Next Article in Journal
Nitrate Concentration in Leachate—Essential Information for Reducing Nitrogen Surplus and Groundwater Pollution from Agricultural Land in Slovakia
Next Article in Special Issue
Moderate Boron Concentration Beneficial for Flue-Cured Tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L.) Seedlings Growth and Development
Previous Article in Journal
Projections of Drought Characteristics Based on the CNRM-CM6 Model over Africa
Previous Article in Special Issue
Effect of Processing on Some Quality Parameters of Flour and Bread Made from Wheat Grain Biofortified with Zn and Se
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Agriculture
Volume 12
Issue 4
10.3390/agriculture12040496
agriculture-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Effect of Se-Enriched Irrigation Water and Soil Texture on Biomass Production and Elemental Composition of Green Pea and Carrot and Their Contribution to Human Se Intake

by
Péter Ragályi
1,
Tünde Takács
1,*,
Anna Füzy
1,
Nikolett Uzinger
1,
Péter Dobosy
2,
Gyula Záray
2,
Nóra Szűcs-Vásárhelyi
1,3 and
Márk Rékási
1
1
Institute for Soil Sciences, Centre for Agricultural Research, H-1022 Budapest, Hungary
2
Institute of Aquatic Ecology, Centre for Ecological Research, H-1113 Budapest, Hungary
3
Faculty of Military Sciences and Officer Training, Doctoral School of Military Engineering, University of Public Service, H-1101 Budapest, Hungary
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Agriculture 2022, 12(4), 496; https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12040496
Submission received: 3 March 2022 / Revised: 29 March 2022 / Accepted: 30 March 2022 / Published: 31 March 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Micronutrient Deficiency and Biofortification in Cropping Systems)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Selenium (Se)-deficient diets are a problem in large areas of the world and can have serious health consequences, thus, the biofortification of foods with Se has been an important research field for several decades. The effect of Se-enriched irrigation water was investigated regarding the Se concentration in green peas and carrots. A pot experiment was set up in a greenhouse with irrigation water containing 0, 100, and 500 µg Se L−1 with sand, silty sand and silt soil types. Most of the treatments only slightly reduced the biomass, while the 500 µg Se L−1 treatment caused a significant decrease in the dry weight of carrot root. Treatment with irrigation water containing 100 µg Se L−1 increased the Se content in green peas and carrots 76 and 75 times, respectively, producing foodstuffs where 100 g of a fresh product covered 395% and 92% of the recommended dietary allowance, respectively, averaged over the three soil types. The Se concentration was higher for green peas in sand and carrots in silt. The treatments had little effect on the concentrations of other nutrients. The enrichment of irrigation water with Se may thus be a suitable method for the biofortification and production of functional food under certain conditions.

1. Introduction

Selenium (Se) is an essential nutrient for humans and animals. Both Se deficiency and excessive Se can lead to the development of diseases. An adequate intake of Se promotes healthy growth and the normal function of the immune system, muscle activity, cardiovascular system and reproductive organs, while also contributing to defense against the spread of certain infections, the inflammatory response and carcinomas [1,2,3]. In areas with severe Se deficiency, multifocal myocarditis and joint diseases manifested in the form of shorter toes and fingers or dwarfism and may develop in humans, even causing death in extreme cases. Animals may also be affected, often in the form of metabolic diseases and liver damage [4]. In selenium-deficient regions where Kaschin–Beck or Keshan diseases appeared, there was a lower proportion of elderly people in the population, though this was primarily due not to the diseases themselves but to other health conditions caused by Se deficiency [5].
The most important source of Se for humans is food [6]. The Se content of the food crops produced in a given area is highly dependent on the Se supply in the soil. If Se intake is typically low, additional Se intake should be considered. One of the options for Se supplement is biofortification, i.e., the enrichment of crops grown for human consumption [7]. This practice has already been successfully applied on a larger scale in countries with low Se soils, such as Finland [4], the UK [8] and China [9]. The Eastern European region is also characterized by a low supply of Se, as also indicated by the low concentration of Se in the blood of the population, thus, biofortification may be justified in this area as well [10,11].
However, biofortification is influenced by a number of factors. The goal is to achieve an optimal Se concentration in the edible part of the plant. Se is mostly applied in inorganic form. Previous studies have shown that selenate is preferable to selenite because it translocates and accumulates more easily within the plant [12] and its uptake is easier whether applied through the soil [13,14] or as foliar spray [15,16,17]. When applied through the soil, the effectiveness of Se fertilizers is highly dependent on soil properties, especially aeration [18], pH [19], Fe and Al contents [20] and organic matter content [21], which affect its fate and uptake by the plant. However, the application of Se with irrigation water allows the plant to absorb Se directly, so the influence of the soil on Se availability may decrease. This needs to be confirmed in further investigations, however, because little is yet known about irrigation water enriched with Se for biofortification purposes.
Green peas and carrots are widely grown and consumed almost all over the world. In 2019, the total production was 21.8 and 44.8 million tons on 2.78 and 1.13 million hectares, respectively [22]. Green peas are very rich in protein and essential amino acids, while carrots are high in fiber, carotenoids and sugars, and both vegetables play an important role in human nutrition due to their mineral content [23,24]. Therefore, these vegetables may serve as good target plants for biofortification, especially considering the availability of processed, ready-to-consume products [25]. The effect of Se enrichment has been extensively studied for various plant species, either in hydroponic experiments or in a soil medium [7,26,27,28]. However, even though both peas and carrots are popular, only a limited number of experiments have focused on the biofortification of these vegetables with Se. Previous research has also covered the potential for enriching green peas and carrots with elements other than Se. Umaly and Poel [29] enriched green peas with iodine in nutrient solution culture, whereas Poblaciones and Rengel [30] studied the possibility of enriching green peas with zinc in a greenhouse pot experiment. The biofortification of carrot with iodine has been investigated in studies in field trials [13], in a greenhouse with a soilless system [31] or in a greenhouse with different soils [32].
Knowledge is particularly scant on the effect of biofortification with Se on the macro and microelement content of these vegetables. To the best of our knowledge, the effect of Se on the element content of carrots has only been reported so far by Oliveira et al. [14]. The present experiment also provides an opportunity to compare the results with the effect of Se-enriched irrigation water on green beans, cabbage, potato and tomato, which was previously studied under similar experimental conditions [33].
The aim of the present experiment was to investigate a possible method for the biofortification of the test plants—green peas and carrots with irrigation water containing Se. It was hypothesized that irrigation water enriched with Se would not affect biomass production but would increase the concentration of Se in the vegetables. Although the plant can absorb Se directly from the irrigation water, it was thought that the soil type might have an effect on the Se concentration in the plants: looser textured soil binds less Se, thus allowing a higher uptake. It was also assumed that Se would not cause a substantial change in the concentration of other nutrients in the plant.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Experimental Setup

An open greenhouse experiment was set up to study the effect of Se-enriched irrigation on the pea (Pisum sativum L. var. Rajnai törpe) and carrot (Daucus carota L. var. sativus cv. Nantes-2) at the Experimental Station of the Center for Agricultural Research in Őrbottyán, Hungary [32,34,35]. The experiment was performed using 10 L pots having four 0.5 cm diameter holes in the bottom to allow leached water to escape. A 1 cm layer of gravel with a diameter of 4–8 mm was placed at the bottom of the pots, which were covered with a fine synthetic fiber fabric to keep the gravel bed separate from the soil. Each pot was filled with 10 kg of soil. The soils were collected from the top 0–20 cm layer at three different locations in Hungary, having distinct properties: sand (Mollic Umbrisol, Arenic) from Őrbottyán, silty sand (Luvic Calcic Phaeozem) from Gödöllő, and silt (Calcic Chernozem) from Hatvan [36]. The basic characteristics of the soils are shown in Table 1.
After germination, the carrot seeds were planted in propagation trays filled with a commercially available growth medium (Vegasca Bio soil mix; Florasca Hungary Ltd. (Osli, Hungary)—A mixture of peat and gray cattle manure compost: OM > 50%; N > 0.3%; P2O5 > 0.1%; K2O > 0.1%; pH 6.8). The seedlings were grown for three weeks in a growth chamber under controlled climatic conditions (16/8 h photoperiod, 25–27/15–17 °C day/night temperature and 600 μmol/m2/s photon flux density). After this period, the seedlings were acclimatized for an additional 6 days in the greenhouse and then transplanted into plastic pots. Green pea seeds were sown directly. For both carrots and green peas, three plants were grown per pot.
The young plants were irrigated with plain water for three weeks after transplantation to allow time for them to strengthen, and the Se-enriched irrigation water was only given to the plants after this period. The experiment included three treatment levels: Se-0: control, Se-1: 100 and Se-2: 500 µg Se L−1 in the form of Na2SeO4 in the irrigation water applied on three soil types: sand, silty sand and silt, in three replicates. It should be noted that the Se concentrations used for the treatments were well above the 20 µg Se L−1 value recommended for irrigation water by FAO [37], which served experimental purposes to remarkably increase the Se concentration of the test plants to allow the evaluation of the effect of provocative treatments on the studied parameters. The irrigation water was stored in 0.5 m3 tanks, and irrigation was carried out with an automatic irrigation system. Individual drip stakes were placed in each pot, and the daily volume of irrigation water was adjusted according to the requirements of the plants. The irrigation system delivered the set amount of water every day at 7 a.m. Soil moisture content was monitored at a depth of 10 cm every hour with Decagon EC-5 sensors. The characteristics of the growth period and irrigation details are shown in Table 2.
Climate data were measured and recorded throughout the growth period and are presented in Table 3. The plants received natural light in the greenhouse. The nutrient requirements of all the treated plants were fulfilled using 200 cm3 of Hoagland solution per pot, applied weekly by hand during the whole vegetation period. Pesticides (Decis, Bayer, Leverkusen, Germany) were applied whenever necessary.

2.2. Sample Preparation and Analyses

After harvest, the plants were washed with deionized water. Subsequently, the plant parts were separated (root, leafy shoot, fruit) and the fresh biomass was weighed. The roots and aerial parts of the plants were dried at 40 °C in a laboratory dryer for two days, except for carrot roots and pea grains, which were milled and freeze-dried at −70 °C, 200 Pa for 72 h in Christ Alpha 1 equipment (Martin Christ Gefriertrocknungsanlagen GmbH, Osterode am Harc, Germany), before measuring the dry mass of the plant organs. Dried samples were homogenized with a blending machine, equipped with plastic housing and a stainless-steel blade. The dried and homogenized plant samples were mineralized in microwave-assisted acid digestion equipment (TopWave, Analytik Jena, Jena, Germany). Plant samples weighing 400–500 mg were digested in a mixture of 7 mL 67% HNO3 and 3 mL 30% H2O2 (VWR International, Radnor, PA, USA). After digestion, internal standards (Sc, Y, In) were added to the solutions with deionized water to make up the volume to 15 mL. The Se, macro and microelement concentrations (As, B, Cu, Fe, I, K, Mg, Mn, P and Zn) were measured in terms of the dry weight (DW) of the plant samples using an inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometer (ICP-MS) (PlasmaQuant Elite, Analytik Jena, Jena, Germany).
Untreated composite soil samples were collected from the soils used for the experiment in order to analyze their basic parameters. After harvesting the plants and removing plant residues, the Se concentrations of the soil samples from each pot were analyzed. The soil samples were dried and sieved through a 2 mm mesh. The soil pH was measured according to the Hungarian standard method [38] in a 1:2.5 soil:water suspension after mixing for 12 h, and the organic matter (OM) content was determined using the modified Walkley–Black method [39]. The Kjeldahl method [40] was used to measure the total N content, and the mineral N (NH4-N and NO3-N) concentrations were measured from KCl extracts according to the Hungarian standard [41]. The CaCO3 content was determined using the Scheibler gas-volumetric method [38] and the cation exchange capacity (CEC) values with the modified method of Mehlich [42]. The “total” Se concentrations were determined from the samples using aqua regia in a microwave Teflon bomb [43]. The plant-available P and K fractions were measured after extraction with ammonium acetate-lactate (AL-P2O5 and AL-K2O) [44]. The extractable Se and other macro and microelement contents were measured in 0.5 M NH4-acetate + 0.02 M ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) extract according to Lakanen and Erviö [45] (referred to as “LE” or “extractable”). The element contents of the soil samples were analyzed using an ICP-MS instrument.

2.3. Statistical Analysis

The data were analyzed using a two-factor factorial analysis of variance, one factor being the Se dose and the other the soil type. The level of significance was set to a 95% confidence interval (p < 0.05). Significantly different groups were identified using Tukey’s HSD post hoc test. All the statistical calculations were carried out with Statistica v.13 (StatSoft Inc., College Station, TX, USA) software. Data visualization was implemented with R statistical software [46] using the ggplot2 package [47].

3. Results

3.1. Total and Extractable Se Content of Soils

The total and extractable Se concentrations in the soils by the end of the experiment as a result of the Se treatments are shown in Figure 1. Both Se fractions showed a definite increase, which was proportional to the dose used. Regarding the original Se content in the control soils, the total Se content is roughly ten times the extractable content. The selenate applied in the treatments, on the other hand, is an easily extractable form, so 36% of the total Se was extractable in Se-1 treated soils and 80% in Se-2 treated soils.

3.2. Biomass Production

The effect of the Se treatments on the biomass of edible parts of vegetables grown in each soil type is shown in Table 4. Se treatments had no significant effect on the green pea grain biomass averaged over the soil types. The fresh grain yield on silty sand increased significantly in the Se-2 treatment and was significantly higher than that measured in the other two soil types. At the same time, a decreasing trend was observed for sand as the Se dose increased, while for silt, the Se-1 dose resulted in the highest fresh grain weight, though these changes were not significant. There were no significant differences in the dry weights either. For carrots, the Se-2 treatment had a significant negative effect on root dry weight compared to the control when averaged over the three soils, but this appeared to be mainly due to the low dry weight obtained in the Se-2 treatment on sand and silt soils. Comparing the soil types, both fresh and dry root weights were significantly higher for silty sand than silt soil at all Se levels, and higher than sand in the Se-0 and Se-2 treatments.

3.3. Se Concentration in Plants

The Se concentrations in both species were markedly increased by Se treatments (Table 5). In the pea grain, a 46-fold increase in Se content was measured in the Se-1 treatment and a 254-fold increase in the Se-2 treatment compared to the control averaged over the three soil types. In the shoot, the increments were higher, 72-fold and 464-fold, respectively, but the highest Se concentration was found in the root, averaged over the three soils. Among the soil types, green peas had the highest Se content in sand; the Se-2 treatment resulted in significantly higher values in all three plant parts compared to silt, and in the root and grain compared to silty sand. In carrot root, the Se-1 treatment caused a 45-fold increase, and the Se-2 treatment, a 281-fold increase compared to the control, averaged over the three soil types. In the shoot, the degree of enrichment was practically the same (45-fold and 280-fold, respectively); however, the Se concentration was almost twice that of the root. Among the soil types, a significant difference was only found in the Se content of the root in the Se-2 treatment, where the value was higher for silt than for sand.

3.4. Se Content in Fresh Edible Parts in Relation to the Recommended and Toxic Se Intake

The amount of Se ingested with 100 g of fresh vegetables is shown in Table 6. The Se content in green pea grains was 43 times higher and in carrot roots 40 times higher in the Se-1 treatment than in the control, while the differences were 235 and 248-fold in the Se-2 treatment, respectively, averaged over the three soils. In green peas, however, the amount of Se was more than four times higher than that in carrot in the Se-1 treatment and almost four times higher in the Se-2 treatment.
The consumption of 100 g of fresh green pea grains treated with Se-1 would cover approximately four times the daily recommended dietary allowance (RDA), while this proportion was more than 20 times, averaged over the three soils, in the Se-2 treatment. In contrast, the Se content of 100 g carrot produced in the Se-1 treatment was around the recommended daily intake, while the higher dose gave values 4.5–6 times higher than RDA (Table 7).
Table 8 compares the Se content of 100 g of fresh vegetables with the tolerable upper intake level (UL), which is practically equivalent to the hazard quotient (HQ), expressed as a percentage. In the Se-1 treatment, green peas reached nearly half of the UL and carrots about 10%. In the Se-2 treatment, this ratio was more than two and a half times the UL for peas and 69% of the UL for carrots, averaged over the three soils.

3.5. Concentrations of Other Elements in Edible Parts

Figure 2 shows that in green pea grain, P and Fe tended to increase in parallel with the Se treatments, though only P increased significantly in silt and Fe in silty sand in the Se-2 treatment. K increased very slightly in most cases. In contrast, Zn decreased non-significantly in sand and silt soils. In carrot root, there was a significant increase in Zn for silty sand and silt in the Se-1 treatment, but most of the other elements, including Mg and Cu, only increased slightly in the Se-1 treatment. The As, B, I and Mn contents were not correlated with the treatments, so no detailed description of these elements is given. On average, the edible parts of green peas and carrots contained 0.003 and 0.014 mg kg−1 As; 11.1 and 13.9 mg kg−1 B; 0.015 and 0.013 mg kg−1 I; and 14.8 and 8.26 mg kg−1 Mn, respectively, in DW.

4. Discussion

4.1. Se in Soils

As shown in Figure 1, the total Se content of silt soil was the highest among the control soils, followed by silty sand and sand. This is consistent with previous results showing that the total amount of Se in soils may increase with increasing clay content [49]. The ratio of the extractable to total fraction exhibits great variability, so it is important to examine both Se contents to get a complete picture. Poblaciones et al. [17] found that about 3.6% of total Se was plant-available in the soil used in their experiment, whereas Stroud et al. [50] found this ratio to be 1.1%–4.3% in soils from field trials in the UK. Another problem when comparing the total and extractable Se fractions is that a number of different methods are used to determine the extractable fraction. Zhao et al. [51] found that plant-available Se content was more strongly correlated with silt content than with clay content, but the results showed that biological availability was dominantly affected by the CaCO3 content. In the present experiment, sandy soil had the highest CaCO3 content (1.45%), followed by silt (0.20%) and silty sand (0.08%), but the extractable Se content was the lowest in the sand for both plant species and all treatments. This is probably due to the fact that the Se applied with irrigation water was adsorbed to the greatest extent on the surface of soil particles with the highest CEC value. However, the actual availability of Se is best indicated by plant Se uptake. Since green peas and carrots may have taken up Se directly from the irrigation water, the amount absorbed by the plants in the present experiment does not necessarily reflect the extractable Se fraction estimated by the extractant.

4.2. Enrichment of Se in Plants

In this present study, the Se concentration in untreated control pea grain was 118 μg kg−1 (DW), which was higher than in those grown under field conditions in Slovenia (11 μg Se kg−1 DW) [52] and in Spain (57 μg Se kg−1 DW) [17], and in greenhouses in Australia (38 μg Se kg−1 DW) [53]. In a comprehensive survey of 293 green pea samples in Canada, Gawalko et al. [54] found that the average Se content was 331 μg kg−1 (DW), while 56% of the samples tested had a Se content higher than 300 μg kg−1 due to the naturally Se-rich soils. In this work, in carrot root, 78 μg kg−1 (DW) Se was measured in the control soil. De Temmerman et al. [49] examined 121 carrot samples grown in Belgium and recorded an average Se content of 43.4 μg kg−1 (DW).
Some plant species, such as certain members of the Brassicaceae family, are capable of hyperaccumulation, i.e., they may have a very high Se content without any signs of toxicity [12]. However, carrots and green peas may exhibit severe toxicity as a result of high soil Se doses and, in extreme cases, when the Se content in carrots and green peas exceeds 63 and 176 mg kg−1 (DW), respectively, the crops may be completely eradicated [55,56,57]. This is because Se shows structural similarity to sulphur, making it easy for plants to take up. Subsequently, sulphur is replaced by Se in certain proteins, which consequently lose their function. Toxicity may also be caused by oxidative stress due to Se [58]. Several studies report that Se promotes plant development in low concentrations but inhibits it in high concentrations. Hegedűsová et al. [59] found that higher Se treatments reduced germination and root and shoot formation in seedlings, while low-dose Se increased root and shoot length by about 25%. Landberg and Greger [60] and Łukaszewicz et al. [61,62] reported a decrease in the root and shoot biomass in young pea plants grown in nutrient solution as a result of selenate treatments. Regarding the yield of mature green pea grain in the present experiment, no clear decreasing or increasing trend was observed in response to the Se doses, except for the increased fresh grain weight in silty sand (Table 4). Thus, it should be noted that no yield depression was observed even when a relatively high average concentration of 30 mg Se kg−1 developed in the pea grains in the Se-2 treatment (Table 5). All the other experiments described in the literature used foliar spray to enrich ripe green peas with Se. Nevertheless, these results are partly consistent with the results of the present experiment. Poblaciones and Rengel [63] found that foliar Se treatment increased the Se content of field-grown green pea grain to 1.415 mg Se kg−1 at the highest dose of Na2SeO4 but had no effect on shoot biomass or grain yield, while the root weight and 100-grain weight increased. Hegedűsová et al. [64] applied 50 g and 100 g Se ha−1 sodium selenate during pea flowering by leaf spraying in a field experiment, which increased the Se content of the pea grain from 90–100 μg kg−1 to 1.16–1.30 mg kg−1 and 2.22–2.29 mg kg−1, respectively, which is roughly half the Se content achieved in the Se-1 (100 µg L−1) treatment used in the present experiment (Table 5). Nearly half of the Se content obtained in the Se-2 (500 µg L−1) treatment was achieved by Poblaciones et al. [17], who increased the Se content of field-grown green pea grain to a maximum of 12.2 mg Se kg−1 and found no effect on the grain yield.
The carrot root FW showed a mostly decreasing trend, whereas Se-2 treatment had a significant negative effect on root DW compared to the control when averaged over the three soils (Table 4). This is partly in agreement with Smoleń et al. [13], who applied 0.5 kg Se ha−1 to the soil in the form of Na2SeO4 in a field experiment, and observed no changes in carrot root biomass yield, except for a minimal decrease when the Se content reached 25 mg kg−1 (DW) in the root, which is approximately comparable to the effect of the Se-2 treatment used in the present experiment (Table 5). Oliveira et al. [14] also applied sodium selenate to the soil, which had a very slight non-significant negative effect on the root weight while increasing the Se content of carrot roots to nearly 10 mg kg−1. Bañuelos et al. [65,66] investigated the effect of mixing Se-rich Stanleya pinnata plant residues with the soil. The Se content of carrots reached a maximum concentration of 6.28 mg kg−1 as a result of the treatments without any decrease in biomass or any stress symptoms.
The results of this experiment confirmed that only a moderate non-significant decrease in yield if any can be expected for green peas and carrots with the high or higher Se contents achieved with the biofortification methods used so far. It should be noted that in a previous experiment with similar treatments, the fresh yield of green beans, tomato fruit, potato tubers and cabbage heads decreased slightly as a result of the Se treatment, but this effect was not significant. The Se content (DW) of green pea grain was quite similar to that of the green beans and tomato fruit, the lower Se content of carrot root was similar to or slightly higher than that of potato tuber, while the Se content of cabbage was much higher than that of the other vegetables studied [33].
The effect of the soil type on the Se enrichment of plants was controversial in this experiment. In the case of green peas, the Se content in the treated plants tended to be much higher for sand soil. This may be explained by the fact that sand is looser with lower CEC, so it binds less Se, and a higher proportion remains easily available for green peas. The same was observed in a previous similar experiment with green beans, cabbage and potato plants [33]. At the same time, in the case of carrots, the opposite trend was seen, though to a lesser extent, i.e., the highest Se contents in carrot roots were measured in silt soil. A possible explanation for this phenomenon is that pea roots are much denser, with more branching and a larger surface area than the taproot of carrot, enabling them to absorb the Se content of irrigation water much faster, while carrots might be more able to take up the Se content bound in the soil over a longer period of time. A similar conclusion was drawn by Bañuelos et al. [66], who compared the uptake of Se from the soil with broccoli with that of carrots. De Temmerman et al. [49] also found that on soils with similar Se concentrations, quite different Se concentrations may develop in different vegetable crops because the mode of uptake and accumulation is plant-specific.

4.3. Contribution of Se-Enriched Products to Human Se Intake

The daily RDA of Se may vary by country or region, but usually ranges from 25 to 60 μg day−1 for adult women and from 30 to 75 μg day−1 for adult men. A value of 55 μg day−1 is mostly recommended in the EU, USA and Canada. However, the daily UL of Se lies between 350 and 450 μg day−1 in different parts of the world, so the gap between deficient and toxic levels is relatively small [48]. In Eastern European countries, the estimated daily intake is usually between 30 and 40 μg Se day−1, which is below the RDA [67].
Smoleń et al. [68] applied 0.25 kg Se ha−1 to the soil, which increased the Se content of carrot root from 2.21 to 10.97 mg kg−1 (DW). The consumption of 100 g of untreated carrot root would cover only 46% of the RDA while eating treated carrots would exceed RDA by 2.4 times. Poblaciones and Rengel [53] treated green peas with 0.03% or 0.06% (w/v) of SeNaO4 leaf spray leading to Se contents of 67 and 95 μg Se, respectively, in 100 g of fresh grain weight, while Poblaciones et al. [17] treated green peas with 10 g Se ha−1 in the form of foliar application, resulting in 179 μg Se in 100 g of fresh grain weight, thus containing more than three times the RDA.
In the present experiment, the Se content of 100 g of fresh green peas grown in the Se-1 treatment exceeded the RDA value of 55 μg Se day−1 four times, but the average content of Se in carrots was 50.7 μg Se, so it was close to the RDA value (Table 6 and Table 7). Irrigation water containing 100 μg Se L−1 can thus be considered a suitable method for the production of functional food from carrots in order to compensate for the low Se intake, but in the case of green peas, this concentration is too high. In a previous experiment, irrigation water containing 100 μg Se L−1 resulted in a Se content close to the RDA value in green beans and potatoes, while in tomatoes the content was only two-thirds of RDA, and in cabbage, it was four times higher. Thus, the degree of Se enrichment in green peas is similar to that of cabbage, which absorbs Se highly efficiently compared to the other tested vegetables. Irrigation water containing 100 μg Se L−1, therefore, resulted in excessive Se levels, equal to half of the UL for both species. The effect of the Se-2 treatment was also similar for cabbage and green peas in terms of the UL (Table 8), because the Se contents were close to three-fold in both plants, while the enrichment of carrot was less than that of green bean and greater than that of potato, and about twice as much as that of tomato fruit [33]. The use of 100 μg Se L−1 concentration has already caused excessive Se enrichment in plants, so it is not recommended for biofortification.
The element content of raw vegetable products may change during the preparation of ready-to-eat food. For example, heat treatment reduces the Se content [69]. The bioavailable organic Se fractions may decrease due to protein denaturalization as a result of boiling, baking, microwaving or frying [70]. Cooking reduced the Se content of biofortified green peas by 7.4% [53] and in another study, by 12% [63].

4.4. Changes in Element Composition

Biofortification is a method to produce plant products rich in certain elements that are otherwise deficient, but the concentration of other nutrients important for human consumption should not be adversely affected. The antagonistic effect of Se on elements such as sulphur, mercury and molybdenum has been shown in previous studies [71,72,73]. However, for most elements, the results have been conflicting, often depending on whether Se was applied to soil or hydroponic growing medium (nutrient solution culture) [74] or as a leaf spray [75]. For example, the results of an in vitro experiment proved the synergistic effect of Se on sulphur in the case of wheat and rape seedlings [76]. These results underline the importance of investigating the effect of Se in irrigation water, as this application method differs from the methods commonly used. In a previous experiment, the concentrations of other elements (P, K, Fe, Mg, Zn, Cu) varied depending on the plant species or soil type or showed no substantial change (As, B, I, Mn), but no clear, consistent positive or negative effect of Se on the elements was observed [33].
In the present experiment, the increase in P, K and Fe and the decrease in Zn in green peas partly confirmed and partly contradicted previous results (Figure 2). Łukaszewicz et al. [62] found that Se applied in the form of selenate in hydroponic cultivation decreased P and Mg while increasing K content in green pea shoots when the first pair of leaves appeared. Reynolds-Marzal et al. [77] treated forage pea (Pisum sativum L.) with a dose of 10 g Se ha−1 in the form of Na2SeO4 in a field experiment, which increased the accumulation of Mg from 2.16 to 2.35 g kg−1 and that of Ca from 8.74 to 9.55 g kg−1 in relation to the control, but had no effect on Fe. According to Poblaciones and Rengel [53], Se treatment caused a non-significant increase in the Zn concentration of peas from 33 to 38 mg kg−1, while it had no great effect on the Ca, Fe or Mg contents. However, in another similar study, it was found that the Mg concentration of green peas decreased from 1260 to 946 mg kg−1 in proportion to the increasing Se dose, while the Zn concentration increased from 43 to 47 mg kg−1, and both changes were significant [63].
The concentration-dependent effect found for Se on most elements in carrots agrees with the results of Filek et al. [76], who recorded an increase in K, Mg, Mn, Zn and Fe compared to the control in a low Se treatment, but a decrease or a smaller increase due to a higher Se dose in rape and wheat seedlings. Oliveira et al. [14] applied 1.0 mg Se dm−3 to the soil in the form of Na2SeO4, which significantly reduced the K content of carrot shoots by 26% and non-significantly increased the Fe content by approx. 10%. Interestingly, both the Fe and Mn contents in the root were significantly reduced by the treatment.

5. Conclusions

From the point of view of Se biofortification, irrigation water with a concentration of 100 µg Se L−1, referred to as treatment Se-1, can be recommended for the enrichment of Se in carrots, since this treatment increased the Se content by an average of 45 times, so consuming 100 g of the fresh root would approximately cover the 55 µg Se RDA per day. However, this concentration was too high for the biofortification of green peas, so a lower dose is recommended, the exact level of which needs to be determined in further research. It can be stated that only the Se-2 treatment, involving a concentration of 500 µg Se L−1, caused a significant decrease in the dry weight of carrot, whereas the Se-1 treatment had a practically negligible negative effect on the biomass of the studied plants. The effect of Se treatment on the concentration of other nutrients is also minimal. The role of the soil type was controversial: green peas were able to absorb more Se in the looser sand soil, while carrots were able to take up more Se in the more compacted silt, presumably due to the different root systems of the plants. Based on previous and current results, the enrichment of irrigation water with Se could be a possible method for plant biofortification.

Author Contributions

P.R. contributed to the implementation of the experiment, prepared the manuscript and conducted the statistical data analyses; T.T. contributed to the implementation of the experiment, carried out the photosynthetic efficiency and chlorophyll content measurements; A.F. conducted the statistical data analyses and proofread the manuscript; N.U. contributed to the data evaluation and proofread the manuscript; P.D. was the leader of the project, performed the analytical experimental work, and proofread the manuscript; G.Z. provided substantial contributions to the conception of the study and proofread the manuscript; N.S.-V. contributed to the implementation of the experiment; M.R. contributed to the design and implementation of the experiment and proofread the manuscript. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the National Research Development and Innovation Office (grant no. NVKP_16-1-2016-0044 and grant no. 2018-2.1.12-TÉT-HR-2018-00006 project) as well as by Eötvös Loránd Research Network ELKH (grant no. SA-26/2021).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The datasets analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Rayman, M.P. Selenium and human health. Lancet 2012, 379, 1256–1268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Koszta, G.; Kacska, Z.; Szatmári, K.; Szerafin, T.; Fülesdi, B. Lower whole blood selenium level is associated with higher operative risk and mortality following cardiac surgery. J. Anesth. 2012, 26, 812–821. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Tóth, R.J.; Csapó, J. The role of selenium in nutrition—A review. Acta Univ. Sapientiae Aliment. 2018, 11, 128–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  4. Hartikainen, H. Biogeochemistry of selenium and its impact on food chain quality and human health. J. Trace Elem. Med. Biol. 2005, 18, 309–318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Foster, H.D.; Zhang, L. Longevity and selenium deficiency: Evidence from the People’s Republic of China. Sci. Total Environ. 1995, 170, 133–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Puccinelli, M.; Malorgio, F.; Pezzarossa, B. Selenium Enrichment of Horticultural Crops. Molecules 2017, 22, 933. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Schiavon, M.; Nardi, S.; Vecchia, F.d.; Ertani, A. Selenium biofortification in the 21st century: Status and challenges for healthy human nutrition. Plant Soil 2020, 453, 245–270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Broadley, M.R.; White, P.J.; Bryson, R.J.; Meacham, M.C.; Bowen, H.C.; Johnson, S.E.; Hawkesford, M.J.; McGrath, S.P.; Zhao, F.-J.; Breward, N.; et al. Biofortification of UK food crops with selenium. Proc. Nutr. Soc. 2006, 65, 169–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  9. Wu, Z.; Bañuelos, G.S.; Lin, Z.-Q.; Liu, Y.; Yuan, L.; Yin, X.; Li, M. Biofortification and phytoremediation of selenium in China. Front. Plant Sci. 2015, 6, 136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Rayman, M.P. The argument for increasing selenium intake. Proc. Nutr. Soc. 2002, 61, 203–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Gondi, F.; Panto, G.; Feher, J.; Bogye, G.; Alfthan, G. Selenium in Hungary—The rock-soil-human system. Biol. Trace Elem. Res. 1992, 35, 299–306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Terry, N.; Zayed, A.M.; de Souza, M.P.; Tarun, A.S. Selenium in higher plants. Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. 2000, 51, 401–432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  13. Smoleń, S.; Skoczylas, Ł.; Ledwożyw-Smoleń, I.; Rakoczy, R.; Kopeć, A.; Piątkowska, E.; Bieżanowska-Kopeć, R.; Koronowicz, A.; Kapusta-Duch, J. Biofortification of Carrot (Daucus carota L.) with Iodine and Selenium in a Field Experiment. Front. Plant Sci. 2016, 7, 730. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  14. Oliveira, V.C.D.; Faquin, V.; Guimarães, K.C.; Andrade, F.R.; Pereira, J.; Guilherme, L.R.G. Agronomic biofortification of carrot with selenium. Ciência Agrotecnol. 2018, 42, 138–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Jerše, A.; Maršić, N.K.; Kroflič, A.; Germ, M.; Šircelj, H.; Stibilj, V. Is foliar enrichment of pea plants with iodine and selenium appropriate for production of functional food? Food Chem. 2018, 267, 368–375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Kápolna, E.; Hillestrøm, P.R.; Laursen, K.H.; Husted, S.; Larsen, E.H. Effect of foliar application of selenium on its uptake and speciation in carrot. Food Chem. 2009, 115, 1357–1363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Poblaciones, M.J.; Rodrigo, S.M.; Santamaría, O. Evaluation of the Potential of Peas (Pisum sativum L.) to Be Used in Selenium Biofortification Programs Under Mediterranean Conditions. Biol. Trace Elem. Res. 2013, 151, 132–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Mengel, K.; Kirkby, E.A.; Kosegarten, H.; Appel, T. Principles of Plant Nutrition, 5th ed.; International Potash Institute: Bern, Switzerland, 2001; pp. 665–667. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Xing, K.; Zhou, S.B.; Wu, X.G.; Zhu, Y.Y.; Kong, J.J.; Shao, T.; Tao, X. Concentrations and characteristics of selenium in soil samples from Dashan Region, a selenium-enriched area in China. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 2015, 61, 889–897. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Dinh, Q.T.; Li, Z.; Tran, T.A.T.; Wang, D.; Liang, D. Role of organic acids on the bioavailability of selenium in soil: A review. Chemosphere 2017, 184, 618–635. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Coppin, F.; Chabroullet, C.; Martin-Garin, A. Selenite interactions with some particulate organic and mineral fractions isolated from a natural grassland soil. Eur. J. Soil Sci. 2009, 60, 369–376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. FAO. UN Food and Agriculture Organization, Corporate Statistical Database (FAOSTAT); FAO: Rome, Italy, 2021; Available online: https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#home (accessed on 15 November 2021).
  23. Nithiyanantham, L.S.; Selvakumar, S.; Siddhuraju, P. Total phenolic content and antioxidant activity of two different solvent extracts from raw and processed legumes, Cicer arietinum L. and Pisum sativum L. J. Food Comp. Anal. 2012, 27, 52–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Smoleń, S.; Sady, W. The effect of various nitrogen fertilization and foliar nutrition regimes on the concentrations of sugars, carotenoids and phenolic compounds in carrot (Daucus carota L.). Sci. Hort. 2009, 120, 315–324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Skoczylas, Ł.; Tabaszewska, M.; Smoleń, S.; Słupski, J.; Liszka-Skoczylas, M.; Barański, R. Carrots (Daucus carota L.) Biofortified with Iodine and Selenium as a Raw Material for the Production of Juice with Additional Nutritional Functions. Agronomy 2020, 10, 1360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Wiesner-Reinhold, M.; Schreiner, M.; Baldermann, S.; Schwarz, D.; Hanschen, F.S.; Kipp, A.P.; Rowan, D.D.; Bentley-Hewitt, K.L.; McKenzie, M.J. Mechanisms of Selenium Enrichment and Measurement in Brassicaceous Vegetables, and Their Application to Human Health. Front. Plant Sci. 2017, 8, 1365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  27. Lončarić, Z.; Ivezić, V.; Kerovec, D.; Rebekić, A. Foliar Zinc-Selenium and Nitrogen Fertilization Affects Content of Zn, Fe, Se, P, and Cd in Wheat Grain. Plants 2021, 10, 1549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Tamás, M.; Mándoki, Z.S.; Csapó, J. The role of selenium content of wheat in the human nutrition. A literature review. Acta Univ. Sapientiae Aliment. 2010, 3, 5–34. [Google Scholar]
  29. Umaly, R.C.; Poel, L.W. Effects of iodine in various formulations on the growth of barley and pea plants in nutrient solution culture. Ann. Bot. 1971, 35, 127–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Poblaciones, M.J.; Rengel, Z. Soil and foliar zinc biofortification in field pea (Pisum sativum L.): Grain accumulation and bioavailability in raw and cooked grains. Food Chem. 2016, 212, 427–433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Signore, A.; Renna, M.; D’Imperio, M.; Serio, F.; Santamaria, P. Preliminary evidences of biofortification with iodine of “Carota di Polignano”, an Italian carrot landrace. Front. Plant Sci. 2018, 9, 170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  32. Dobosy, P.; Endrédi, A.; Sandil, S.; Vetési, V.; Rékási, M.; Takács, T.; Záray, G. Biofortification of potato and carrot with iodine by applying different soils and irrigation with iodine-containing water. Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 11, 593047. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Ragályi, P.; Takács, T.; Füzy, A.; Uzinger, N.; Dobosy, P.; Záray, G.; Szűcs-Vásárhelyi, N.; Rékási, M. Effect of Se-Enriched Irrigation Water on the Biomass Production and Elemental Composition of Green Bean, Cabbage, Potato and Tomato. Plants 2021, 10, 2086. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Dobosy, P.; Vetési, V.; Sandil, S.; Endrédi, A.; Kröpfl, K.; Óvári, M.; Takács, T.; Rékási, M.; Záray, G. Effect of irrigation water containing iodine on plant physiological processes and elemental concentrations of cabbage (Brassica oleracea L. var. capitata L.) and tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) cultivated in different soils. Agronomy 2020, 10, 720. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Rékási, M.; Ragályi, P.; Füzy, A.; Uzinger, N.; Dobosy, P.; Záray, G.; Szűcs-Vásárhelyi, N.; Makó, A.; Takács, T. Effect of the boron concentration in irrigation water on the element composition of edible parts of tomato, green bean, potato and cabbage grown on soils with different textures. Front. Plant Sci. 2021, 12, 658892. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. IUSS Working Group WRB. World Reference Base for Soil Resources 2014, update 2015. International Soil Classification System for Naming Soils and Creating Legends for Soil Maps; World Soil Resources Reports No. 106; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2015; Available online: https://www.fao.org/3/i3794en/I3794en.pdf (accessed on 15 November 2021).
  37. Jeong, H.; Kim, H.; Jang, T. Irrigation Water Quality Standards for Indirect Wastewater Reuse in Agriculture: A Contribution toward Sustainable Wastewater Reuse in South Korea. Water 2016, 8, 169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  38. MSZ-08-0206/2; Evaluation of Some Chemical Properties of the Soil. Laboratory Tests. (pH Value, Phenolphtalein Alkalinity Expressed in Soda, Total Water Soluble Salt Content, Hydrolytic (y1 Value) and Exchangeable Acidity (y2 Value). Hungarian Standard Association: Budapest, Hungary, 1978.
  39. MSZ-08-0452; Use of High-Capacity Analyser Systems for Soils Analyses. Quantitative Determination of the Organic Carbon Content of the Soil on Contiflo Analyzer System. Hungarian Standard Association: Budapest, Hungary, 1980.
  40. ISO 11261:1995; Soil Quality—Determination of Total Nitrogen—Modified Kjeldahl Method. International Organization for Standardization: Geneva, Switzerland, 1995.
  41. MSZ 20135; Determination of the Soluble Nutrient Element Content of the Soil. Hungarian Standard Association: Budapest, Hungary, 1999.
  42. MSZ-08-0215; Determination of the Cation Adsorption Capacity of the Soil. Modified Mechlich Technique. Hungarian Standard Association: Budapest, Hungary, 1978.
  43. MSZ 21470-50; Environmental Testing of Soils. Determination of Total and Soluble Toxic Element, Heavy Metal and Chromium (VI) Content. Hungarian Standard Association: Budapest, Hungary, 2006.
  44. Egnér, H.; Riehm, H.; Domingo, W.R. Untersuchungen über die chemische Bodenanalyse als Grundlage für die Beurteilung des Nährstoffzustandes der Böden. II. K. Lantbr. Högsk. Ann. 1960, 26, 199–215. [Google Scholar]
  45. Lakanen, E.; Erviö, R. A comparison of eight extractants for the determination of plant available microelements in soils. Acta Agric. Fenn. 1971, 123, 223–232. [Google Scholar]
  46. R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing; R Foundation for Statistical Computing: Vienna, Austria, 2020; Available online: https://www.R-project.org/ (accessed on 22 June 2021).
  47. Wickham, H. ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2016; ISBN 978-3-319-24277-4. Available online: https://ggplot2.tidyverse.org (accessed on 22 June 2021).
  48. Fairweather-Tait, S.J.; Bao, Y.; Broadley, M.R.; Collings, R.; Ford, D.; Hesketh, J.E.; Hurst, R. Selenium in Human Health and Disease. Antioxid. Redox. Signal 2011, 14, 1337–1383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. De Temmerman, L.; Waegeneers, N.; Thiry, C.; Du Laing, G.; Tack, F.; Ruttens, A. Selenium content of Belgian cultivated soils and its uptake by field crops and vegetables. Sci. Total Environ. 2014, 468, 77–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Stroud, J.L.; Li, H.F.; Lopez-Bellido, F.J.; Broadley, M.R.; Foot, I.; Fairweather-Tait, S.J.; Hart, D.J.; Hurst, R.; Knott, P.; Mowat, H.; et al. Impact of sulphur fertilisation on crop response to selenium fertilisation. Plant Soil 2010, 332, 31–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Zhao, C.Y.; Ren, J.H.; Xue, C.Z.; Lin, E.D. Study on the relationship between soil selenium and plant selenium uptake. Plant Soil 2005, 277, 197–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Smrkolj, P.; Germ, M.; Krett, I.; Stibilj, V. Respiratory potential and Se compounds in pea (Pisum sativum L.) plants grown from Se-enriched seeds. J. Exp. Bot. 2006, 57, 3595–3600. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  53. Poblaciones, M.J.; Rengel, Z. Combined foliar selenium and zinc biofortification in field pea (Pisum sativum): Accumulation and bioavailability in raw and cooked grains. Crop Pasture Sci. 2017, 68, 265–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Gawalko, E.; Garrett, R.G.; Warkentin, T.; Wang, N.; Richter, A. Trace elements in Canadian field peas: A grain safety assurance perspective. Food Addit. Contam. 2009, 26, 1002–1012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Kádár, I.; Radics, L.; Daood, H. Effect of Microelement Loads on the Yield of Carrots on Calcareous Chernozem Soil. Agrokémia Talajt. 2000, 49, 427–446. [Google Scholar]
  56. Kádár, I. Effect of microelement loads on peas grown on calcareous chernozem soil I. Yield and mineral composition. Agrokémia Talajt. 2001, 50, 62–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Kádár, I. Effect of microelement loads on pea (Pisum sativum L.) grown on calcareous sandy soil. Agrokémia Talajt. 2009, 58, 281–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Gupta, M.; Gupta, S. An Overview of Selenium Uptake, Metabolism, and Toxicity in Plants. Front. Plant Sci. 2017, 7, 2074. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  59. Hegedűsová, A.; Jakabová, S.; Hegedűs, O.; Valšiková, M.; Uher, A. Testing of selenium inhibition effect on selected characteristics of garden pea. Eur. Chem. Bull. 2012, 1, 520–523. [Google Scholar]
  60. Landberg, T.; Greger, M. Influence of selenium on uptake and toxicity of copper and cadmium in pea (Pisum sativum) and wheat (Triticum aestivum). Physiol. Plant. 1994, 90, 637–644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Łukaszewicz, S.; Politycka, B.; Smoleń, S. Effects of selenium on the content of essential micronutrients and their translocation in garden pea. J. Elem. 2018, 23, 1307–1317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Łukaszewicz, S.; Politycka, B.; Smoleń, S. Accumulation of selected macronutrients and tolerance towards selenium of garden pea treated with selenite and selenate. J. Elem. 2019, 24, 245–256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Poblaciones, M.J.; Rengel, Z. The effect of processing on Pisum sativum L. biofortified with sodium selenate. J. Plant Nutr. Soil Sci. 2018, 181, 932–937. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Hegedűsová, A.; Mezeyová, I.; Hegedűs, O.; Andrejiová, A.; Juríková, T.; Golian, M.; Lošák, T. Increasing of selenium content and qualitative parameters in garden pea (Pisum sativum L.) after its foliar application. Acta Sci. Pol. Hortorum Cultus 2017, 16, 3–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Bañuelos, G.S.; Arroyo, I.; Pickering, I.J.; Yang, S.I.; Freeman, J.L. Selenium biofortification of broccoli and carrots grown in soil amended with Se-enriched hyperaccumulator Stanleya pinnata. Food Chem. 2015, 166, 603–608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  66. Bañuelos, G.S.; Arroyo, I.S.; Dangi, S.R.; Zambrano, M.C. Continued Selenium Biofortification of Carrots and Broccoli Grown in Soils Once Amended with Se-enriched S. pinnata. Front. Plant Sci. 2016, 7, 1251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  67. Rayman, M.P. Food-chain selenium and human health: Emphasis on intake. Br. J. Nutr. 2008, 100, 254–268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  68. Smoleń, S.; Baranski, R.; Ledwożyw-Smoleń, I.; Skoczylas, Ł.; Sady, W. Combined biofortification of carrot with iodine and selenium. Food Chem. 2019, 300, 125202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Higgs, D.J.; Morris, V.C.; Levander, O.A. Effect of Cooking on Selenium Content of Foods. J. Agric. Food Chem. 1972, 20, 678–680. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  70. Pérez, M.B.; Maniero, M.Á.; Londonio, A.; Smichowski, P.; Wuilloud, R.G. Effects of common cooking heat treatments on selenium content and speciation in garlic. J. Food Compos. Anal. 2018, 70, 54–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Shrift, A. Sulfur-Selenium Antagonism. I. Antimetabolite Action of Selenate on the Growth of Chlorella vulgaris. Am. J. Bot. 1954, 41, 223–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Bai, X.; Li, Y.; Liang, X.; Li, H.; Zhao, J.; Li, Y.-F.; Gao, Y. Botanic Metallomics of Mercury and Selenium: Current Understanding of Mercury-Selenium Antagonism in Plant with the Traditional and Advanced Technology. Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 2019, 102, 628–634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  73. Zhang, M.; Hu, C.; Zhao, X.; Tan, Q.; Sun, X.; Li, N. Impact of molybdenum on Chinese cabbage response to selenium in solution culture. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 2012, 58, 595–603. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  74. Feng, R.; Wei, C.; Tu, S.; Wu, F. Effects of Se on the uptake of essential elements in Pteris vittata L. Plant Soil 2009, 325, 123–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Newman, R.; Waterland, N.; Moon, Y.; Tou, J.C. Selenium biofortification of agricultural crops and effects on plant nutrients and bioactive compounds important for human health and disease prevention—A review. Plant Foods Hum. Nutr. 2019, 74, 449–460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  76. Filek, M.; Zembala, M.; Kornaś, A.; Walas, S.; Mrowiec, H.; Hartikainen, H. The uptake and translocation of macro- and microelements in rape and wheat seedlings as affected by selenium supply level. Plant Soil 2010, 336, 303–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Reynolds-Marzal, M.D.; Rivera-Martín, A.M.; Rodrigo, S.M.; Santamaria, O.; Poblaciones, M.J. Biofortification of Forage Peas with Combined Application of Selenium and Zinc Under Mediterranean Conditions. J. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 2021, 21, 286–300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Agriculture 12 00496 g001 550
Figure 1. Changes in the total and extractable Se concentrations in the soil as a result of Se treatments. Error bars represent a 95% confidence interval.
Figure 1. Changes in the total and extractable Se concentrations in the soil as a result of Se treatments. Error bars represent a 95% confidence interval.
Agriculture 12 00496 g001
Agriculture 12 00496 g002 550
Figure 2. Macro and microelement concentrations of green peas and carrots, mg·kg−1 DW. Different letters indicate significant differences between treatments (p < 0.05). Error bars represent standard deviations.
Figure 2. Macro and microelement concentrations of green peas and carrots, mg·kg−1 DW. Different letters indicate significant differences between treatments (p < 0.05). Error bars represent standard deviations.
Agriculture 12 00496 g002
Table
Table 1. Characteristics of the soils.
Table 1. Characteristics of the soils.
ParameterSandSilty SandSilt
pH-H2O7.966.837.34
OM (w/w%)0.911.242.12
CaCO3 (w/w%)1.450.080.20
Total N (w/w%)0.0640.0920.135
NH4-N (mg kg−1)1.42.33.9
NO3-N (mg kg−1)4.72.314.2
AL-K2O (mg kg−1)74174176
AL-P2O5 (mg kg−1)13123881
CEC (Na meq/100 g)91737
Total Se (mg kg−1)0.0760.0940.132
Extractable Se (mg kg−1)0.0090.0160.010
Water-soluble Se (mg kg−1)<dl<dl<dl
Clay (<0.002 mm, %)142334
Silt (0.002–0.02 mm, %)183050
Sand (0.02–2 mm, %)694616
OM: organic matter, AL: ammonium-lactate-soluble, CEC: cation exchange capacity, Total: aqua regia-soluble, Extractable: extract according to Lakanen and Erviö, <dl: below the detection limit. Methods are described in Section 2.2. Sample preparation and analyses.
Table
Table 2. Growth period and irrigation parameters of the vegetables.
Table 2. Growth period and irrigation parameters of the vegetables.
ParameterPeaCarrot
Growth period7 May–20 June11 April–4 July
Length of growth period (days)4585
Se solution (mI/pot)868011,160
Se load in 100 µg L−1 treatment (mg/pot)0.8681.116
Se load in 500 µg L−1 treatment (mg/pot)4.345.58
Table
Table 3. Greenhouse parameters during the growth period of the vegetables.
Table 3. Greenhouse parameters during the growth period of the vegetables.
ParameterPeaCarrot
Daytime average temperature (°C)21.2 ± 7.622.4 ± 8.0
Nighttime average temperature (°C)13.7 ± 6.314.6 ± 6.6
Photosynthetically active radiation (W/m2)149 ± 91155 ± 93
Air humidity (%)74.0 ± 24.672.5 ± 24.9
Soil moisture (% v/v)23 ± 123 ± 2
Table
Table 4. Effect of Se treatments on the fresh and dry biomass production (g pot−1) and dry matter content (%) of the edible parts of peas and carrots.
Table 4. Effect of Se treatments on the fresh and dry biomass production (g pot−1) and dry matter content (%) of the edible parts of peas and carrots.
PlantParameterSe DoseSoil TypeMean
SandSilty SandSilt
Green peaGrain freshSe-024.7 ± 0.2 aA23.9 ± 5.0 aA20.5 ± 4.7 aA23.0 ± 3.9 A
weight (g)Se-121.5 ± 3.4 aA24.5 ± 2.6 aAB24.3 ± 4.1 aA23.4 ± 3.3 A
Se-217.4 ± 3.6 aA29.1 ± 1.9 bB18.9 ± 1.9 aA21.8 ± 5.9 A
Grain drySe-09.60 ± 1.18 aA10.6 ± 2.6 aA8.75 ± 2.30 aA9.65 ± 2.00 A
weight (g)Se-18.40 ± 2.00 aA10.5 ± 2.1 aA9.80 ± 1.30 aA9.57 ± 1.82 A
Se-26.78 ± 1.41 aA11.7 ± 1.1 aA7.66 ± 1.19 aA8.72 ± 2.54 A
Grain drySe-038.9 ± 4.9 aA44.5 ± 7.2 aA43.3 ± 10.4 aA42.3 ± 7.3 A
matterSe-138.7 ± 5.1 aA43.1 ± 7.9 aA40.5 ± 4.1 aA40.8 ± 5.5 A
content (%)Se-239.2 ± 5.5 aA40.3 ± 1.4 aA40.3 ± 2.2 aA39.9 ± 3.1 A
CarrotRoot freshSe-0103 ± 23 aA162 ± 16 bA86.7 ± 8.1 aA117 ± 37 A
weight (g)Se-1115 ± 16 abA141 ± 8 bA90.8 ± 9.6 aA116 ± 24 A
Se-285.1 ± 8.4 aA146 ± 22 bA83.0 ± 6.7 aA105 ± 33 A
Root drySe-017.0 ± 3.9 aA25.5 ± 2.2 bA14.3 ± 1.2 aA18.9 ± 5.6 B
weight (g)Se-116.4 ± 2.4 abA20.9 ± 2.8 bA13.7 ± 1.3 aA17.0 ± 3.7 AB
Se-211.8 ± 1.1 aA22.3 ± 3.1 bA11.1 ± 1.6 aA15.1 ± 5.7 A
Root drySe-016.5 ± 0.9 aA15.8 ± 1.2 aA16.5 ± 1.5 aA16.3 ± 1.1 B
matterSe-114.3 ± 0.5 aA14.8 ± 1.8 aA15.1 ± 0.8 aA14.7 ± 1.1 A
content (%)Se-214.0 ± 1.8 aA15.3 ± 0.2 aA13.4 ± 1.5 aA14.2 ± 1.4 A
Means ± std. dev., lower case letters indicate significant differences between columns (soil types) and capitals between rows (Se doses) (Tukey HSD5%).
Table
Table 5. Se concentrations in green peas and carrots as a function of Se treatments and soil types, mg·kg−1 DW.
Table 5. Se concentrations in green peas and carrots as a function of Se treatments and soil types, mg·kg−1 DW.
PlantParameterSe DoseSoil TypeMean
SandSilty SandSilt
Green peaGrainSe-00.101 ± 0.012 aA0.146 ± 0.041 aA0.108 ± 0.034 aA0.118 ± 0.035 A
Se-16.37 ± 0.61 aA4.92 ± 0.55 aA4.89 ± 0.61 aA5.39 ± 0.90 B
Se-237.1 ± 6.9 bB29.0 ± 3.9 aB24.0 ± 1.6 aB30.0 ± 7.0 C
ShootSe-00.118 ± 0.031 aA0.130 ± 0.033 aA0.068 ± 0.011 aA0.106 ± 0.037 A
Se-110.7 ± 3.0 aA7.66 ± 1.48 aA4.59 ± 0.92 aA7.65 ± 3.17 B
Se-258.9 ± 8.8 bB60.0 ± 3.4 bB28.9 ± 7.8 aB49.2 ± 16.5 C
RootSe-00.889 ± 0.069 aA0.456 ± 0.081 aA0.375 ± 0.085 aA0.574 ± 0.249 A
Se-120.3 ± 3.0 aB10.1 ± 1.7 aB8.83 ± 7.17 aA13.1 ± 6.8 B
Se-298.9 ± 8.4 bC49.7 ± 4.4 aC48.1 ± 15.5 aB65.5 ± 26.6 C
CarrotRootSe-00.062 ± 0.017 aA0.110 ± 0.022 aA0.061 ± 0.006 aA0.078 ± 0.028 A
Se-13.36 ± 0.17 aA2.91 ± 2.39 aA4.17 ± 0.49 aA3.48 ± 1.34 B
Se-217.6 ± 3.2 aB22.5 ± 3.9 abB25.5 ± 1.8 bB21.9 ± 4.4 C
ShootSe-00.086 ± 0.020 aA0.171 ± 0.074 aA0.153 ± 0.047 aA0.136 ± 0.059 A
Se-15.00 ± 1.06 aA6.68 ± 1.00 aA6.66 ± 0.73 aA6.11 ± 1.17 B
Se-237.5 ± 7.9 aB39.9 ± 7.5 aB37.0 ± 7.6 aB38.1 ± 6.8 C
Means ± std. dev., lower case letters indicate significant differences between columns (soil types) and capitals between rows (Se doses) (Tukey HSD5%).
Table
Table 6. Se content in edible parts * of vegetables, µg 100 g−1 fresh weight.
Table 6. Se content in edible parts * of vegetables, µg 100 g−1 fresh weight.
PlantSe Dose Soil Type
SandSilty SandSilt
Green peaSe-03.89 ± 0.19 aA6.70 ± 2.78 aA4.66 ± 1.68 aA
Se-1245 ± 13 aA209 ± 22 aA197 ± 26 aA
Se-21451 ± 329 bB1170 ± 171 abB967 ± 118 aB
CarrotSe-01.02 ± 0.24 aA1.73 ± 0.38 aA1.01 ± 0.19 aA
Se-147.8 ± 1.9 aA41.1 ± 33.0 aA63.2 ± 8.8 aA
Se-2247 ± 59 aB344 ± 55 bB340 ± 30 bB
Means ± std. dev., lower case letters indicate significant differences between columns (Se doses) and capitals between rows (soil types) (Tukey HSD5%); * green pea grains, carrot roots.
Table
Table 7. Amount of Se ingested with 100 g of fresh edible vegetable parts as a percentage (%) of the recommended dietary allowance (RDA) *.
Table 7. Amount of Se ingested with 100 g of fresh edible vegetable parts as a percentage (%) of the recommended dietary allowance (RDA) *.
PlantSe Dose Soil Type
SandSilty SandSilt
Green peaSe-07.07 ± 0.3412.2 ± 5.08.48 ± 3.06
Se-1446 ± 23381 ± 40359 ± 47
Se-22638 ± 5982127 ± 3111759 ± 214
CarrotSe-01.85 ± 0.443.15 ± 0.701.85 ± 0.34
Se-187.0 ± 3.574.8 ± 60.0115 ± 16
Se-2449 ± 108626 ± 101619 ± 54
* Based on 55 µg Se RDA in the EU, USA and Canada [48].
Table
Table 8. Amount of Se ingested per 100 g of fresh edible vegetable parts as a percentage (%) of the tolerable upper intake level (UL) *.
Table 8. Amount of Se ingested per 100 g of fresh edible vegetable parts as a percentage (%) of the tolerable upper intake level (UL) *.
PlantSe Dose Soil Type
SandSilty SandSilt
Green PeaSe-00.864 ± 0.0421.49 ± 0.621.04 ± 0.37
Se-154.4 ± 2.846.5 ± 4.943.9 ± 5.7
Se-2322 ± 73260 ± 38215 ± 26
CarrotSe-00.226 ± 0.0540.385 ± 0.0850.226 ± 0.042
Se-110.6 ± 0.49.14 ± 7.3414.0 ± 2.0
Se-254.9 ± 13.276.5 ± 12.375.6 ± 6.6
* Based on 450 µg Se UL in the EU and UK [48].
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Ragályi, P.; Takács, T.; Füzy, A.; Uzinger, N.; Dobosy, P.; Záray, G.; Szűcs-Vásárhelyi, N.; Rékási, M. Effect of Se-Enriched Irrigation Water and Soil Texture on Biomass Production and Elemental Composition of Green Pea and Carrot and Their Contribution to Human Se Intake. Agriculture 2022, 12, 496. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12040496

AMA Style

Ragályi P, Takács T, Füzy A, Uzinger N, Dobosy P, Záray G, Szűcs-Vásárhelyi N, Rékási M. Effect of Se-Enriched Irrigation Water and Soil Texture on Biomass Production and Elemental Composition of Green Pea and Carrot and Their Contribution to Human Se Intake. Agriculture. 2022; 12(4):496. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12040496

Chicago/Turabian Style

Ragályi, Péter, Tünde Takács, Anna Füzy, Nikolett Uzinger, Péter Dobosy, Gyula Záray, Nóra Szűcs-Vásárhelyi, and Márk Rékási. 2022. "Effect of Se-Enriched Irrigation Water and Soil Texture on Biomass Production and Elemental Composition of Green Pea and Carrot and Their Contribution to Human Se Intake" Agriculture 12, no. 4: 496. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12040496

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop