| Literature DB >> 36003806 |
Fengxian Yao1, Li Wen1, Rong Chen1, Chao Du2,3, Shiming Su4, Mengmeng Yan1,4, Zhonglan Yang1.
Abstract
Diet is the main intake source of selenium (Se) in the body. Southern Jiangxi is the largest navel orange-producing area in China, and 25.98% of its arable land is Se-rich. However, studies on the Se-rich characteristics and Se dietary evaluation of navel orange fruits in the natural environment of southern Jiangxi have not been reported. This study was large-scale and in situ samplings (n = 492) of navel oranges in southern Jiangxi with the goal of investigating the coupling relationships among Se, nutritional elements, and quality indicators in fruits and systematically evaluating Se dietary nutrition to the body. The results indicated that the average content of total Se in the flesh was 4.92 μg⋅kg-1, and the percentage of Se-rich navel oranges (total Se ≥ 10 μg⋅kg-1 in the flesh) was 7.93%, of which 66.74% of the total Se was distributed in the pericarp and 33.26% in the flesh. The average content of total Se in the flesh of Yudu County was the highest at 5.71 μg⋅kg-1. There was a significant negative correlation (p < 0.05) between Se, Cu, and Zn in the Se-rich flesh. According to the Se content in the flesh, the Se dietary nutrition evaluation was carried out, and it was found that the Se-enriched navel orange provided a stronger Se nutritional potential for the human body. These findings will help to identify Se enrichment in navel orange fruit in China's largest navel orange-producing area and guide the selection of Se-rich soils for navel orange production in the future.Entities:
Keywords: dietary evaluation; elemental coupling; navel orange; selenium enrichment; selenium intake
Year: 2022 PMID: 36003806 PMCID: PMC9393740 DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2022.881098
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Plant Sci ISSN: 1664-462X Impact factor: 6.627
FIGURE 1Locations of the study area and 492 fruit sampling points in southern Jiangxi Province, China.
FIGURE 2Total Se content of navel orange fruit, pericarp, and flesh in southern Jiangxi (A), distribution of total Se content in fruit (B), and percentage of total Se in flesh and pericarp (n = 492) (C). Letters indicate a significant difference at p < 0.05 among treatments (**p < 0.01).
FIGURE 3Total Se content and spatial distribution in navel orange fruit (A,C) and flesh (B,D) in southern Jiangxi (n = 492). Letters indicate a significant difference at p < 0.05 among treatments.
Quality indicators and mineral elements of ordinary navel orange (total Se < 10 μg⋅kg–1 in the flesh) and Se-rich navel orange (total Se ≥ 10 μg⋅kg–1 in the flesh) fruit (**p < 0.01).
| Indicators | Ordinary navel oranges | Se-rich navel oranges | |
| Single fruit weight (g) | 234.52 ± 43.82 | 251.84 ± 24.52 | |
| Horizontal diameter (H) (mm) | 76.08 ± 5.07 | 78.82 ± 3.28 | |
| Longitudinal diameter (D) (mm) | 78.64 ± 5.37 | 81.11 ± 3.79 | |
| H/D | 0.968 ± 0.033 | 0.973 ± 0.033 | |
| Pericarp thickness (mm) | 4.65 ± 0.77 | 4.82 ± 0.88 | |
| Soluble solids (%) | 12.03 ± 1.33 | 11.89 ± 1.17 | |
| Vitamin C (mg⋅100 g–1) | 52.07 ± 7.36 | 52.28 ± 8.09 | |
| Titratable acid (%) | 0.719 ± 0.218 | 0.718 ± 0.159 | |
| Se (μg⋅kg–1) | Fruit | 11.73 ± 5.19 | 43.82 ± 16.05** |
| Flesh | 3.83 ± 1.89 | 16.60 ± 7.69** | |
| B (mg⋅kg–1) | Fruit | 40.79 ± 5.25 | 40.75 ± 4.90 |
| Flesh | 16.12 ± 3.52 | 16.10 ± 3.57 | |
| Mn (mg⋅kg–1) | Fruit | 21.85 ± 13.10 | 21.46 ± 11.71 |
| Flesh | 5.26 ± 4.25 | 5.29 ± 3.79 | |
| Fe (mg⋅kg–1) | Fruit | 31.66 ± 23.77 | 30.72 ± 7.67 |
| Flesh | 12.71 ± 4.86 | 12.72 ± 2.12 | |
| Cu (mg⋅kg–1) | Fruit | 6.20 ± 2.69 | 6.18 ± 2.19 |
| Flesh | 2.61 ± 0.63 | 2.58 ± 0.64 | |
| Zn (mg⋅kg–1) | Fruit | 10.01 ± 3.04 | 9.93 ± 2.59 |
| Flesh | 3.81 ± 0.88 | 3.78 ± 0.82 | |
| Mo (mg⋅kg–1) | Fruit | 0.064 ± 0.048 | 0.063 ± 0.046 |
| Flesh | 0.025 ± 0.018 | 0.028 ± 0.014 | |
| Mg (mg⋅kg–1) | Fruit | 188.09 ± 42.64 | 189.89 ± 23.88 |
| Flesh | 89.88 ± 14.88 | 91.04 ± 14.22 | |
| P (mg⋅kg–1) | Fruit | 176.83 ± 37.96 | 180.43 ± 33.72 |
| Flesh | 125.22 ± 29.29 | 130.17 ± 33.07 | |
| K (mg⋅kg–1) | Fruit | 1,940 ± 284 | 1,985 ± 314 |
| Flesh | 1,116 ± 180 | 1,141 ± 194 | |
| Ca (mg⋅kg–1) | Fruit | 901 ± 214 | 907 ± 218 |
| Flesh | 237 ± 70.61 | 244 ± 59.01 | |
FIGURE 4Correlation analysis of Se with its quality indicators and mineral elements in ordinary navel orange fruit (A) and flesh (C) and Se-rich navel orange fruit (B) and flesh (D) in southern Jiangxi (*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01).
FIGURE 5The difference in NRVse in the study area (A), the difference in NRVse between ordinary and Se-rich navel oranges (B), and the difference in RNIse between ordinary (C) and Se-rich (D) navel oranges. Letters indicate a significant difference at p < 0.05 among treatments (**p < 0.01).