| Literature DB >> 35730036 |
Monize Morgado Neves1, João Batista Dos Santos Espinelli Junior1, Michele Moraes de Souza1, Rodolfo Carapelli1.
Abstract
Consumption of organic food has grown much around the world in the last 20 years. Change in the profile of consumers who have increasingly sought a healthy diet is the major contributor to this phenomenon. In scientific literature, some studies have already shown the nutritional superiority of organic food in the individual evaluation of metabolites. However, few studies have assessed interaction among metabolites, especially the one between minerals and the food matrix. This information may have great relevance in determining the extractability of minerals, especially in food consumed through infusion, such as yerba mate, since this interaction can directly influence their solubility. Thus, this study aimed to use hot water extraction techniques (infusion and decoction) and the principal component analysis (PCA) to evaluate the differences between organic and conventional cultivation systems in absorption and availability of Ca, Mg, Fe, Mn, and Zn in yerba mate leaves and stems. The PCA showed that cultivation influences total mineral contents found in both leaves and stems. Results of extractability only showed differences in conventional leaf samples, from which all minerals under study were better extracted. Results point out a different interaction between minerals and the matrix, depending on the cultivation, and to the stronger interaction between the matrix and minerals in organic samples, a fact which leads to low availability of minerals for consumption.Entities:
Keywords: Decoction; Infusion; Mineral nutrients; Organic food; Yerba mate
Year: 2022 PMID: 35730036 PMCID: PMC9200374 DOI: 10.1007/s12161-022-02340-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Food Anal Methods ISSN: 1936-9751 Impact factor: 3.498
Ca, Fe, K, Mn, and Zn average total contents (mg kg.−1) in organic and conventional samples of yerba mate leaves and stems
| Element | Conventional | Organic | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Leaf | Branch | Leaf | Branch | |
| Fe | 279c ± 54 | 101a ± 45 | 337d ± 85 | 151b ± 40 |
| Zn | 64a ± 18 | 54a ± 15 | 54a ± 15 | 52a ± 17 |
| Mn | 2118c ± 322 | 871a ± 196 | 2281c ± 753 | 1295b ± 190 |
| K | 20,096b ± 2391 | 14,734a ± 1553 | 16,224a ± 238 | 13,701a ± 488 |
| Mg | 5877b ± 937 | 2862a ± 1059 | 5496b ± 627 | 3655a ± 775 |
| Ca | 6825b ± 600 | 6925b ± 635 | 5545a ± 1217 | 4839a ± 912 |
*Values represent mean concentration for each group of samples ± standard deviation
**Equal letters in the same line symbolize similarity at the 95% significance level while different letters symbolize difference at the 95% significance level
Ca, Fe, K, Mn, and Zn average aqueous extractability (%) in organic and conventional samples of yerba mate leaves and stems extracted by infusion and decoction
| Element | Extraction | Conventional | Organic | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Leaf | Stem | Leaf | Stem | ||
| Fe | Decoction | 1.4a,A ± 0.7 | 3.0a,A ± 1.4 | 0.8a,A ± 0.3 | 1.2a,A ± 0.3 |
| Infusion | 2.3a,B ± 0.6 | 3.8b,A ± 1.3 | 0.9a,A ± 0.3 | 1.3a,A ± 0.3 | |
| Zn | Decoction | 40.0b,A ± 11.2 | 25.2a,A ± 6.7 | 21.3a,A ± 6.0 | 19.0a,A ± 5.8 |
| Infusion | 13.5a,B ± 2.4 | 9.6a,B ± 3.0 | 14.0a,B ± 5.0 | 9.0a,B ± 3.0 | |
| Mn | Decoction | 58.3b,A ± 5.4 | 51.4b,A ± 8.8 | 31.2a.A ± 5.0 | 48.2b,A ± 4.7 |
| Infusion | 56.0a,A ± 4.8 | 55.0a,A ± 8.8 | 45.9a,B ± 9.2 | 57.1a,A ± 10.8 | |
| K | Decoction | 78.3b,A ± 14.7 | 76.6b,A ± 13.0 | 87.7b,A ± 11.0 | 58.7a,A ± 10.1 |
| Infusion | 80.5a,A ± 10.2 | 78.1a,A ± 8.8 | 69.2a,B ± 7.4 | 71.5a,A ± 10.8 | |
| Mg | Decoction | 25.2a,A ± 19.4 | 17.5a,A ± 7.5 | 24.8a,A ± 3.4 | 20.2a,A ± 1.7 |
| Infusion | 19.4a,A ± 3.9 | 18.1a,A ± 7.6 | 21.2a,A ± 5.0 | 19.5a,A ± 2.6 | |
| Ca | Decoction | 37.5b,A ± 6.6 | 15.1a,A ± 3.4 | 14.2a,A ± 2.2 | 12.3a,A ± 1.3 |
| Infusion | 25.6c,B ± 3.4 | 21.7b,A ± 3.0 | 14.5a,A ± 0.4 | 14.9a,A ± 2.0 | |
*Values represent mean extractability for each group of samples ± standard deviation
**Equal lowercase letters in the same line, for each element, symbolize similarity at the 95% significance level while different lowercase letters symbolize difference at the 95% significance level
***Equal uppercase letters in the same column, for each element, symbolize similarity at the 95% significance level while different uppercase letters symbolize difference at the 95% significance level
Fig. 1PC1 and PC2 a scores and b loading plots of all yerba mate samples, showing a comparison of part of the plant and cultivation. Stems (squares), leaves (circles), conventional cultivation (black circles and squares), organic cultivation (white circle and squares)
Fig. 2PC1 and PC2 a scores and b loading plots of yerba mate leaf samples, showing a comparison of cultivation. Conventional cultivation (black squares), organic cultivation (white squares)
Fig. 3PC1 and PC2 a scores and b loading plots of yerba mate stem samples, showing a comparison of cultivation. Conventional cultivation (black circles), organic cultivation (white circles)
Fig. 4PC1 and PC3 a scores and b loading plots of yerba mate leaf samples, showing a comparison of cultivation. Conventional sample infusion (black squares), organic sample infusion (white squares), conventional sample decoction (dark gray squares), organic sample decoction (light gray squares)