The review, authored by researchers at Mountain Top University in Ogun State, examines how four molecular techniques—AFLP-PCR, RAPD-PCR, quantitative real-time PCR and next-generation sequencing—could revolutionise the assessment of genetic damage, environmental contamination and pharmaceutical safety in Nigeria. It also surveys the global advances in omics technologies and CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing, and asks a pointed question: how can a country with Africa’s largest population and economy, and one of its richest biodiversity hotspots, still be conducting toxicology largely with biochemical assays and histopathology alone?

The technical case for the proposed shift is compelling. AFLP-PCR, which combines restriction enzymes with polymerase chain reaction to generate high-resolution genomic fingerprints, can reveal DNA polymorphisms in organisms exposed to pollutants, detecting mutations or adaptive changes in fish species and plants subjected to chronic contamination. RAPD-PCR, a simpler and cheaper genotyping method based on short synthetic primers annealing at low stringency, produces genome-specific fragments that serve as biomarkers of DNA mutation, and can be used to track the genetic changes that allow bacteria and fungi to remediate contaminated soils. Both techniques can, in effect, convert the genetic material of exposed organisms into a historical record of toxic exposure.

Quantitative PCR adds precision and speed. By amplifying targeted DNA regions with fluorescent dyes or probes and measuring signal accumulation in real time, qPCR can detect and quantify foodborne pathogens such as Salmonella, Escherichia coli and Campylobacter, extend food shelf life by monitoring spoilage microorganisms, and track microRNA expression changes that serve as early biomarkers of inflammation and cancer. Next-generation sequencing, meanwhile, has transformed mutation detection from a low-throughput endeavour into a rapid, increasingly affordable whole-genome analysis. The review notes that NGS could enhance diagnostics, disease prevention and personalised medicine in Nigeria, particularly for conditions with distinct genetic profiles in African populations such as malaria, sickle cell disease and HIV, while also enabling rapid identification of crop traits conferring resistance to pests, disease and drought—a direct contribution to food security in a changing climate.

The global track record of these tools underscores their potential. During the COVID-19 pandemic, omics technologies—genomics, transcriptomics, proteomics, metabolomics and epigenomics—enabled rapid characterisation of SARS-CoV-2, identification of variants such as Alpha and Beta, discovery of biomarkers like interleukin-6 and lactate dehydrogenase that signalled severe disease, and detailed mapping of how infection altered human metabolism. The review treats the pandemic response as a demonstration that these approaches can function in resource-limited settings when political will and funding converge.

CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing offers another dimension. The review highlights how the technique has illuminated the mechanisms by which toxins trigger cell death and resistance, and points to a striking agricultural application: knocking out the OsNramp5 gene in rice, which encodes a metal transporter, reduces cadmium accumulation in rice grains and thereby lowers a significant dietary health risk. Researchers have also used a catalytically inactive Cas9 protein to identify epigenetic changes caused by environmental toxicants. In the Nigerian context, the authors suggest that combining CRISPR-based gene drives targeting the Anopheles mosquito vector with a malaria vaccine could form a powerful model strategy against infectious diseases more broadly.

Yet the barriers to realising this vision in Nigeria are formidable. The regulatory landscape embodied in the Nigeria Biosafety Act is poorly implemented, creating uncertainty for stakeholders, while political instability discourages investment and makes academics and policymakers hesitant to endorse biotechnological products for fear of public backlash against genetic modification. High import duties and inefficient port procedures push researchers toward substandard equipment and degraded reagents, and universities struggle with insufficient facilities, understaffed research offices and graduates who lack skills in grant writing. The National Biosafety Management Agency Act, amended in 2015, made provisions for gene editing, synthetic biology and gene drives but failed to anticipate CRISPR, next-generation sequencing, toxicogenomic profiling and high-throughput screening—a gap the review says demands a comprehensive revision developed collaboratively by scientists, policymakers, indigenous knowledge holders and ethicists.

Infrastructure constraints compound the problem. Unreliable electricity disrupts experiments, damages equipment and destroys biological samples that require stable storage. Internet access remains limited—Nigeria ranked 105th of 137 countries on connectivity, and as of 2019 only about 26 percent of the population had access—which isolates researchers from international collaboration and data sharing. Funding is perhaps the most severe constraint: Nigeria allocates just 0.2 percent of GDP to research and development, and although the government invests $242 per researcher in gross expenditure on R&D, exceeding the Sub-Saharan African average of $168, many Nigerian scientists finance their own research, conference attendance and publication costs from modest salaries, and many have emigrated in search of better-resourced environments. Industry involvement in funding academic research remains alarmingly low, despite the existence of mechanisms such as TETFund, the National Science and Technology Fund and the Petroleum Technology Development Fund.

Against this backdrop, the review proposes a trans-disciplinary framework with three strategic pillars. The first is scientific capacity building through international collaborations and specialised training in molecular techniques and bioinformatics, building on existing initiatives such as the Nigerian Bioinformatics and Genomics Network and molecular diagnostics training programmes run by the Nigeria Centre for Disease Control since 2021. The second is comprehensive policy and regulatory reform that incorporates advanced molecular technologies while balancing innovation with safety. The third is sustainable funding aligned with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, particularly SDG 3 on health, SDG 6 on clean water and sanitation, SDG 9 on infrastructure and innovation, and SDG 17 on partnerships. The framework draws inspiration from the OECD’s Integrated Approaches to Testing and Assessment, which replaces heavy reliance on animal testing with mechanistic data from high-throughput screening and transcriptomics, and from the experience of the US Environmental Protection Agency, which responded to a similar gap between the chemicals humans are exposed to and the chemicals that had actually been studied by partnering with NCATS, the FDA and the National Toxicology Program to deploy high-throughput in vitro screening.

Nigeria has already taken a first institutional step. The Nigerian Toxicology Information Centre, established in 2023 in response to poor documentation of poisoning and rising deaths linked to contaminated food, pesticides and industrial effluents, could—according to the review—leverage the same collaborative approach, integrating high-throughput screening platforms and partnering with the OECD, EPA and WHO to access resources such as the BioKnowledge Library. The authors also point to successful indigenous-modern synergies as proof of concept: Niprisan, the sickle cell drug developed by NIPRD under Professor Charles Wambebe from a blend of local herbs evaluated to international pharmacological standards, and transcriptomic studies of Moringa oleifera that identified over 764,000 single nucleotide polymorphisms and nearly 18,500 simple sequence repeats, enabling breeding for stress tolerance. If the three-pillar framework is implemented strategically, the review concludes, Nigeria could position itself as a regional leader in biotechnology-driven environmental solutions while confronting the public health challenges that its industrialisation has left behind.

Subject of Research: Integration of advanced molecular biotechnology tools into toxicological research infrastructure in Nigeria

Article Title: Integrating advanced molecular biotechnology tools into toxicological research infrastructure for sustainable development in Nigeria

Article References: Oluwamakinde, E. P., Akpofure, O. D., Adeniran, S. O., & Fagbenro, O. S. (2026). Integrating advanced molecular biotechnology tools into toxicological research infrastructure for sustainable development in Nigeria. Discover Toxicology, 3(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44339-026-00048-y

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1007/s44339-026-00048-y

Keywords: molecular biotechnology, toxicology, Nigeria, AFLP-PCR, RAPD-PCR, qPCR, next-generation sequencing, CRISPR-Cas9, omics technologies, environmental monitoring, biosafety regulation, sustainable development