007, 32, 1–24.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
This entry is offline, you can click here to edit this entry!
ScholarVision Creations
Feedback