Next Article in Journal
Medulloblastoma: From TP53 Mutations to Molecular Classification and Liquid Biopsy
Next Article in Special Issue
Tree Physiological Variables as a Proxy of Heavy Metal and Platinum Group Elements Pollution in Urban Areas
Previous Article in Journal
Short-Term UVB Irradiation Leads to Persistent DNA Damage in Limbal Epithelial Stem Cells, Partially Reversed by DNA Repairing Enzymes
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Essential Mineral Elements and Potentially Toxic Elements in Orange-Fleshed Sweet Potato Cultivated in Northern Ethiopia

1
Institute of Climate and Society, Mekelle University, Mekelle P.O. Box 231, Ethiopia
2
Department of Dryland Crops and Horticultural Sciences, College of Dryland Agriculture and Natural Resources, Mekelle University, Mekelle P.O. Box 231, Ethiopia
3
Department of Land Resources Management and Environmental Protection (LaRMEP), College of Dryland Agriculture and Natural Resources, Mekelle University, Mekelle P.O. Box 231, Ethiopia
4
Department of Life Sciences, University of Siena, 53100 Siena, Italy
5
BAT Center—Interuniversity Center for Studies on Bioinspired Agro-Environmental Technology, University of Naples Federico II, 80138 Napoli, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Biology 2023, 12(2), 266; https://doi.org/10.3390/biology12020266
Submission received: 27 December 2022 / Revised: 3 February 2023 / Accepted: 5 February 2023 / Published: 7 February 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Biological Response of Plants to Environmental Changes)

Abstract

:

Simple Summary

This study aimed to investigate the influence of the agro-climatic environment of Northern Ethiopia on the content of essential mineral elements of selected orange-fleshed sweetpotato genotypes, the potential contribution of each genotype’s essential mineral elements to the required daily allowance, and the potential risk to human health from the accumulation of potentially toxic elements in the tuberous roots. The results showed consistent interspecific variability as well as important and significant intraspecific differences, which could depend on genotype and environment. Four of the five investigated genotypes can provide an amount of several essential mineral elements high enough to meet 100% of the recommended dietary allowance for all age groups ≤8 years. For all the genotypes, no health risks associated with their consumption emerged for Cr, As, and Pb, but Al, Cd, Cu, Fe, Mn and Ni is > 1 showed evidence of greater health risk, especially in children.

Abstract

This study investigated the influence of the agro-climatic environment of Northern Ethiopia on the content of essential mineral elements of selected orange-fleshed sweetpotato genotypes, the potential contribution of each genotype’s essential mineral elements to the recommended dietary allowance, and the potential risk to human health from the accumulation of potentially toxic elements in the tuberous roots of the studied genotypes. The results showed consistent interspecific variations in the content of essential mineral elements among the studied orange-fleshed sweetpotato genotypes, as well as important intraspecific differences, which could depend on the variations in soil mineral and organic matter content, rainfall, temperature, as well as interactions between genotype and environment. The investigated genotypes, especially Kulfo, Ininda, Gloria, and Amelia, can provide an amount of several essential mineral elements high enough to meet 100% of the recommended dietary allowance for all age groups ≤8 years. The mean content of potentially toxic elements in tuberous roots and their daily intake values were within the recommended permissible levels; likewise, no health risk was associated with the consumption of these genotypes for Cr, As, and Pb. However, Al, Cd, Cu, Fe, Mn, and Ni is > 1, consumption imposes health risks based on daily accumulation.

1. Introduction

Sweetpotato (Ipomoea batatas (L.) Lam.) is globally ranked as the sixth major food crop, and it is the fifth most important food crop in Sub-Saharan Africa [1]. The tuberous roots of this crop plant are rich in essential mineral elements such as Ca, Cu, Fe, K, Mn, P, and Zn [2,3], which are necessary for humans’ metabolic and biological functions. Mineral element deficiency can result in many disorders [4], and is associated with high mortality, high disease occurrence, and infertility [5].
The concentration of essential minerals elements in crops can be increased through biofortification [6,7,8]. When biofortifying sweetpotato, special care should be given to both the nutrient content and genotype-by-environment interactions (GEIs) of these essential mineral elements [7]. Strong GEIs in orange-fleshed sweetpotato have been reported by several authors [9,10,11]. According to Laurie et al. [9], variations in sweetpotato mineral content could be due to differences in GEIs, soil mineral content, and pH. Similarly, the content of essential mineral elements in sweetpotato may vary due to soil contamination with potentially toxic elements (PTEs) [12,13], as a result of anthropogenic activities such as mining, fossil fuel combustion, industrial activities, or heavy use of biosolids in agriculture [14]. Other major sources of PTEs are road transportation [15] and gasoline stations [16].
Several PTEs, e.g., Al, As, Cd, Pb, and Hg, have no known biological role and are thus harmful to humans [17], while other PTEs such as Cu, Cr, Fe, Ni, and Zn are important factors of metabolic functioning but become toxic at high concentrations [18,19]. In common crop plants such as onion, broad bean, tobacco, and potato, PTE toxicity induces inhibition of photosynthesis and growth, low cell division, and impairment of nucleic acid [20,21,22,23] and interferes with uptake and translocation of nitrogen [24], as well as other essential minerals [25,26].
Crop plants grown in heavily contaminated soils can potentially accumulate high concentrations of PTEs, which can thus enter the food chain, with negative implications for human and animal bodies [19,27]. Accumulation of toxic elements in humans may induce damage to several organs, even at low levels of exposure [28]. They are associated with cancer, DNA damage through mutation, deletion, or oxygen radical attack on DNA structure [29].
In African countries such as Ethiopia, war and other anthropogenic activities may cause severe soil pollution of agricultural soils. There is therefore a need to evaluate the qualities of agricultural commodities, including sweetpotatoes, in terms of both essential minerals and PTEs for food and nutritional security, given their great importance as a source of food for the local population.
This study thus aimed to investigate: (I) the influence of the agro-climatic environment on the content of essential mineral elements of selected orange-fleshed sweetpotato (OFSP) genotypes, (II) the potential contribution of each genotype’s essential mineral elements to the required daily allowance, and (III) the potential risk to human health from the accumulation of PTEs in the tuberous roots of the studied genotypes.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Sites

The experiments were run at three sites: Mekelle-1 (M1), Mekelle-2 (M2), and Aba’ala (A). The main climatic, geographical, and soil characteristics of the study sites are shown in Table 1. Africa has been divided into agro-climatic zones based on of the length of the growing season, which is associated with rainfall [30]; M1 and M2 fall within the semi-arid agro-climatic zone, while A falls within the arid agro-climatic zone. The arid agro-climatic zone has a growing period shorter than 60 days, while the semi-arid agro-climatic zone is 60–120 days [30]. At each site, experimental plots of 11 × 17 m (approximately 187 m2) were randomly selected.

2.2. Planting Material

A total of 5 distinct OFSP genotypes: 1 = Amelia, 2 = Gloria, 3 = Ininda, 4 = Kulfo, and 5 = Melinda, were obtained from the Tigray Agricultural Research Institute (TARI). These planting materials (except Kulfo (release-check)) were from the new germplasm sourced from Mozambique for trials at TARI in Ethiopia.
Planting was carried out at the three experimental sites using a randomized complete block design with three replicates at a spacing of 0.3 m × 1.0 m. The space between replication blocks was 1.0 m, and each plot within a replicate was 0.5 m. Each replication block contained five plots, and each plot was planted with 30 stems of a genotype.
The experiment depended on the natural environmental conditions for moisture and minerals. Nevertheless, at Aba’ala (arid agro-climate) water was supplied for two weeks at initial planting to enable crop pickup due to a lack of rainfall. No supplementary irrigation was provided at the other two sites. Weed control was achieved through mechanical management until the establishment of a full canopy cover of the crop.

2.3. Tuberous Roots

At maturation (at the end of November 2020), ten plants were randomly selected from the middle of the experimental plots to avoid border influence, and their tuberous roots were harvested. One tuberous root from each plant from the harvestable plot of each genotype was randomly taken to make a composite sample of each genotype used for the nutrient element quality and the content of PTEs analysis. Samples were washed in deionized water, peeled, sliced, and then freeze-dried (True-Ten Industrial Co., Taichung City, Taiwan), milled (Mini Mill, Thomas Scientific, Swedesboro, NJ, USA), and stored at −24 °C until chemical analysis.

Chemical Analysis

About 200 mg of ground samples for each OFSP genotype were mineralized with a mixture of 3 cm3 of 70% (v/v) HNO3, 0.2 cm3 of 50% (v/v) HF, and 0.5 cm3 of 30% (v/v) H2O2, using the microwave digestion system Ethos 900 (Milestone, Sorisoles, Italy) at 280 °C and 5.5 MPa, following the method described by Loppi et al. [31]. The content of Al, Ca, Cd, Cr, Cu, Fe, K, Mg, Mn, Ni, P, Pb, and Zn was quantified by an ICP-MS NexION 350 (Perkin Elmer, Waltham, MA, USA). The analytical quality was measured using the certified standard reference material DC 73350 “Poplar leaves” (Analytika, Praque, Czech Republic); recoveries were 94–112%. The precision of analyses was estimated by the coefficient of variation of 5 replicates and was always >97%. The results were expressed on a dry weight basis.

2.4. Data Analysis

The mineral contribution of each genotype to the recommended dietary allowance (RDA) or to the recommended adequate intake (RAI) for humans for Ca, Cu, Fe, K, Mg, Mn, Na, P, and Zn was calculated using a daily intake of 250 g of dry weight (dw) OFSP tuberous roots in mg per day, making it directly comparable to the standard consumption estimates. The average weight, height, and body mass for different age groups used to determine the RDA/RAI for different essential nutrients is taken from U.S. National Academy of Sciences [32] (Table 2).
The average essential minerals element content per genotype from the three environments was used to calculate the genotypes’ RDA contribution. The reference RDA/RAI are 270–1300 mg Ca, 0.4–1.3 mg Cu, 40–45 mg Fe, 400–1300 mg K, 75–360 mg Mg, and 0.6–11 mg Mn, 400–1300 mg Na, 275–1250 mg P, and 3–14 mg Zn [32,33]. For each element, the corresponding percentage contribution to the RDA/RAI was calculated as the mineral content in 250 g (dw)/RDA of each age group ×100.
To evaluate the health risk from PTEs associated with the consumption of OFSP, the Health Risk Index (HRI) was calculated according to the formula:
H R I = D I P T E R f d
The value of DIPTE (Daily Intake of PTE) was calculated using the formula proposed by Khan et al. [34]:
D I P T E = C O F S P × C f a c t o r   ×   D f o o d   i n t a k e B a v e r a g e   w e i g h t
where: COFSP is the average concentration (mg kg−1) of PTE in OFSP samples; Dfood intake is the daily consumption of OFSP (250 g); Baverage weight is the average body weight (70 kg). Cfactor is the conversion factor 0.085.
The values of Rfd (reference dose in mg kg−1 day−1) for the investigated PTEs were Al = 1.0, As = 0.07, Cd = 0.001, Cr = 1.5, Cu = 0.04, Fe = 0.7, Mn = 0.014, Ni = 0.02, Pb = 0.025, and Zn = 0.3. These Rfd values were taken from the IRIS (Integrated Risk Information System) of the US EPA [35,36]. A value of HRI > 1 for a given PTE is indicative of a potential risk to human health [37].
The data approached a normal distribution (Shapiro–Wilk test, p < 0.05), and were explored for significant differences (p < 0.05) across sweetpotato genotype and environment using two-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s test for post hoc comparisons. All calculations were run with the free software R [38].

3. Results

3.1. Mineral Elements

The mean values of essential mineral elements are reported in Table 3. Sweet potatoes from Aba’ala had by far the highest Ca, K, and P content; Cu, Ni, and Mn were also higher at Aba’ala. Trends in genotypes were element specific.
The results of two-way ANOVA (Table 4) showed that variations in genotype, environment, and the interactions between them are almost always statistically significant (p < 0.05), with exceptions such as Ni and Zn for genotype; Cr, Mg, and Zn for environment; and Cr, Ni, P, and Zn for the interactions.
The recommended dietary allowance (RDA)/recommended adequate intake (RAI) contributions for the different age groups are generally high for all mineral elements, with exceptions being Mg, Ca, Cr, Fe, Mn, Na, P, and Zn (Table 5).

3.2. Potentially Toxic Elements (PTEs)

The mean PTEs values are reported in Table 6. Melinda has the highest content of Cu and Fe and Amelia for Mn. Gloria ranked first for Al, Cr. Ininda had a high mean Cu content, and Kulfo had a low mean content of Al, Fe, and Mn. Environmental differences did not emerge for Al, Cd, Cr, Pb, and Zn. Aba’ala had a high content of Cu, Mn, and Ni, while Mekelle-1 and Makelle-2 had high contents of As and Fe, respectively. Tukey’s test (95%) significant confidence showed variations in the mineral element content in genotypes for almost all elements except Cd, Ni, Pb, and Ni; meanwhile, in terms of environment, the concentration of mineral elements varied, except for Al, Cd, Cr, Pb, and Zn.
The results of two-way ANOVA (Table 7) showed that genotype was only statistically significant (p < 0.05) for Al and Cr, Cu, Fe, and Mn, while the environment was significant only for As, Cu, Fe, Mn, and Ni. Only Cu, Fe, and Mn showed significant genotype x environment interactions.

3.3. Daily Intake of Potential Toxic Elements (DIPTEs) and Health Risk Index (HRI)

On average, the values of the DIPTEs followed the order Fe > Al > Zn > Cu > Mn > Ni > Cd > Cr > Pb > As in the five genotypes (Table 8). In some cases (Amelia, Melinda) the order of Cu and Mn was reversed.
The values of the HRI (Table 9) showed that Mn, Ni, Cu, Pb, Zn, and Cd were higher than the rest of the studied PTEs. On average, the order of the HRI values was Mn > Cd > Cu > Ni > Fe > Zn > Al > Pb > As > Cr.

4. Discussion

In Ethiopia, sweetpotato breeding programs prioritize improving in beta-carotene, yield, and resistance to pests and diseases. In this study, we evaluated the response of five genotypes to their environments in terms of concentrations of essential mineral and PTEs, with the aim of boosting nutritional security in Northern Ethiopia.
This study showed a wide array of variation in the content of mineral elements related to the effect of both genotype and environment, and the interactions between them. The overall high mean mineral content in Aba’ala (arid lowland) agrees with other studies, e.g., Laurie et al. [9] that reported high mineral content in sweetpotato varieties from lowland compared to their counterparts at highland.
All genotypes could provide more than 100% RDA/RAI for age groups ≤12 months and at least more than 50% RDA/RAI for age groups ≥8 years. All genotypes provided 100% RDA/RAI for all the different age groups for Cu and K with 250 g of dry weight, indicating that all the studied genotypes have very high Cu and K content. Generally, Ca, Cr, Mn, Fe, Na, Zn, and P content was low: all genotypes were unable to contribute >50% RDA/RAI for age groups ≥8 years. A similar low Mn content was already reported by Tumwegamire [10] and Tumwegamire et al. [39].
The concentration range for most elements in the studied OFSP tuberous roots (Al = 16.6–21.8 mg kg−1, As = 0.025–0.033 mg kg−1, Cr = 0.15–0.24 mg kg−1, Cu = 5.9–7.7 mg kg−1, Fe = 40.0–43.8 mg kg−1, Mn = 4.7–8.5 mg kg−1, Pb = 0.40–0.63 mg kg−1, Zn = 11.4–16.3 mg kg−1) was lower than the concentration reported for the “reference plant” [40] (Al = 80 mg kg−1, As = 0.1 mg kg−1, Cr = 1.5 mg kg−1, Cu = 10 mg kg−1, Fe = 150 mg kg−1, Mn = 200 mg kg−1, Pb = 1 mg kg−1, Zn = 50 mg kg−1). Nevertheless, the concentration ranges of Cd (0.12–0.22 mg kg−1) and Ni (1.8–2.7 mg kg−1) were slightly higher than those in the “reference plant” (Cd = 0.05 mg kg−1, Ni = 1.5 mg kg−1). However, this concentration may pose negligible health risks on a daily intake basis [40,41,42,43,44,45].
The calculated DIPTEs for all elements were within the estimated permissible daily intake levels [36,44]. Similarly, values of the health risk index of the studied potentially toxic elements through the intake of orange-fleshed sweetpotato (dry weight) from different studied genotypes were within the safe limit < 1 for As, Cr, and Pb, but Al, Cd, Cu, Fe, Mn, and Ni [34,37]. Thus, it can be suggested that all the studied orange-fleshed sweetpotato genotypes can be safely consumed as far as the health risk from exposures to PTEs As, Cr, and Pb is concerned, whereas Al, Cd, Cu, Fe, Mn, and Ni, which were > 1, cannot be consumed safely.

5. Conclusions

This study showed consistent interspecific variations in the content of essential mineral elements among the studied orange-fleshed sweetpotato genotypes, as well as important intraspecific differences, which could depend on the variations in soil mineral and organic matter content, rainfall, temperature, as well as interactions between genotype and environment (GEI). Thus, we need to consider these differences when selecting genotypes for introduction of sweetpotato in a new production environment where sweetpotato has not previously been grown.
The investigated genotypes, especially Kulfo, Ininda, Gloria, and Amelia, can provide several essential minerals in amounts high enough to meet 100% RDA for all age groups ≤8 years. These features justify the increased potentials of OFSP in assuaging mineral deficiencies in young children. Further investigation of these promising sweetpotato genotypes in other parts of the arid agro-climate is needed to verify the need for biofortification; this will help to scale up the concentration of essential nutrients to meet the RDA for age groups ≥8 years, including pregnant and breastfeeding ladies.
The mean content of potentially toxic elements in tuberous roots and their daily intake values were within the recommended permissible levels; likewise, no health risk was associated with the consumption of these genotypes for As, Cr, and Pb, but health risks emerged for Al, Cd, Cu, Fe, Mn, Ni, and Zn, especially for age groups ≤8 years old compared to adults ≥19 years old.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization: G.P.L., Y.T. and A.G.; investigation: G.P.L., A.V. and R.F.; formal analysis: G.P.L. and S.L.; writing G.P.L. and S.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The raw data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author.

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by OWSD/SIDA and COIMBRA funds from the University of Siena. The authors are grateful to Mekelle University, College of Agriculture, for providing land and lab facilities for experimental research. The Tigray Agricultural Research Institute (TARI) is acknowledged for providing the genotypes used in this study and laboratory service for soil analysis.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. FAOSTAT. World Food and Agriculture-Statistical Year Book 2020; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2020. [CrossRef]
  2. Kapinga, R.S.; Tumwegamire, S.; Ndunguru, J.; Andrade, M.I.; Agili, S.; Mwanga, R.O.M. Catalogue of Orange-Fleshed Sweetpotato Varieties for Sub-Saharan Africa; International Potato Center: Lima, Peru, 2010.
  3. Mwanga, R.O.M.; Odongo, B.; Niringiye, C.; Alajo, A.; Kigozi, B.; Makumbi, R.; Lugwana, E.; Namakula, J.; Mpembe, I.; Kapinga, R.; et al. ‘NASPOT 7’, ‘NASPOT 8’, ‘NASPOT 9 O’, ‘NASPOT 10 O’, and ‘Dimbuka-Bukulula’ sweetpotato. HortScience 2009, 44, 828–832. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Gupta, U.C.; Gupta, S.C. Sources and Deficiency Diseases of Mineral Nutrients in Human Health and Nutrition: A Review. Pedosphere 2014, 24, 13–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Ezzati, M.; Lopez, A.D.; Rodgers, A.; Vander Hoorn, S.; Murray, C.J. Comparative Risk Assessment Collaborating Group. Selected major risk factors and global and regional burden of disease. Lancet 2002, 360, 1347–1360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Mulongo, G.; Munyua, H.; Mbabu, A.; Maru, J. What is required to scale-up and sustain biofortification? Achievements, challenges and lessons from scaling-up Orange-Fleshed Sweetpotato in Sub-Sahara Africa. J. Agric. Food Res. 2021, 4, 100102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Pfeiffer, W.H.; McClafferty, B. Biofortification: Breeding micronutrient-dense crops. In Breeding Major Food Staples; Blackwell Scientific Publications, Inc.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2007; pp. 61–91. [Google Scholar]
  8. Nestel, P.; Bouis, H.E.; Meenakshi, J.V.; Pfeiffer, W. Biofortification of staple food crops. J. Nutr. 2001, 36, 1064–1067. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Laurie, S.M.; Van Jaarsveld, P.J.; Faber, M.; Philpott, M.F.; Labuschagne, M.T. Trans-ß-carotene, selected mineral content and potential nutritional contribution of 12 sweetpotato varieties. J. Food Compos. Anal. 2012, 27, 151–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Tumwegamire, S. Genetic Variation Diversity and Genotype by Environment Interactions of Nutritional Quality Traits in East African Sweetpotato. Ph.D. Thesis, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  11. Grüneberg, W.J.; Manrique, K.; Zhang, D.; Hermann, M. Genotype x environment interactions for a diverse set of sweetpotato clones evaluated across varying ecogeographic conditions in Peru. Crop Sci. 2005, 45, 2160–2171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Vimala, B.; Nambisan, B.; Hariprakash, B. Retention of carotenoids in orange-fleshed sweetpotato during processing. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2011, 48, 520–524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Liu, S.C.; Lin, J.T.; Yand, D.J. Determination of cis- and trans-a- and bcarotenoids in Taiwanese sweet potatoes (Ipomoea batatas (L.) Lam) harvested at various times. Food Chem. 2009, 116, 605–610. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Sharma, B.; Sarkar, A.; Singh, P.; Singh, R.P. Agricultural utilization of biosolids: A review on potential effects on soil and plant grown. Waste Manag. 2017, 64, 117–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Rolka, E.; Żołnowski, A.C.; Sadowska, M.M. Assessment of Heavy Metal Content in Soils Adjacent to the DK16-Route in Olsztyn (North-Eastern Poland). Pol. J. Environ. Stud. 2020, 29, 4303–4311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Rolka, E.; Żołnowski, A.C.; Kozłowska, K.A. Assessment of the content of trace elements in soils and roadside vegetation in the vicinity of some gasoline stations in Olsztyn (Poland). J. Elem. 2020, 25, 549–563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Gall, J.E.; Boyd, R.S.; Rajakaruna, N. Transfer of heavy metals through terrestrial food webs: A review. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2015, 187, 201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Tchounwou, P.B.; Yedjou, C.G.; Patlolla, A.K.; Sutton, D.J. Heavy metal toxicity and the environment. In Molecular, Clinical and Environmental Toxicology; Luch, A., Ed.; Springer: Basel, Switzerland, 2012; Volume 101, pp. 133–164. [Google Scholar]
  19. Zhuang, P.; McBride, M.B.; Xia, H.; Li, N.; Li, Z. Health risk from heavy metals vial consumption of food crops in the vicinity of Dabaoshan mine, South China. Sci. Total Environ. 2009, 407, 1551–1561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Qin, R.; Wang, C.; Chen, D.; Björn, L.O.; Li, S. Copper-induced root growth inhibition of Allium cepa var. agrogarum L. involves disturbances in cell division and DNA damage. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 2015, 34, 1045–1055. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Arya, S.K.; Basu, A.; Mukherjee, A. Lead induced genotoxicity and cytotoxicity in root cells of Allium cepa and Vicia faba. Nucleus 2013, 56, 183–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Gichner, T.; Patková, Z.; Száková, J.; Demnerová, K. Toxicity and DNA damage in tobacco and potato plants growing on soil polluted with heavy metals. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2006, 65, 420–426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Yang, J.L.; Wang, L.C.; Chang, C.Y.; Liu, T.Y. Singlet oxygen is the major species participating in the induction of DNA strand breakage and 8-hydroxydeoxyguanosine adduct by lead acetate. Environ. Mol. Mutagen. 1999, 33, 194–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Lea, P.J.; Miflin, B.J. Glutamate synthase and the synthesis of glutamate in plants. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 2009, 41, 555–564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Safarzadeh, S.; Ronaghi, A.; Karimian, N. Effect of cadmium toxicity on micronutrient concentration, uptake and partitioning in seven rice cultivars. Arch. Agron. Soil Sci. 2013, 59, 231–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Meharg, A.A.; Hartley-Whitaker, J. Arsenic uptake and metabolism in arsenic resistant and nonresistant plant species. New Phytol. 2002, 154, 29–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. McLaughlin, M.J.; Parker, D.R.; Clarke, J.M. Metals and micronutrients–food safety issues. Field Crops Res. 1999, 60, 143–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Chang, L.W.; Magos, L.; Suzuki, T. Toxicology of Metals; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 1996. [Google Scholar]
  29. Landolph, J. Molecular mechanisms of transformation of CH3/10T1/2 C1 8 mouse embryo cells and diploid human fibroblasts by carcinogenic metal compounds. Environ. Health Perspect. 1999, 102, 119–125. [Google Scholar]
  30. Food and Agriculture Organization. Report on Agro-Ecological Zones: Volume 1: Methodology and Results for Africa; FAO: Rome, Italiy, 1978.
  31. Loppi, S.; Fedeli, R.; Canali, G.; Guarnieri, M.; Biagiotti, S.; Vannini, A. Comparison of the mineral and nutraceutical of elephant garlic (Allium ampeloprasum L.) grown in organic and conventional fields of Valdichiana, a traditional cultivation area of Tuscany, Italy. Biology 2021, 10, 1058. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. US National Academy of Sciences. Dietary Reference Intake Report—Water, Potassium, Sodium, Chloride, and Sulphate. Food and Nutrition Board, Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences. 2004. Available online: https://www.nal.usda.gov/ (accessed on 21 November 2021).
  33. Trumbo, P.; Yates, A.A.; Schlicker, S.; Poos, M. Dietary reference intake: Vitamin A, Vitamin K, Arsenic, Boron, Chromium, Copper, Iodine, Iron, Magnesium, manganese, Molybdenum, Nickel, Silicon, Vanadium, and Zinc. J. Am. Diet. Assoc. 2001, 101, 294–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Khan, Z.I.; Ahmad, K.; Rehman, S.; Siddique, S.; Bashir, H.; Zafar, A.; De Mastro, G. Health risk assessment of heavy metals in wheat using different water qualities: Implication for human health. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2017, 24, 947–955. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. U.S. EPA. Report on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) International Decontamination Research and Development Conference; EPA/600/R-14/210; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: Washington, DC, USA, 2014.
  36. FAO/WHO. Evaluation of Certain Food Additives and Contaminants (Seventy-Third Report of the Joint FAO/WHO ExpertCommittee on Food Additives). WHO Technical Report Series, No. 960. 2010. Available online: http://whqlibdoc.who.int/trs/WHO_TRS_960_eng.pdf (accessed on 19 November 2022).
  37. Kumar, M.; Rahman, M.M.; Ramanathan, A.L.; Naidu, R. Arsenic and other elements in drinking water and dietary components from the middle Gangetic plain of Bihar, India: Health risk index. Sci. Total Environ. 2016, 539, 125–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing; R Foundation for Statistical Computing: Vienna, Austria, 2022; Available online: http://www.r-project.org (accessed on 13 July 2022).
  39. Tumwegamire, S.; Kapinga, R.; Rubaihayo, P.R.; LaBonte, D.R.; Grüneberg, W.J.; Burgos, G.; Zum Felde, T.; Carpio, R. Evaluation of dry matter, protein, starch, sucrose, ß-carotene, iron, zinc, calcium, and magnesium in East African sweetpotato [Ipomoea batatas (L.) Lam] germplasm. HortScience 2011, 46, 348–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Markert, B. Establishing of ‘Reference Plant’ for inorganic characterization of different plant species by chemical fingerprinting. Water Air Soil Pollut. 1992, 64, 533–538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Bhalerao, S.A.; Amit, S.S.; Anukthi, C.P. Toxicity of nickle in plants. Int. J. Pure Appl. Biosci. 2015, 3, 345–355. [Google Scholar]
  42. Fu, Y.; Jia, F.B.; Wang, J.; Song, M.; Liu, S.M.; Li, Y.F.; Liu, S.Z.; Bu, Q.W. Effects of subchloric aluminum chloride exposure on rat ovaries. Life Sci. 2014, 100, 60–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Velma, V.; Vutukuru, S.S.; Tchounwou, P.B. Ecotoxicology of hexavalent chromium in freshwater fish: A critical review. Rev. Environ. Health 2009, 24, 129–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. U.S. EPA. Cadmium Compounds. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2006. Available online: http://www.epa.gov/ttnatw01/hlthef/cadmium.html (accessed on 29 June 2022).
  45. Jarup, L.; Berglund, M.; Elinder, C.G.; Nordberg, G.; Vahter, M. Health effects of Cadmium exposure-a review of the literature and a risk estimate. Scand. J. Work. Environ. Health 1998, 24 (Suppl. S1), 1–51. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
Table 1. Main features of the study sites.
Table 1. Main features of the study sites.
Mekelle-1Mekelle-2Aba’ala
Latitude N13° 28′46′13° 28′50.6′13° 21′19′
Longitude E39° 29′09′39° 29′23.9′39° 45′17′
Altitude (m asl)222322231441
Annual rainfall (mm)406523394
Min annual temperature (°C)13.112.218.6
Max annual temperature (°C)25.324.434.0
Soil texture Silty claySilty claySilty-loamy
Sand (%)181828
Silt (%)494954
Clay (%)333318
pH7.07.06.9
EC (ds/m)0.230.230.11
CEC (cmol/kg)41.341.338.0
OC (%)0.480.521.90
Total N (%)0.090.100.14
Available K (ppm)134134121
Available P (ppm)26.626.638.7
Fe (ppm)11.011.015.1
Zn (ppm)5.45.46.5
Ca (ppm) 29.429.425.4
Table 2. Average weight, height, and body mass for different age groups used to determine the RDA/RAI for different essential nutrients is taken from U.S. National Academy of Sciences [33].
Table 2. Average weight, height, and body mass for different age groups used to determine the RDA/RAI for different essential nutrients is taken from U.S. National Academy of Sciences [33].
GenderAgeBody Mass Index, kg m−2Height, cm (in)Weight kg (lb)
Male and female6–12 months72 (28)9 (20)
4–8 years15.8118 (46)22 (48)
Male19–30 years22.6176 (69)70 (153)
Female19–30 years22.6163 (64)60 (131)
Table 3. Content of essential mineral elements in sweetpotato genotypes (mean ± standard error; mg 250 g−1 dw) in the studied environments.
Table 3. Content of essential mineral elements in sweetpotato genotypes (mean ± standard error; mg 250 g−1 dw) in the studied environments.
EnvironmentGenotypeCaCuCrFeKMgMnNaNiPZn
Aba’alaAmelia486 ± 22 ± 00.18 ± 0.0110 ± 13555 ± 16204 ± 43 ± 0174 ± 43.9 ± 0.1580 ± 64 ± 1
Aba’alaGloria273 ± 102 ± 00.25 ± 0.019 ± 33675 ± 1499 ± 22 ± 076 ± 33.7 ± 0.1407 ± 34 ± 0
Aba’alaIninda179 ± 72 ± 00.18 ± 0.019 ± 24272 ± 18100 ± 21 ± 072 ± 32.9 ± 0.1507 ± 54 ± 0
Aba’alaKulfo372 ± 82 ± 00.19 ± 0.0110 ± 31568 ± 11274 ± 72 ± 0431 ± 63.7 ± 0.1480 ± 44 ± 1
Aba’alaMelinda508 ± 12 ± 00.15 ± 0.0110 ± 32099 ± 13274 ± 62 ± 0391 ± 62.2 ± 0.1539 ± 54 ± 1
Mekelle-1Amelia340 ± 32 ± 00.15 ± 0.0110 ± 21034 ± 5225 ± 41 ± 0543 ± 42.5 ± 0.1348 ± 83 ± 1
Mekelle-1Gloria278 ± 111 ± 00.19 ± 0.0110 ± 21333 ± 9147 ± 51 ± 0392 ± 41.6 ± 0.1292 ± 53 ± 0
Mekelle-1Ininda230 ± 82 ± 00.17 ± 0.0110 ± 11604 ± 4158 ± 52 ± 0297 ± 52.2 ± 0.1344 ± 63 ± 0
Mekelle-1Kulfo242 ± 91 ± 00.18 ± 0.0110 ± 11157 ± 10167 ± 31 ± 0675 ± 41.8 ± 0.1342 ± 53 ± 1
Mekelle-1Melinda689 ± 82 ± 00.13 ± 0.0111 ± 32458 ± 9248 ± 42 ± 0329 ± 70.8 ± 0.1568 ± 74 ± 1
Mekelle-2Amelia379 ± 82 ± 00.13 ± 0.0111 ± 11524 ± 6262 ± 42 ± 0395 ± 61.7 ± 0.1452 ± 64 ± 1
Mekelle-2Gloria174 ± 121 ± 00.27 ± 0.0113 ± 1968 ± 6142 ± 51 ± 0380 ± 51.0 ± 0.1234 ± 44 ± 1
Mekelle-2Ininda175 ± 102 ± 00.23 ± 0.0111 ± 11502 ± 5127 ± 51 ± 0210 ± 51.5 ± 0.1356 ± 53 ± 0
Mekelle-2Kulfo219 ± 102 ± 00.24 ± 0.0111 ± 21126 ± 9167 ± 31 ± 0607 ± 51.2 ± 0.1337 ± 44 ± 1
Mekelle-2Melinda271 ± 22 ± 00.15 ± 0.0111 ± 11288 ± 7226 ± 42 ± 0358 ± 42.5 ± 0.1389 ± 53 ± 1
Table 4. Two-way ANOVA of mineral elements (* = p < 0.05).
Table 4. Two-way ANOVA of mineral elements (* = p < 0.05).
Source of VariationCaCuCrFeKMgMnNaNiPZn
Genotype2,127,795 *6.19 *0.01 *24 *25,695,899 *461,967 *29 *2,825,824 *0.95749,608 *34
Environment1,090,146 *10.07 *0.01202 *217,030,847 *1937 24 *3,083,098 *13.32 *1,525,083 *81
Interaction625,759 *2.17 *0.00111 *45,047,780 *150,500 *38 *386,427 *1.5847,33720
Residual40,6520.30.0061,256,47127440.512961.6433,43127
Table 5. Intake of essential mineral elements in OFSP genotypes with a daily dose of 250 g of d.w. of orange flesh sweetpotato per person (70 kg body weight) in the studied environments.
Table 5. Intake of essential mineral elements in OFSP genotypes with a daily dose of 250 g of d.w. of orange flesh sweetpotato per person (70 kg body weight) in the studied environments.
Essential ElementsRDA/RAI (mg d−1)Age GroupGenotypes
AmeliaGloriaInindaKulfoMelinda
2706–12 months1499072103181
8004–8 years5030243561
Ca (mg/250 g)100019 years >4024192849
1300Pregnant ladies 30–50 years3119152161
1300Lactation 19–50 years3119152161
0.56–12 months360300380320380
0.44–8 years450375475400475
Cu (mg/250 g)0.719 years >257214271229271
0.77Pregnant ladies 30–50 years234195247208247
1.3Lactation 19–50 years138115146123146
5.56–12 months3.04.03.53.62.9
154–8 years1.11.51.31.31.1
Cr (mg/250 g)2519 years >0.70.90.80.80.6
30Pregnant ladies 30–50 years0.50.70.60.70.5
45Lactation 19–50 years0.40.50.40.40.4
406–12 months2627262527
404–8 years2627262527
Fe (mg/250 g)4519 years >2324232224
45Pregnant ladies 30–50 years2324232224
45Lactation 19–50 years2324232224
5006–12 months387388381400389
4004–8 years484485476499486
K (mg/250 g)70019 years >277277272285278
770Pregnant ladies 30–50 years252252247259252
1300Lactation 19–50 years149149146154150
750–12 months)307172171270333
1304–8 years1779998156192
Mg (mg/250 g)32019 years >7240406378
400Pregnant ladies 30–50 years5832315162
360Lactation 19–50 years6436355669
0.66–12 months350233 200200317
34–8 years7047404063
Mn (mg/250 g)1119 years >1913111117
11Pregnant ladies 30–50 years1913111117
11Lactation 19–50 years1913111117
5006–12 months74434310872
4004–8 years92735413590
Na (mg/250 g)70019 years >5342317751
770Pregnant ladies 30–50 years4838287047
1300Lactation 19–50 years2822214228
Ni (mg/250 g)ND6–12 monthsNDNDNDNDND
0.34–8 years133200200167200
0.619 years >6710010084100
1Pregnant ladies 30–50 years4060605060
1Lactation 19–50 years4060605060
2756–12 months167113146140181
5004–8 years92628077100
P (mg/250 g)125019 years >3725323140
1250Pregnant ladies 30–50 years3725323140
1250Lactation 19–50 years3725323140
36–12 months117113117113113
54–8 years7068706868
Zn (mg/250 g)1119 years >3231323131
13Pregnant ladies 30–50 years2726272626
14Lactation 19–50 years2524252424
ND = not determined by US National Academy of Sciences [33] and Trumbo et al. [32].
Table 6. Content (mg kg−1 dw) of potentially toxic elements in sweetpotato genotypes in the studied environments. Different letters indicate statistical differences between the genotypes.
Table 6. Content (mg kg−1 dw) of potentially toxic elements in sweetpotato genotypes in the studied environments. Different letters indicate statistical differences between the genotypes.
GenotypeAlAsCdCrCuFeMnNiPbZn
Amelia18.5 ab0.025 b0.14 a0.16 b7.4 a41.0 ab8.5 a2.7 a0.40 a15.1 a
Gloria21.8 a0.033 a0.22 a0.24 a5.9 b43.2 a5.4 c2.1 a0.48 a11.4 a
Ininda19.0 ab0.031 a0.18 a0.19 ab7.7 a40.8 b4.7 cd 2.2 a0.44 a16.3 a
Kulfo16.6 b0.033 a0.22 a0.20 ab6.4 b40.0 b4.7 d2.2 a0.61 a12.5 a
Melinda16.7 b0.033 a0.12 a0.15 b7.7 a43.8 a7.7 b1.8 a0.63 a13.7 a
CV3.28.18.14.11.61.31.84.88.49.1
Environment
Aba’ala17.8 a0.026 b0.19 a0.19 a8.0 a38.7 b7.7 a3.3 a0.62 a15.3 a
Mekelle-118.8 a0.037 a0.15 a0.16 a7.4 b40.7 b5.3 b1.8 b0.46 a11.6 a
Mekelle-218.9 a0.029 ab0.18 a0.21 a7.3 b45.8 a5.6 b1.6 b0.46 a13.5 a
Table 7. Two-way ANOVA of potentially toxic elements (* = p < 0.05).
Table 7. Two-way ANOVA of potentially toxic elements (* = p < 0.05).
Source of VariationsAlAsCdCrCuFeMnNiPbZn
Genotype41.03 *0.000.020.01 *6.19 *24.38 *29.09 *0.950.1034.24
Environment 5.450.00 *0.010.0110.07 *202.97 *24.10 *13.32 *0.1481.14
Interaction22.520.000.000.001.33 *59.21 *20.09 *1.460.1224.72
Residual9.470.000.010.000.336.560.251.640.1228.22
Table 8. Daily Intake of PTEs (DIPTEs, mg) through the intake of 250 g d−1 (dw) of the studied sweetpotato genotypes.
Table 8. Daily Intake of PTEs (DIPTEs, mg) through the intake of 250 g d−1 (dw) of the studied sweetpotato genotypes.
AlAsCdCrCuFeMnNiPbZn
Amelia5.60.0080.040.041.812.42.60.820.014.6
Gloria6.60.0100.070.041.613.11.60.630.013.5
Ininda5.80.0090.050.051.912.41.40.660.015.0
Kulfo5.00.0100.070.061.512.21.40.670.023.8
Melinda5.10.0090.040.051.913.32.40.550.024.2
Table 9. Health Risk index (HRI) of PTEs from oral exposure for each studied sweetpotato genotypes.
Table 9. Health Risk index (HRI) of PTEs from oral exposure for each studied sweetpotato genotypes.
GenotypesAlAsCdCrCuFeMnNiPbZn
Amelia5.600.1140.000.0345.0017.71185.7141.000.4015.33
Gloria6.600.1470.000.0340.0018.71114.2931.500.4011.67
Ininda5.800.1350.000.0347.5017.71100.0033.000.4016.67
Kulfo5.000.1470.000.0437.5017.43100.0033.500.8012.67
Melinda5.100.1340.000.0347.5019.00171.4327.500.8014.00
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Lamaro, G.P.; Tsehaye, Y.; Girma, A.; Vannini, A.; Fedeli, R.; Loppi, S. Essential Mineral Elements and Potentially Toxic Elements in Orange-Fleshed Sweet Potato Cultivated in Northern Ethiopia. Biology 2023, 12, 266. https://doi.org/10.3390/biology12020266

AMA Style

Lamaro GP, Tsehaye Y, Girma A, Vannini A, Fedeli R, Loppi S. Essential Mineral Elements and Potentially Toxic Elements in Orange-Fleshed Sweet Potato Cultivated in Northern Ethiopia. Biology. 2023; 12(2):266. https://doi.org/10.3390/biology12020266

Chicago/Turabian Style

Lamaro, Gloria Peace, Yemane Tsehaye, Atkilt Girma, Andrea Vannini, Riccardo Fedeli, and Stefano Loppi. 2023. "Essential Mineral Elements and Potentially Toxic Elements in Orange-Fleshed Sweet Potato Cultivated in Northern Ethiopia" Biology 12, no. 2: 266. https://doi.org/10.3390/biology12020266

APA Style

Lamaro, G. P., Tsehaye, Y., Girma, A., Vannini, A., Fedeli, R., & Loppi, S. (2023). Essential Mineral Elements and Potentially Toxic Elements in Orange-Fleshed Sweet Potato Cultivated in Northern Ethiopia. Biology, 12(2), 266. https://doi.org/10.3390/biology12020266

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