Next Article in Journal
Loss and Early Recovery of Biomass and Soil Organic Carbon in Restored Mangroves After Paspalum vaginatum Invasion in West Africa
Previous Article in Journal
Formiguer Fertilization: Historical Agricultural Biochar Use in Catalonia and Its Modern-Day Resource Implications
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Resources
Volume 14
Issue 8
10.3390/resources14080121
resources-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
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Communication

Morphological and Nutritional Characterization of the Native Sunflower as a Potential Plant Resource for the Sierra Gorda of Querétaro

by
Ana Patricia Arenas-Salazar
,
Mark Schoor
,
María Isabel Nieto-Ramírez
,
Juan Fernando García-Trejo
,
Irineo Torres-Pacheco
,
Ramon Gerardo Guevara-González
,
Humberto Aguirre-Becerra
and
Ana Angélica Feregrino-Pérez
*
Faculty of Engineering, Autonomous University of Querétaro, Cerro de las Campanas s/n, Querétaro 76010, Mexico
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Resources 2025, 14(8), 121; https://doi.org/10.3390/resources14080121
Submission received: 13 June 2025 / Revised: 24 July 2025 / Accepted: 24 July 2025 / Published: 29 July 2025
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

Problems with primary food production (food insecurity, malnutrition, and socioeconomic problems) persist throughout the world, especially in rural areas. Despite these problems, the available natural food resources are underutilized; residents are no longer interested in growing and consuming foods native to their region. In this regard, this study carries out the morphological and nutritional characterization of a native sunflower (Helianthus annuus) grown in the Sierra Gorda, Querétaro, Mexico, known as “Maíz de teja”, to implement a sustainable monoculture production system. The results were compared with some other sunflower varieties and other oilseeds grown and consumed in the country. This study determined that this native sunflower seed is a good source of linoleic acid (84.98%) and zinc (17.2 mg/100 g). It is an alternative protein source (18.6 g/100 g), comparable to foods of animal origin. It also provides a good amount of fiber (22.6 g/100 g) and bioactive compounds (total phenolic compounds (TPC) 3.434 ± 0.03 mg/g and total flavonoids (TFC) 0.67 ± 0.02 mg/g), and seed yield 341.13 kg/ha. This study demonstrated a valuable nutritional profile of this native seed and its potential for cultivation. Further research is needed to improve agricultural management to contribute to food security and improve the socioeconomic status of the community.

1. Introduction

The conservation of native species is relevant to promoting sustainable food production systems. Their exploitation benefits the local ecosystems, economy and public health [1]. In rural areas of Mexico and other developing or underdeveloped countries, several hectares of land have been allocated to the use of intensive agricultural systems [2,3] with the introduction of species foreign to the area. The displacement of native species from their natural habitats causes various socioeconomic and environmental issues. The first refers to the few producers who can afford to grow crops but prefer to continually introduce species with higher economic value, increasing the need for agrochemicals to maintain production. This leads to a smaller variety of foods being available in the area and complicates access to food [4,5]. The second is related to emigration; the limitation of accessible species to cultivate forces people, especially men, to emigrate to other countries in search of better job opportunities, which causes an imbalance in the population of these rural areas. Regarding environmental impact, intensive agriculture damages biodiversity and natural habitats causing soil imbalance in the soil microbiome [6], pollution, and waste of natural resources [7]. Lastly, there is food security. Within this point, the decline in the nutritional quality of the products produced in these systems affects healthy diets [6,7], producing a negative impact on the well-being of their populations [8,9,10,11] and the loss of culinary traditions [12,13].
The characteristics above are currently occurring in a rural area of the Sierra Gorda de Querétaro in Mexico, which is located within the boundaries of a biosphere reserve. The inhabitants of this region have primarily dedicated themselves to agriculture for many years; however, soil conditions have changed in part due to intensive crop management and climate change, making it increasingly difficult to produce food in this area. Furthermore, it is an area with a high rate of migration due to limited job opportunities [14,15]. This has also influenced the change in eating habits among new generations, abandoning the traditional diet [16].
This area is characteristic of several native plant species with certain nutritional and, consequently, significant economic value, such as a variety of sunflower seed known locally as “Maíz de teja,” which is the only oilseed produced in the region [14]. Residents typically consume it as the main ingredient in a typical Mexican drink called “atole.” However, this tradition is disappearing because people have lost interest in cultivating it, opting instead to produce other non-native species.
Sunflower seeds are part of the oilseed group; their wild form is native to Mexico and parts of the western United States [17]. This oilseed species belongs to the Asteraceae family. The Helianthus genus has a great variety of species and is currently widely cultivated around the world [18]. The yield of this crop is important, since it is a source of highly valued edible oil, as well as food. Therefore, various studies focus on examining not only strategies to increase yield but also to improve the nutritional profile of different varieties sustainably [19].
Sunflower seeds contain high-quality proteins, vitamins, and important minerals such as potassium, phosphorus, and magnesium, along with unsaturated and polyunsaturated fatty acids (FAs) and several bioactive compounds [20,21,22].
Therefore, this research aims to characterize, at the morphological and nutritional levels, the sunflower “maíz de teja” native to the Sierra Gorda Queretana, in Mexico, since no information related to this variety is available and due to the fact that the nutrient composition and yield of food crops can vary according to agricultural management and edaphic conditions. Analyzing plant development and seed composition will help us evaluate its economic and nutritional potential and to recover the foods that comprised the traditional diet of the area, thus improving food security and impacting the health of its inhabitants, through sustainable agricultural practices [11,23,24].

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Experimental Site

The rural area is located in the state of Querétaro, Mexico, with GPS coordinates of longitude (dec) −99.635556, latitude (dec) 21.445000 at an average altitude of 560 m above sea level. Its climate is buffered: (A)(C)(w1) very warm, 34 to 36 °C, with summer temperatures reaching 40 °C and winter temperatures ranging from 8 to 10 °C, with average rainfall of 600–800 mm or up to 1000 mm per year. Regarding the edaphology of the place, a type of soil called lithosol can be identified, which is characteristic of the buffer zones, with 166,897.13 ha, equivalent to 43.45% of the same [17].

Soil Characteristics of the Experimental Area

A soil sample was taken at five different points in the experimental area, and a soil analysis was performed to determine its composition [25] before planting (Table 1).

2.2. Experimental Design

A plot of five furrows was implemented, each 10 m long, 0.90 m wide, with three replicates (Figure 1), and a 0.30 m distance between plants. The total area planted was 135 m2.

2.3. Sowing and Agricultural Management

The sunflower seeds were obtained from different producers in the region who plant this species in their crops to attract pollinators. Later, they harvest the flowers to select the best seeds for their later use in other crops.
After obtaining the native sunflower seeds, a monoculture system was implemented. After implementing the experimental lot, a 0.5-meter-diameter slow-flow drip irrigation tape was installed, with drippers spaced every 15 cm in a row; each dripper yields 0.7 gallons per hour (Figure 2). Watering was performed approximately every 3 days, depending on the local temperature. The field trial was conducted from the summer of 2023 to the spring of 2024. The seeds were sown at the end of August, when rainfall normally begins in the area; it was carried out manually, placing two sunflower seeds per hole (Figure 2). Pest management was performed with biorational products, and weeds were kept under control by hand weeding throughout the crop life cycle. Control was performed manually; no insecticides or fertilizers were applied to review the development of native seeds.

2.4. Harvest

Maíz de teja harvesting was performed at the end of February, when the flowers were completely dry, to take the seeds (Figure 3). Finally, to obtain the sample for analysis, the seeds of the three replicates were mixed. The seeds obtained from this native sunflower are shown in Figure 4.

2.5. Morphology

2.5.1. Height and Stem Measurement

During the time the experiment was carried out, plant height (PH) and stem diameter (SD) of 10 plants of each replicate (3 replicates) were measured (Figure 5) in each growth stage: emergence (E), vegetative emergence (VE), bud visible (R1), immature bud (R3), first flowering (R5:1), 50% flowering (R5:5), last flowering (R6), and physiological maturity (R9).

2.5.2. Yield

The variables determined were seed yield per hectare (SY) and the final count of plants per replicate.
Data was collected on seed yield per unit area (t/ha) according to the following Equation (1): Formula (1)
Seed yield/(t ha−1) = seed weight (kg/plot) × 10,000 m2/plot area (m2) × 100

2.6. Chemical Analysis

To review the nutritional and antioxidant potential, chemical analyses were performed. Bromatological analyses (protein, lipid, fiber, carbohydrate, moisture, and ash content) were performed using the AOAC methods (1975).

2.7. Phenolic Compounds

2.7.1. Extraction

A polyphenol extraction method based on Cardador-Martínez et al. [26] was conducted with some modifications. A sample of 200 mg of ground sunflower seeds was mixed with 10 mL of methanol (HPLC grade, 99.98%). The mixture was stirred for 30 min in an ultrasonic bath at 20 °C, then centrifuged at 5000× g for 10 min at 4 °C. The clear liquid obtained was used for further analysis.

2.7.2. Total Phenols

Total phenol content was determined by the Folin–Ciocalteu method [27] using a gallic acid calibration curve. Forty microliters of methanolic extract was mixed with reagents and left in the dark for 2 h. Absorbance was measured at 760 nm, and results were expressed as mg gallic acid equivalents (GAE)/100 g, analyzed in triplicate.

2.7.3. Total Flavonoids

Total flavonoids were quantified following Oomah et al.’s method [28]. Fifty microliters of extract was mixed with methanol and 1% 2-aminoethyldiphenylborate; absorbance was measured at 404 nm. The results were compared to a rutin standard curve and expressed as mg rutin equivalents (RE)/100 g, in triplicate.

2.8. Antioxidant Capacity

2.8.1. DPPH

Scavenging of DPPH radicals was measured using Williams’ method [29], modified by Fakumoto and Mazza [30]. Absorbance was measured at 532 nm every 10 min for 90 min in darkness. A Trolox standard curve was used and antiradical activity (ARA) was calculated by the percentage of DPPH decolorization using Formula (2), where Sabs is the absorbance of the sample, and Cabs is the absorbance of the control (the absence of an antioxidant).
ARA = (1 − Sabs/Cabs) × 100.

2.8.2. ABTS

The ABTS radical was prepared with K2S2O8 and absorbance measured at 734 nm [31]. Trolox was used for calibration, and antioxidant inhibition was calculated using Formula (3):
% Inhibition = ((Initialabs − finalabs)/(Initialabs)) × 100

2.9. Fatty Acid Profile

To determine the fatty acids (FAs) in sunflower seed, a sample of 50.7 mg of this seed was used. The sunflower seed oil was extracted using Soxhlet extraction. The fatty acids in the oil were then esterified with sodium hydroxide and methanol, and subsequently analyzed by gas chromatography–mass spectrometry (GC-MS). The results obtained were expressed as percentages, identifying the content of each fatty acid [32].

2.10. Mineral Content

To determine the mineral content in sunflower seeds (sodium, potassium, magnesium, manganese, zinc, calcium, iron, and copper), the Anton Paar equipment was used, following the steps outlined in its Multiwave GO User Manual [33].

2.11. Statistical Analysis

Results were expressed as mean ± standard deviation (n = 3). Each analysis was compared with other studies conducted on sunflower and oilseed varieties produced and consumed in Mexico. The morphology results obtained were analyzed using a normality test with the JMP-Pro 16.0.0 program.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Morphology

3.1.1. Height and Stem Measurement

First, a normality test was performed to determine whether the data obtained for both plant height and stem diameter had a normal distribution. Regarding height, a mean of 90.72 cm, a standard deviation of 69.89, and an N of 210 were obtained. And for stem diameter, the results were a mean of 14.38 mm, a standard deviation of 8.85, and an N of 210.
Table 2 shows that the height and stem diameter of the sunflower plant varied according to each stage of development. Between stages R3 and R5.1, the difference in data means is very different in height and diameter. Stages R5.5, R6 and R9 showed a similar average for these parameters; for height, the average was 167.63 ± 23.37, 166.70 ± 19.30, and 167.90 ± 20.53 cm. respectively, for these stages, and for diameter, 22.66 ± 5.00, 22.30 ± 5.68, and 22.4 ± 5.35 mm, which shows that from the stage where there is already 50% flowering, the plant practically stops growing and concentrates on forming seeds. Canvar et al. [19] presented similar results regarding the decrease in growth between stages R5.5, R6, and R9 with the different sunflower hybrids they studied. However, it can be observed that the height and stem diameter (121.3 cm and 2.16 mm, respectively) of the different sunflower hybrids in their study are smaller than those in the present study.
Some experimental data on traditional sunflowers, obtained in Mexico for seed production or oil production, were used to review the height and diameter of the plants, obtaining values of 1.4–2.0 m in height and 1.8–2.5 cm in stem diameter [34]. Other investigations in which these same variables were measured include the study by Kaya et al. [35], who examined a sunflower cultivar for ornamental use. The ranges they obtained were 0.5–1.2 m in height and 1.5–2.0 cm in stem diameter; the referenced values were obtained from plants in a maturing state (R6). Plant height and stem thickness in sunflower plants vary among domesticated varieties depending on the cultivar and agronomic management. Various studies on sunflower show that plant height generally ranges from 1.2 m to 3.5 m. In contrast, stem diameters range from 1.5 cm to 5 cm, depending on the variety, planting density, and type of fertilization.
Regarding the growth of native species, plant height and stem diameter are usually lower in native plants compared to domesticated varieties. This can be explained primarily by the fact that domesticated varieties have already undergone a selection of seeds from taller plants with thicker stems to facilitate mechanized harvesting and increase biomass and yield. Native varieties have not undergone this selection, which is why they maintain smaller sizes adapted to natural conditions, as the plants can conserve water and energy [36]. In addition to growing in conditions of lower fertility and without irrigation, this limits the potential for growth in height and stem thickness [37]. Another characteristic that domesticated varieties have developed is the accumulation of alleles that regulate stem and height growth; these characteristics are absent or less expressed in native varieties [38]. In relation to the present study, this native variety of sunflowers in monoculture proved to be taller and had a larger diameter, surely related to continuous irrigation, since no type of fertilizer was used. Therefore, it will be important to continue researching it, as its development and performance can improve with adequate agricultural management and the implementation of a sustainable strategy for its production in rural areas.

3.1.2. Yield

The total average seed yield of native sunflower was 341.13 kg/ha (10.48± 4.93). Canvar et al. [19] found higher yields among monoculture sunflower hybrid cultivars (2658.5 kg–3876.6 kg ha−1). On the contrary, in another experiment carried out in Belgium [39], the yield obtained in one year was 2.53 t ha−1, lower than that of this research. The low yield in the present study compared to other studies can be explained by the fact that the native creole accessions studied in this experiment have only undergone artisanal improvement by producers who use them to attract pollinators. Soil analysis performed before planting showed that nitrogen levels were at a low average level (0.12%); nitrogen, as a mineral nutrient, is required in large amounts by plants. Nevertheless, the pH was moderately alkaline (8.048), which probably also had a negative impact on nutrient availability [40].
However, it should be noted that this experiment evaluated the yield of a native species in its natural habitat, and the first monoculture was explored for possible future use. Other studies include additional nutrition to ensure yield, in this study fertilizers were not included.
There is evidence to support the idea that native species can be combined with other native species in polyculture to enhance their performance [41,42]. This is related to the fact that native species in their natural habitat complement the soil microbiome [42]. Therefore, soil microbiome analysis would be necessary in future studies. Furthermore, studying this microbiome could improve soil conditions, allowing for the use of fewer or no agrochemicals and fertilizers [43,44].

3.2. Chemical Composition of Native Sunflower Seeds

The results of many of the analyses performed in this study were compared with other types of oilseeds grown and consumed in Mexico, to compare their nutritional potential with that of maíz de teja. All these seeds are grown in Mexico; however, a large percentage of them are imported into the country. For example, soybeans are one of the main oilseeds consumed in Mexico, with national consumption of 6.1 million tons. However, they are the main oilseed imported by this country, with approximately 95% coming primarily from the USA. It is primarily used as edible oil (36% of total oils consumed in Mexico); its meal is also added to livestock and poultry feed [45].
Another important oilseed is canola; the demand for its edible oil has grown in recent years because it is a vegetable oil that is low in saturated fat. Its estimated consumption in 2024 was 500,000 tons. Nevertheless, almost 100% is imported to Mexico and is widely used in the edible oil and margarine industries [46].
Sunflower is widely consumed in Mexico as vegetable oil, and its seeds are consumed as a snack. Despite being a species endemic to Mexico, its production is limited in the country, as both the oil and the seed must be imported to cover the estimated annual consumption of 140,000 tons, as many snack-type products produced in the country contain sunflower oil [47]. Regarding safflower, Mexico was a leading producer of this oilseed for many years, yet the planted area has declined. It is used as edible oil and for the cosmetics industry. Currently, consumption is 90,000 tons, with a national production of 30,000 tons annually. Therefore, the remainder must be imported from other countries. Furthermore, sesame is an oilseed widely consumed in the country, primarily used in bakeries, confectionery, and traditional cooking (mole, candy) [46]. Mexico produces a large portion of what is consumed (20,000 tons annually). Other oilseeds consumed in smaller quantities but of regional importance are peanuts, flaxseeds, almonds, and walnuts. They are typically used in gourmet oils, baking, and as seeds. Nonetheless, it should be noted that these oilseeds have a high added value, so a smaller percentage of the Mexican population consumes them. In relation to the above, it is of interest to review the nutritional composition of this native seed, since the country generally requires the availability of other sources of oilseeds [47].
The results of the chemical analysis showed the moisture and ash content (4.24% and 3.67% respectively), and the percentage of nutrients: 46% lipids, 18% protein, 21.75% fiber, and 6.56% carbohydrates. Compared to another study where bromatological analyses were performed on a sunflower seed carried out by Ortiz-Hernández et al. [48], the native sunflower seed in the present study has a higher amount of protein (18–14.5 g) and lipids (46–35.70 g) per 100 g, but less fiber (21.75–28.55 g). Another study, carried out in 2020, examined the physico-chemical composition of various domesticated sunflower seed varieties. The results showed that the amount of lipids and fiber is lower in their sunflower seeds (40.33 g and 3.43 g, respectively) [49], compared to the native oilseed.
Table 3 shows the average nutrient content per 100 g of native sunflower seed compared to other oilseed species grown and consumed in Mexico.
In relation to macronutrients, the native sunflower seeds contain similar amounts of protein to sesame seeds (18 g/100 g) according to Elleuch et al. [56], but lower than domesticated sunflower seeds (20–40 g/100 g) [61], and lower than the other seeds with which it is being compared. However, this amount of protein (18 g/100 g) can be compared to or is even greater than the quantity of protein in other basic foods such as eggs (15 g/100 g), natural yogurt (16 g/100 g), and whole milk (12 g/100 g). Even the amount of this macronutrient is greater than that of other oilseeds consumed worldwide, such as walnuts (15 g/100 g) [62]. Regarding lipids, native sunflower seed contains a higher amount compared to soybean and safflower seeds, as reported by Benito-González et al. [54] and Hall III [58], respectively, and a similar amount to peanuts (48 g/100 g) [59], which makes it viable for oil extraction [63] since it has an oil content greater than 40% [55]. Maíz de teja sunflower seed presented the lowest carbohydrate values, which is a positive characteristic for both the process of industry and its consumption [64]. Finally, Table 3 shows that the amount of fiber contained in the native sunflower seed is not negligible (21.75 g/100 g) since it exceeds most of the seeds with which it is compared, with only the amount of fiber in the sesame seed being comparable to or greater (26–33 g/100 g) than that in native sunflower seed as found by Elleuch et al. [56].

3.3. Total Phenolic and Total Flavonoid Contents

Table 4 shows the total phenolic content (TPC) and total flavonoid content (TFC) of the maíz de teja seed analyzed, domesticated sunflower and the six oilseeds to compare. Regarding phenolic compounds, maíz de teja seeds had a much higher TPC in comparation to domesticated sunflower (3.434 ± 0.03 mg/g and 0.8 ± 0.1 mg/g), similar to that of soybeans (3.434 ± 0.03 mg/g and 3.23 ± 0.08 mg/g, respectively) and less than that of the domesticated variety (80 ± 0.3) [65]. However, the amount of flavonoids is higher (0.67 ± 0.02 mg/g) in maíz de teja compared to four of the oilseeds. Sesame exceeds it (4.99 ± 0.03 mg/g) [62] and so does domesticated sunflower (1.94 ± 0.2) [63].
The presence of phenolic compounds and flavonoids in the native variety allows these compounds to act as defense molecules against abiotic and biotic stress. The released compounds (chlorogenic acid, caffeic acid, ferulic acid, among others) participate in the neutralization of free radicals generated during oxidative stress, protecting plant tissues. This helps conserve the biochemical diversity associated with native varieties, maintaining relevant plant genetic resources in the face of climate change, for example [71]. This reaction stabilizes plant metabolism and stops the initiation and propagation stages of the oxidative reaction, resulting in the effective production of bioactive compounds (eustress). Nevertheless, it is necessary to evaluate the antioxidant capacity of foods, to check whether the bioactive compounds produced are appropriate for consumption.
Research carried out by Piotrowicz-Cieślak et al. [65] indicates that native varieties tend to accumulate higher levels of phenolic compounds due to their adaptation to environments with greater environmental stress. This accumulation benefits the plant, and in addition, the phenols produced provide antioxidant capacity to the seeds, which contributes to the oxidative stability of the oil that can be obtained, reducing the rate of rancidity [72] and derived products. Furthermore, this contributes to healthier diets and has a good impact on human health by providing a functional food that is capable of neutralizing free radicals and reducing oxidative damage [73], and has several antioxidants, anticancer, and anti-inflammatory functions, among others [74]. This information opens a broad scope for the exploitation of native varieties, enabling them to be used in the development of functional foods with antioxidant properties.

3.4. DPPH and ABTS Antioxidant Activity

The antioxidant activities of these native sunflower seeds were determined using the DPPH and ABTS radical assays.
The results indicated that the extract from native sunflower seeds exhibited antioxidant activity, playing a role as a scavenger of DPPH and ABTS radical cations. The extract from native sunflower seeds showed an average DPPH inhibition percentage of 41.7 ± 0.5% and an average ABTS inhibition percentage of 35.94 ± 1.88%.
The antioxidant capacity of DPPH and ABTS was measured at different times to verify the percentage of inhibition where each reagent neutralizes reactive oxygen species (ROS) and is corroborated by its color change. Antioxidant activity is related to abiotic stress; in native species, these percentages may not be as high because, although they have been implemented in a monoculture, these plants are accustomed to the soil conditions of the area. Other research proves that the production of bioactive compounds (phenols and flavonoids) is related to antioxidant activity: the higher the activity, the greater the production of phenolic compounds and vice versa. This point could agree with the present study since the amount of secondary metabolites produced and the antioxidant activity were medium. However, it shows that there is a positive interaction between the plant, soil, and microbiome [75]. In DPPH and ABTS tests, sunflower seeds exhibit antioxidant capacity values of 40–75 µmol TE/g (Trolox equivalents per gram of sample). There is evidence that chlorogenic acid and α-tocopherol contribute significantly (>70%) to the total antioxidant capacity of sunflower seeds, so the analysis of these phenolic compounds in tile corn is important for relating them to antioxidant capacity [73].
The benefits associated with antioxidant activity in the human body are enormous, as we are constantly exposed to ROS through interactions with the environment and our diet. These ROS damage the body by exposing it to constant inflammation (low-grade inflammation), which makes it more susceptible to the onset of various diseases [76]. Therefore, a diet high in antioxidants could help reduce or eliminate these ROS. Oilseeds are characterized by high amounts of antioxidants, but these characteristics depend on soil conditions and the types of stress to which the plants are subjected. Native seeds, when they are in their natural habitat, may have a positive interaction with the soil microbiota, other climatic aspects, and species that surround them, which could favor the production of various nutrients [77].

3.5. Fatty Acid Content

Table 5 shows the types and percentages of each fatty acid present in the oil of maíz de teja seed. The fatty acid that predominantly composes this sunflower seed oil is linoleic acid (84.99%), with a saturated fatty acid to polysaturated fatty acid ratio of 1:5; no monounsaturated fatty acids were found in this seed. Velasco and Fernández-Martínez [78] compared the fatty acid composition of native and domestic sunflower varieties in their study. They reported a linoleic acid content of 50–68% in native seeds, compared with 5–15% in domesticated seeds. Thus, the seed of the tile maize evaluated in this study had the highest percentage of this fatty acid. An important aspect of these authors’ research is that they were able to establish that domesticated seeds of this species produce a greater amount of oleic acid, while native species produce more linoleic acid [78].
It was reported earlier that cultivated sunflower seeds of different varieties have 61.1% as their maximum value of this fatty acid [61,79], which is still lower than that found in the native seed. In addition, other studies reported that sunflower seeds enriched with different bioactives have a lower percentage of linoleic fatty acid compared to the present study (55.90% ± 0.1) [80], which demonstrates that the native sunflower seed under study still contains a greater amount of this component. Compared to other oilseeds grown in Mexico, Bozan et al. [81] reported that in safflower seeds, the percentage of linoleic acid was 70.46%. In fact, Table 5 shows the identification and percentage content of fatty acids in both the native sunflower seed oil from this study and oils from previous studies; the result is the same: the native sunflower seeds are the ones that contain the highest percentage of linoleic acid. They can contribute to the consumption of healthy fats, since it was demonstrated that diets in which at least 5–10% of energy is contributed by ω-6 polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) have a beneficial effect on serum lipids, which could help to reduce negative impacts on cardiovascular diseases [61]. Although native sunflower seeds contain the lowest amount of linolenic acid, a study conducted by Salas et al. [79], which evaluated different varieties of sunflower seeds, did not find a large amount of linolenic acid, confirming the information recorded to date that no variety of sunflower seeds is characterized by a high content of this fatty acid. However, that study mentions the presence of very long-chain saturated fatty acids, such as arachidic acid (C20:0) and behenic acid (C22:0), in the sunflower varieties studied. These fatty acids are not contained in tile corn, which could be a positive aspect for its consumption.
Table 5. Identification of the main fatty acids, and fatty acid content (% of oil) of native sun-flower, canola, soybean, sesame, safflower, and peanut seeds.
Table 5. Identification of the main fatty acids, and fatty acid content (% of oil) of native sun-flower, canola, soybean, sesame, safflower, and peanut seeds.
OilseedsMyristic Acid (14:0)Hexadecanoic Acid (16:0)Stearic Acid (18:0)Oleic Acid (18:1)Linoleic Acid (18:2)Linolenic Acid (18:3)Arachidic Acid (20:0)Eicosenoic Acid (20:1)Heneicosanoic Acid (21:0)Docosahexaenoic Acid (22:0)Tetracosanoic Acid (24:0)Ref.
Maíz de tejaN.D7.297.21N.D84.990.01N.DN.D0.50N.DN.D_
Domesticated sunflowerN.D6.004.0075.00015.000.50N.DN.DN.DN.DN.D[72,78]
Canola/rapeseedN.D11.122.4239.9118.3919.12N.DN.DN.DN.DN.D[51,67]
SoybeanN.D12421559N.DN.DN.DN.DN.D[82]
SesameN.D9.395.5141.3641.250.35N.DN.DN.DN.DN.D[83]
Safflower0.15.41.314.977.90.10.2N.DN.DN.DN.D[84]
PeanutN.D9.31.135.620.9N.D0.30.7N.D1.800.40[70]
Notes: N.D = not detected.
It is important to mention that although a physical evaluation of this native seed was not performed, according to some references, it can be classified as a seed used in human snacks or different preparations and as bird feed [61], which are, in fact, consumed in this rural area. However, this study has also found that it can be used as a seed for oil production due to its high lipid composition, high percentage of linoleic acid, and lack of saturated fatty acids [85]. These characteristics warrant further study to explore the potential for local oil production.

3.6. Mineral Content

Detailed descriptions of the types of minerals present in native sunflower seeds and other oilseeds along with their relative weight per 100 g are given in Table 6. These minerals were chosen based on knowledge of the composition of other sunflower seeds.
The ash content in sunflower seeds was 3.6 g. Zinc is found in the highest concentration, followed by magnesium and copper. Iron, calcium, and low amounts of Fe and Ca. A study conducted on sunflower seeds found a similar quantity of ash (2.34 to 3.92 g/100 g) and lower quantities of zinc (2.98 to 4.05 mg/100 g); all the other minerals were higher than in the oilseed in this investigation [49]. USDA analysis of sunflower seed mineral content showed a lower amount of zinc (5 mg/100 g), indicating that the sunflower seed variety in the study could be regarded as a source of this mineral [55].
Especially, when comparing the quantities of minerals with other oilseeds (Table 6), it was seen that the sunflower seed in this study contains the highest levels of zinc (17.28 mg/100 g).
The amount of zinc obtained from maíz de teja was compared with foods high in zinc, such as red meat (2.9–4.7 mg/100 g), organ meats (4.2–6.1 mg/100 g), and seafood (0.5–5.2 mg/100 g) [91]. Therefore, it is interesting to evaluate the bioavailability of this mineral to know the quantity that is assimilated by the human body, since it is precisely in rural areas where the consumption of quality animal-based foods is scarce, and their decline is often linked to malnutrition, especially in children, which impacts growth [92,93].
A detailed analysis of the nutritional profile of maiz de teja in the Sierra de Querétaro reveals its significant potential to contribute to local food security and improve community health. This native variety stands out for its balanced content of essential fatty acids, proteins, and bioactive compounds with antioxidant properties, which is consistent with previous findings in germplasm studies in similar regions [94,95]. The presence of phenolic compounds and antioxidants is especially relevant, given that these compounds are associated with a reduced risk of chronic non-communicable diseases, such as cardiovascular disease and certain types of cancer [96,97].
Comparatively, the native sunflower of Querétaro presents nutritional profiles that in some cases surpass or equal domesticated and commercially cultivated varieties. For example, studies such as those by Pérez-Vega et al. [98] show that certain native varieties contain a higher percentage of unsaturated fatty acids, especially linoleic acid, compared to conventional hybrid varieties. This characteristic is not only valuable from a nutritional perspective but also from a technological perspective, as it affects the quality of the oil and its oxidative stability [99,100].
Furthermore, when compared to other oilseeds commonly consumed in nearby regions, such as avocado, chia, or sesame, maíz de teja provides a unique profile that can complement the local diet and diversify the supply of nutritious foods [101,102]. Its adaptation to the local environment, resistance to pests and diseases, and low requirement for chemical inputs position this variety as a viable option for sustainable agricultural practices that promote biodiversity conservation and agroecological resilience [103,104].
The yield of this native species, although it may be lower compared to highly selected commercial or domesticated varieties, should not be viewed exclusively from a quantitative perspective. The nutritional and functional quality of the seed can provide significant added value for local markets and for food security in rural communities, where self-sufficiency and sustainability are priorities [105,106].
Finally, this research points out the need for continued studies that integrate agronomic, nutritional, and socioeconomic analyses to optimize the management of native sunflowers in the Sierra de Querétaro. Future research should include evaluating their yield under different sustainable cultivation systems, studying their interaction with local biodiversity, and developing production chains that enhance their nutritional properties for community benefit [107,108].

4. Conclusions

The morphological and nutritional characterization of the creole sunflower seed accession grown in monoculture in Sierra Gorda, Querétaro, Mexico, demonstrated both nutritional and economic potential for implementation in a sustainable food production system. These results could draw the attention of the local inhabitants to reintroduce it into their traditional diet, thereby supporting food security and crop production on a larger scale, as several commercially interesting byproducts can be obtained. Nowadays, consumers are looking for healthy foods that also have a pleasant taste, which presents a challenge with oilseeds, especially sunflower seeds. In the case of the seed under study, alternative methods for presenting this food should be explored to increase community interest in consuming it.
Further studies should be conducted to enhance the agricultural management of this species and achieve improved yields. A detailed analysis of the bioactive compounds it produces, among other nutrients, and a review of their bioavailability in the body should also be performed. The technology needed for oil production should also be developed, as this seed seems to be suitable for oil production.
In this sense, the present study demonstrates the relevance of conserving native species and utilizing available plant resources in an area to promote local production and consumption.

Author Contributions

A.P.A.-S., M.S., M.I.N.-R., J.F.G.-T., I.T.-P., R.G.G.-G., H.A.-B. and A.A.F.-P. worked equally on this research article, to conceptualize the topic and the direction and execution of the necessary chemical analyses. Furthermore, everyone contributed to the analysis of the results, writing, and editing. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in this study are included in the article. Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Acknowledgments

Arenas Salazar, AP, and Schoor, M. thank the Faculty of Engineering of the Autonomous University of Querétaro for supporting their postgraduate studies.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Abbreviations

The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:
AOACAssociation of Official Analytical Chemists
PUFAsPolyunsaturated fatty acids
FAsFatty acids
TPCTotal phenolic content
TFCTotal flavonoid content
ROSReactive oxygen species
DPPH2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl
ABTS2,2′-Azino-bis(3-ethylbenzthiazoline-6-sulfonic acid

References

  1. Rendón-Hernández, E.; Ayala-Pérez, L.A.; Golubov, J.; Torres-Lara, R.; Vega-Rodríguez, B.I. Aquatic Invasive Species in the Protected Areas of the Yucatan Peninsula and Adjacent Marine Zone, Mexico. Sustainability 2025, 17, 5017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Godfray, H.C.; Beddington, J.R.; Crute, I.R.; Haddad, L.; Lawrence, D.; Muir, J.F.; Pretty, J.; Robinson, S.; Thomas, S.M.; Toulmin, C. Food security: The challenge of feeding 9 billion people. Science 2010, 327, 812–818. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Kabato, W.; Getnet, G.T.; Sinore, T.; Nemeth, A.; Molnár, Z. Towards Climate-Smart Agriculture: Strategies for Sustainable Agricultural Production, Food Security, and Greenhouse Gas Reduction. Agronomy 2025, 15, 565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Chopra, M. Globalization and food: Implications for the promotion of “Healthy” diets. In Globalization, Diets and Noncommunicable Diseases; World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2002; pp. 1–17. [Google Scholar]
  5. Fang, T.; Cao, H.; Wang, Y.; Gong, Y.; Wang, Z. Global Scientific Trends on Healthy Eating from 2002 to 2021: A Bibliometric and Visualized Analysis. Nutrients 2023, 15, 1461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Barbaś, P.; Pszczółkowski, P.; Krochmal-Marczak, B.; Hameed, T.S.; Sawicka, B. Soil-Specific Effects of the Bio-Growth Regulator Supporter on Seed Potato Yield and Quality Across Varieties: Unlocking Sustainable Potential in Diverse Environments. Land 2025, 14, 595. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Renzi, J.P.; Coyne, C.J.; Berger, J.; von Wettberg, E.; Nelson, M.; Ureta, S. How Could the Use of Crop Wild Relatives in Breeding Increase the Adaptation of Crops to Marginal Environments? Front. Plant Sci. 2022, 13, 886162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Luo, Y.; Liu, H.; Jia, W.; Yalimaimaiti, N.; Zhu, Q.; Jia, P.; Huang, Y.; Shi, W.; Sun, C.; Guan, J. Field Inoculation of Pleurotus tuoliensis in Natural Habitat Promotes Microbial Communities That Enhance Its Growth. Agronomy 2025, 15, 1136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Clapp, J.; Moseley, W.; Burlingame, B.; Termine, P. The case for a six-dimensional food security framework. Food Policy 2022, 106, 102164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Mishra, L.K.; Walker-Swaney, J.; Sarkar, D.; Shetty, K. Bioactive vegetables integrated into ethnic “Three Sisters Crops” garden targeting foods for type 2 diabetes-associated health disparities of American Indian communities. J. Ethn. Foods 2017, 4, 163–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Da Costa Marques, S.C.; Carrijo Mauad, J.R.; de Faria Domingues, C.H.; Rossi Borges, J.A.; Rosa da Silva, J. The importance of local food products attributes in Brazil consumer’s preferences. Future Foods 2022, 5, 100125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Popkin, B.M.; Barquera, S.; Corvalan, C.; Hofman, K.J.; Monteiro, C.; Ng, S.W.; Swart, E.C.; Taillie, L.S. Towards unified and impactful policies to reduce ultra-processed food consumption and promote healthier eating. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2021, 9, 462–470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Katre, A.; Raddatz, B.; Swanson, B.; Turgeon, T.; Dugan, A. Food Forward’s Fresh Approach: Can Meal Boxes Improve Food Security for Low-Income Communities Living in Healthy Food Priority Areas? Sustainability 2025, 17, 2088. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. INEGI. Aspectos Geográficos. Querétaro 2021. Available online: https://www.inegi.org.mx/contenidos/app/areasgeograficas/resumen/resumen_22.pdf (accessed on 16 March 2025).
  15. Gobierno del Estado de Querétaro. Arroyo Seco, Querétaro. Available online: https://www.queretaro.gob.mx/web/guest/arroyo (accessed on 16 March 2025).
  16. IHME. GBD Compare Data Visualisation. Available online: http://vizhub.healthdata.org/gbd-compare (accessed on 22 October 2024).
  17. Harter, A.V.; Gardner, K.A.; Falush, D.; Lentz, D.L.; Bye, R.A.; Rieseberg, L.H. Origin of extant domesticated sunflowers in eastern North America. Nature 2004, 430, 201–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Xiang, F.; Ding, C.; Wang, M.; Hu, H.; Ma, X.; Xu, X.; Zaki Abubakar, B.; Pignitter, M.; Wei, K.-N.; Shi, A.-M.; et al. Vegetable oils: Classification, quality analysis, nutritional value and lipidomics applications. Food Chem. 2024, 439, 138059. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Canavar, Ö.; Ellmer, F.; Chmielewski, F.M. Investigation of yield and yield components of sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) cultivars in the ecological conditions of Berlin (Germany). Helia 2010, 33, 117–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Prado, D.M.F.d.; de Almeida, A.B.; Filho, J.G.d.O.; Alves, C.C.F.; Egea, M.B.; Lemes, A.C. Extraction of Bioactive Proteins from Seeds (Corn, Sorghum, and Sunflower) and Sunflower Byproduct: Enzymatic Hydrolysis and Antioxidant Properties. Curr. Nutr. Food Sci. 2020, 17, 310–320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Ge, H.; Guo, C.; Jiang, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Zhou, W.; Wang, H. Research on Non-Destructive Quality Detection of Sunflower Seeds Based on Terahertz Imaging Technology. Foods 2024, 13, 2830. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Athanasiadis, V.; Chatzimitakos, T.; Kalompatsios, D.; Bozinou, E.; Lalas, S.I. Exploration of High-Nutritional-Quality Vegetable Oil Blend with Enhanced Oxidative Stability as a Frying Medium Substitute for Palm Oil. Lipidology 2024, 1, 75–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Ennos, R.A.; French, G.C.; Hollingsworth, P.M. Conserving taxonomic complexity. Trend Ecol. Evol. 2005, 20, 164–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Fernando, Y.; Halili, M.; Tseng, M.L.; Tseng, J.W.; Lim, M.K. Sustainable social supply chain practices and firm social performance: Framework and empirical evidence. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 2022, 32, 160–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Osorio, W.; Casamitjana, M. Toma de muestras de suelo para evaluar la fertilidad del suelo. Manejo Integral Suelo Nutr. Veg. 2012, 1, 1–4. [Google Scholar]
  26. Cardador-Martínez, A.; Loarca-Piña, G.; Oomah, B.D. Antioxidant activity in common beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). J. Agric. Food Chem. 2002, 50, 6975–6980. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Singleton, V.L.; Orthofer, R.; Lamuela-Raventós, R.M. Analysis of Total Phenols and Other Oxidation Substrates and Antioxidants by Means of Folin-Ciocalteu Reagent. In Methods in Enzymology; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1999; Volume 299, pp. 152–178. ISBN 9780121822002. [Google Scholar]
  28. Oomah, B.D.; Cardador-Martínez, A.; Loarca-Piña, G. Phenolics and antioxidative activities in common beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L). J. Sci. Food Agric. 2005, 85, 935–942. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Brand-Williams, W.; Cuvelier, M.E.; Berset, C. Use of a free radical method to evaluate antioxidant activity. LWT Food Sci. Technol. 1995, 28, 25–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Fukumoto, L.R.; Mazza, G. Assessing antioxidant and prooxidant activities of phenolic compounds. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2000, 48, 3597–3604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Re, R.; Pellegrini, N.; Proteggente, A.; Pannala, A.; Yang, M.; Rice-Evans, C. Antioxidant activity applying an improved ABTS radical cation decolorization assay. Free. Radic. Biol. Med. 1999, 26, 1231–1237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Wang, C.Y.; Hou, D.Y.; Hui, R.H.; Li, X.C.; Liu, X.Y. Analysis of Fatty Acids in Sunflower Seed by GC/MS. Food Sci. 2006, 27, 428–430. [Google Scholar]
  33. Paar, A. Multiwave GO User Manual. 2024. Available online: https://www.anton-paar.com (accessed on 2 December 2024).
  34. Martinez, A.; López, E.; Hernández, V. Efecto de la densidad de siembra en el rendimiento de girasol (Helianthus annuus L.) en condiciones de temporal. Rev. Mex. Cienc. Agrícolas 2017, 8, 809–820. [Google Scholar]
  35. Gordeyeva, Y.; Shelia, V.; Shestakova, N.; Amantayev, B.; Kipshakbayeva, G.; Shvidchenko, V.; Aitkhozhin, S.; Kurishbayev, A.; Hoogenboom, G. Sunflower (Heliánthus ánnuus) Yield and Yield Components for Various Agricultural Practices (Sowing Date, Seeding Rate, Fertilization) for Steppe and Dry Steppe Growing Conditions. Agronomy 2024, 14, 36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Seiler, G.J. Anatomy and morphology of sunflower. In Sunflower Technology and Production; ASA; CSSA; SSSA: Madison, WI, USA, 1997; pp. 67–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Seiler, G.J.; Rieseberg, L.H. Systematics, origin, and germplasm resources of the wild and domesticated sunflower. In Sunflower Technology and Production; ASA; CSSA; SSSA: Madison, WI, USA, 1997; pp. 21–65. [Google Scholar]
  38. Warburton, M.L.; Rauf, S.; Marek, L.; Hussain, M.; Ogunola, O.; Sanchez Gonzalez, J.d.J. The Use of Crop Wild Relatives in Maize and Sunflower Breeding. Crop Sci. 2017, 57, 1227–1240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Neshev, N. Comparison of crop rotation vs. monoculture: A sunflower case. Sci. Papers Ser. A Agron. 2022, LXV, 455–459. [Google Scholar]
  40. Rios-Gonzalez, K.; Erdei, L.; Lips, S.H. The activity of antioxidant enzymes in maize and sunflower seedlings as affected by salinity and different nitro-gen sources. Plant Sci. 2002, 162, 923–930. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Freund Saxhaug, K.; Jungers, J.M.; Hegeman, A.D.; Wyse, D.L.; Sheaffer, C.C. Cultivation of native plants for seed and biomass yield. Agron. J. 2020, 112, 1815–1827. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Giri, K.; Mishra, G.; Suyal, D.C.; Kumar, N.; Doley, B.; Das, N.; Bora, N. Performance evaluation of native plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria for paddy yield enhancement in the jhum fields of Mokokchung, Nagaland, North East India. Heliyon 2023, 9, e14588. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Koziol, L.; Schultz, P.A.; House, G.L.; Bauer, J.T.; Middleton, E.L.; Bever, J.D. The Plant Microbiome and Native Plant Restoration: The Example of Native Mycorrhizal Fungi. BioScience 2018, 68, 996–1006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Koziol, L.; Bauer, J.T.; Duell, E.B.; Hickman, K.; House, G.L.; Schultz, P.A.; Bever, J.D. Manipulating plant microbiomes in the field: Native mycorrhizae advance plant succession and improve native plant restoration. J. Appl. Ecol. 2022, 59, 1976–1985. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Trejo, R. USDA GAIN Report: Oilseeds and Products Annual Mexico. In Oilseeds and Products Annual; United States Department of Agriculture: Washington, DC, USA, 2024. Available online: https://apps.fas.usda.gov/newgainapi/api/Report/DownloadReportByFileName?fileName=Oilseeds+and+Products+Annual_Mexico+City_Mexico_MX2024-0019.pdf (accessed on 21 July 2025).
  46. SADER. Estadísticas del Sector Agrícola y de Oleaginosas en México; Secretaría de Agricultura y Desarrollo Rural: Mexico City, Mexico, 2023; Available online: https://www.gob.mx/cms/uploads/attachment/file/829694/Expectativas_Mayo.pdf (accessed on 25 July 2025).
  47. Servicio de Información Agroalimentaria y Pesquera (SIAP). Intención de Siembra y de Cosecha; Servicio de Información Agroalimentaria y Pesquera: Mexico City, Mexico, 2024; Available online: https://nube.agricultura.gob.mx/agroprograma/ (accessed on 28 July 2025).
  48. Ortiz-Hernandez, A.A.; Araiza-Esquivel, M.A.; Delgadillo-Ruiz, L.; Espinosa-Vega, L.I.; Olvera-Olvera, C.A.; Lopez-Martinez, A.; Vega-Carrillo, H.R.; Ortega-Sigala, J.J. Comparison of dehydration systems in quality and chemical effects on sunflower seeds. Sci. Rep. 2024, 14, 12014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Gopika, C.M.; Neena, J. Physico-chemical composition of selected sunflower seed cultivars. Int. J. Chem. Stud. 2020, 8, 2095–2100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. USDA. Sunflower Seed, Dried; Food Data Central: Beltsville, MD, USA, 2023. Available online: https://fdc.nal.usda.gov/ (accessed on 25 July 2025).
  51. Assadi, E.; Janmohammadi, H.; Taghizadeh, A.; Alijani, S. Nutrient composition of different varieties of full-fat canola seed and nitrogen-corrected true metabolizable energy of full-fat canola seed with or without enzyme addition and thermal processing. J. Appl. Poult. Res. 2011, 20, 95–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Carré, P.; Citeau, M.; Robin, G.; Estorges, M. Hull content and chemical composition of whole seeds, hulls and germs in cultivars of rapeseed (Brassica napus). OCL 2016, 23, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Goyal, A.; Tanwar, B.; Sihag, M.K.; Kumar, V.; Sharma, V.; Soni, S. Rapeseed/Canola (Brassica napus) Seed. In Oilseeds: Health Attributes and Food Applications; Tanwar, B., Goyal, A., Eds.; Springer: Singapore, 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Benito-González, I.; Martínez-Sanz, M.; Fabra, M.J.; López-Rubio, A. Health effect of dietary fibers. In Dietary Fiber: Properties, Recovery, and Applications; Galanakis, C.M., Ed.; Academic Press: London, UK, 2019; pp. 125–163. [Google Scholar]
  55. USDA. 2019. Available online: https://fdc.nal.usda.gov/fdc-app.html#/food-details/170562/nutrients (accessed on 1 April 2025).
  56. Elleuch, M.; Bedigian, D.; Besbes, S.; Blecker, C.; Attia, H. Dietary fibre characteristics and antioxidant activity of sesame seed coats (testae). Int. J. Food Prop. 2012, 15, 25–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Yasothai, R. Chemical composition of sesame oil cake—Review. Int. J. Sci. Environ. Technol. 2014, 3, 827–835. [Google Scholar]
  58. Hall, C., III. Overview of the oilseed safflower (Carthamus tinctorius L.). In Reference Module in Food Science; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Akhtar, S.; Khalid, N.; Ahmed, I.; Shahzad, A.; Suleria, H.A.R. Physicochemical characteristics, functional properties, and nutritional benefits of peanut oil: A review. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2014, 54, 1562–1575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Campos-Mondragón, M.; De La Barca, A.C.; Durán-Prado, A.; Campos-Reyes, L.; Oliart-Ros, R.; Ortega-García, J.; Medina-Juárez, L.; Angulo, O. Nutritional composition of new peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) cultivars. Grasas Aceites 2009, 60, 161–167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Khurana, S.; Singh, R. Sunflower (Helianthus annuus) Seed. In Oilseeds: Health Attributes and Food Applications; Tanwar, B., Goyal, A., Eds.; Springer: Singapore, 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Alimentos Ricos en Proteinas, ¿Qué Son las Proteínas? Clínica Universidad de Navarra. Available online: https://www.cun.es/chequeos-salud/vida-sana/nutricion/alimentos-ricos-proteinas#:~:text=Las%20carnes%20rojas%2C%20el%20pollo,hasta%2062%20gramos%20de%20prote%C3%ADna.&text=Los%20huevos%20y%20los%20productos,tambi%C3%A9n%20son%20ricos%20en%20prote%C3%ADnas (accessed on 29 March 2025).
  63. Kaur, S.; Gupta, A.; Singh, A. Chapter 10—Sonication Microwave Synergistic Extraction of Oils from Plant Sources. In Ultrasound and Microwave for Food Processing; Nayik, G.A., Ranjha, M., Zeng, X.A., Irfan, S., Zahra, S.M., Eds.; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2023; pp. 269–290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Zhang, M.; Wang, O.; Cai, S.; Zhao, L.; Zhao, L. Composition, functional properties, health benefits and applications of oilseed proteins: A systematic review. Food Res. Int. 2023, 171, 113061. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Thepthanee, C.; Li, H.; Wei, H.; Prakitchaiwattana, C.; Siriamornpun, S. Effect of Soaking, Germination, and Roasting on Phenolic Composition, Antioxidant Activities, and Fatty Acid Profile of Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) Seeds. Horticulturae 2024, 10, 387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Karamać, M.; Kosińska, A.; Estrella, I.; Hernández, T.; Dueñas, M. Antioxidant activity of phenolic compounds identified in sunflower seeds. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 2012, 235, 221–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Teh, S.S.; Birch, J. Physicochemical and quality characteristics of cold-pressed hemp, flax and canola seed oils. J. Food Compos. Anal. 2013, 30, 26–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Xuan, T.D.; Gangqiang, G.; Minh, T.N.; Quy, T.N.; Khanh, T.D. An Overview of Chemical Profiles, Antioxidant and Antimicrobial Activities of Commercial Vegetable Edible Oils Marketed in Japan. Foods 2018, 7, 21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Agidew, M.G.; Dubale, A.A.; Atlabachew, M.; Wasihun, A. Fatty acid composition, total phenolic contents and antioxidant activity of white and black sesame seed varieties from different localities of Ethiopia. Chem. Biol. Technol. Agric. 2021, 8, 14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Toomer, O.T. Nutritional chemistry of the peanut (Arachis hypogaea). Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2018, 58, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  71. Šamec, D.; Karalija, E.; Šola, I.; Vujčić Bok, V.; Salopek-Sondi, B. The Role of Polyphenols in Abiotic Stress Response: The Influence of Molecular Structure. Plants 2021, 10, 118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Martínez-Force, E.; Dunford, N.T.; Salas, J.J. Sunflower: Chemistry, Production, Processing, and Utilization; AOCS Press: Urbana, IL, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  73. Weisz, G.M.; Kammerer, D.R.; Carle, R. Identification and quantification of phenolic compounds from sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) kernels and shells by HPLC-DAD/ESI-MSn. Food Chem. 2009, 115, 758–765. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Huang, Y.; Han, J.; Ping, Y.; Chen, X.; Zhao, Y.; Chen, G.; Lv, J.; Xu, D.; Zhang, Y.; Chen, J.; et al. Peroxidase-like Active Cu-MOFs Nanozymes for Colorimetric Detection of Total Antioxidant Capacity in Fruits and Vegetables. Foods 2025, 14, 1311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Sonmez, M.C.; Ozgur, R.; Uzilday, B. Reactive oxygen species: Connecting eustress, hormesis, and allostasis in plants. Plant Stress 2023, 8, 100164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. León-Pedroza, J.I.; González-Tapia, L.A.; del Olmo-Gil, E.; Castellanos-Rodríguez, D.; Escobedo, G.; González-Chávez, A. Low-grade systemic inflammation and the development of metabolic diseases: From the molecular evidence to the clinical practice. Cirugía Y Cir. 2015, 83, 543–551. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Coats, V.C.; Rumpho, M.E. The rhizosphere microbiota of plant invaders: An overview of recent advances in the microbiomics of invasive plants. Front. Microbiol. 2014, 5, 368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  78. Velasco, L.; Fernández-Martínez, J.M. Breeding for oil quality in sunflower. Helia 2002, 25, 75–88. [Google Scholar]
  79. Salas, J.J.; Bootello, M.A.; Garcés, R. Food Uses of Sunflower Oils. In Sunflower: Chemistry, Production, Processing, and Utilization; Martínez-Force, E., Dunford, N.T., Salas, J.J., Eds.; AOCS Press: Urbana, IL, USA, 2015; pp. 441–464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. de Oliveira Segantini, K.C.; de Oliveira Santos Junior, O.; Garcia, V.A.D.S.; Raspe, D.T.; da Silva, C. Sunflower Seed Oil Enriched with Compounds from the Turmeric Rhizome: Extraction, Characterization and Cell Viability. Separations 2025, 12, 121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Bozan, B.; Temelli, F. Chemical composition and oxidative stability of flax, safflower and poppy seed and seed oils. Bioresour. Technol. 2008, 99, 6354–6359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Medic, J.; Atkinson, C.; Hurburgh, C.R. Current Knowledge in Soybean Composition. J. Am. Oil Chem. Soc. 2014, 91, 363–384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Thakur, V.; Paroha, S.; Mishra, R.P. Chemical characterization and fatty acid composition of different sesame verities. Int. J. Curr. Microbiol. Appl. Sci. 2017, 6, 1936–1943. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Chakradhari, S.; Perkons, I.; Mišina, I.; Sipeniece, E.; Radziejewska-Kubzdela, E.; Grygier, A.; Rudzińska, M.; Patel, K.S.; Radzimirska-Graczyk, M.; Górnaś, P. Profiling of the bioactive components of safflower seeds and seed oil: Cultivated (Carthamus tinctorius L.) vs. wild (Carthamus oxyacantha M. Bieb.). Eur. Food Res. Technol. 2020, 246, 449–459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Li, Z.; Xiang, F.; Huang, X.; Liang, M.; Ma, S.; Gafurov, K.; Gu, F.; Guo, Q.; Wang, Q. Properties and Characterization of Sunflower Seeds from Different Varieties of Edible and Oil Sunflower Seeds. Foods 2024, 13, 1188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  86. Modgil, R.; Tanwar, B.; Goyal, A.; Kumar, V. Soybean (Glycine max). In Oilseeds: Health Attributes and Food Applications; Tanwar, B., Goyal, A., Eds.; Springer: Singapore, 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Sharma, L.; Saini, C.S.; Punia, S.; Nain, V.; Sandhu, K.S. Sesame (Sesamum indicum) Seed. In Oilseeds: Health Attributes and Food Applications; Tanwar, B., Goyal, A., Eds.; Springer: Singapore, 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Grahovac, N.; Marjanović-Jeromela, A.; Rajković, D.; Đuragic, O.; Spasevski, N.; Rakita, S.; Dragojlovic, D. Nutritional and chemical characterization of safflower seeds (Carthamus tinctorius L.): Implications for food, feed, and oil industries. In Proceedings of the 5th International Congress Food Technology, Quality and Safety-FoodTech 2024, Novi Sad, Serbia, 16–18 October 2024; e-Abstract Book. University of Novi Sad, Institute of Food Technology in Novi Sad: Novi Sad, Serbia, 2024; p. 190. [Google Scholar]
  89. Rebello, C.; Greenway, F.; Finley, J.W. A review of the nutritional value of legumes and their effects on obesity and its related co-morbidities. Obes. Rev. 2014, 15, 392–407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Settaluri, V.; Kandala, C.; Puppala, N.; Sundaram, J. Peanuts and their nutritional aspects—A review. Food Nutr. Sci. 2012, 3, 1644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Manikas, I.; Ali, B.M.; Sundarakani, B. A systematic literature review of indicators measuring food security. Agric. Food Secur. 2023, 12, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. López de Romaña, D.; Castillo, D.C.; Diaz Granados, D. El Zinc en la Salud Humana—I. Rev. Chil. Nutr. 2010, 37, 235–239. [Google Scholar]
  93. López, M.F. Consumo de Alimentos Fuente de Zinc en Niños Con Trastornos del Espectro Autista, de 6 a 10 Años, Pertenecientes al Grupo de Facebook Comunidad LUDOTEA. Ph.D. Dissertation, Universidad de Concepción del Uruguay—CRSF, Entre Rios, Argentina, 2024. [Google Scholar]
  94. Adeleke, B.S.; Babalola, O.O. Oilseed crop sunflower (Helianthus annuus) as a source of food: Nutritional and health benefits. Food Sci. Nutr. 2020, 8, 466–4684. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Bye, R.; Linares, E.; Lentz, D.L. México: Centro de origen de la domesticación del girasol. TIP Rev. Espec. En Cienc. Químico-Biológicas 2009, 12, 5–12. [Google Scholar]
  96. García-López, P.; Martínez, A.; Fernández, J. Efectos antioxidantes de compuestos fenólicos en la prevención de enfermedades crónicas. Nutr. Hosp. 2020, 37, 543–551. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Visioli, F.; Galli, C. Biological properties of olive oil phytochemicals. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2002, 42, 209–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Pérez-Vega, J.; Ruiz, F.; González, A. Composición de ácidos grasos en girasol nativo versus híbridos comerciales. Cienc. Tecnol. Agropecu. 2018, 19, 58–65. [Google Scholar]
  99. Bok, R.; Carrillo, N.; Ramírez, H. Calidad y estabilidad oxidativa del aceite de girasol: Impacto de la composición de ácidos grasos. Rev. Mex. Cienc. Agrícolas 2021, 12, 875–885. [Google Scholar]
  100. Przybylski, R.; Eskin, N.A.M.; Aladedunye, F. Oxidative Stability of Vegetable Oils. In Handbook of Frying; Przybylski, R., Eskin, N.A.M., Eds.; AOCS Press: Urbana, IL, USA, 2009; pp. 123–141. [Google Scholar]
  101. Moreno, M.; Cruz, A.; Sánchez, L. Semillas oleaginosas regionales y su aporte nutricional. Rev. Nutr. Salud Pública 2017, 10, 110–119. [Google Scholar]
  102. Ayerza, R.; Coates, W. Seed composition and nutritional value of chia (Salvia hispanica L.). J. Food Sci. Agric. 2004, 84, 1673–1677. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Rodríguez, M.; Sánchez, J.; Pérez, R. Agricultura sostenible y conservación de la biodiversidad: Caso del girasol nativo. Rev. Iberoam. Agroecol. 2021, 12, 77–88. [Google Scholar]
  104. Altieri, M.A. Agroecology: The Science of Sustainable Agriculture, 2nd ed.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2004. [Google Scholar]
  105. Jiménez, S.; Ortega, V.; Morales, R. Potencial de cultivos nativos para la seguridad alimentaria en zonas rurales de México. Agroproductividad 2016, 9, 45–52. [Google Scholar]
  106. Sosa, G.; Valdez, E.; Ortega, J. Importancia socioeconómica de cultivos autóctonos en comunidades indígenas. Estud. Rural 2019, 14, 33–41. [Google Scholar]
  107. López, D.; Hernández, M. Manejo sostenible del girasol nativo en el centro de México: Perspectivas y desafíos. Rev. Agric. Y Medio Ambiente 2022, 18, 101–114. [Google Scholar]
  108. Contreras, D.d.J.; Ramírez De la O, I.L.; Thomé Ortiz, H. Cultivos nativos y valorización simbólica del suelo rural de la Ciudad de México. Eutopía Rev. De Desarro. Económico Territ. 2016, 1, 97–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Resources 14 00121 g001
Figure 1. An experimental lot of native sunflowers. (a) shows the dimensions of the experimental design; (b) the experimental lot in the rural area.
Figure 1. An experimental lot of native sunflowers. (a) shows the dimensions of the experimental design; (b) the experimental lot in the rural area.
Resources 14 00121 g001
Resources 14 00121 g002
Figure 2. Slow-flow drip irrigation tape and sunflower growing.
Figure 2. Slow-flow drip irrigation tape and sunflower growing.
Resources 14 00121 g002
Resources 14 00121 g003
Figure 3. Maíz de teja harvesting.
Figure 3. Maíz de teja harvesting.
Resources 14 00121 g003
Resources 14 00121 g004
Figure 4. Maíz de teja seeds.
Figure 4. Maíz de teja seeds.
Resources 14 00121 g004
Resources 14 00121 g005
Figure 5. Morphological measurements of native sunflower plants. (a) Stem diameter; (b) height measurement.
Figure 5. Morphological measurements of native sunflower plants. (a) Stem diameter; (b) height measurement.
Resources 14 00121 g005
Table 1. The soil characteristics of the experimental area.
Table 1. The soil characteristics of the experimental area.
Soil TexturepHNCSalinity NaPKCaMg
Sand %Clay%Silt%%%%%mg/kgmg/kgmg/kgmg/kg
32.04 ± 2.8224.96 ± 1.4143 ± 1.418.31 ± 0.000.12 ± 0.011.46 ± 0.130.35 ± 0.017.97 ± 0.04382.37 ± 8.96589.12 ± 32.84207.5 ± 0.05
Notes: percentage = g/100 g.
Table 2. Plant height and stem diameter of native sunflower from emergence to physiological maturity in Sierra Gorda Queretana.
Table 2. Plant height and stem diameter of native sunflower from emergence to physiological maturity in Sierra Gorda Queretana.
Maíz de TejaEVER1R3R5.1R5.5R6R9
Height (cm)5.57 ± 1.6810.20 ± 6.6457.60 ± 16.7980.50 ± 32.09149.48 ± 45.96167.63 ± 23.37166.70 ± 19.30167.90 ± 20.53
Stem diameter (mm)1.79 ± 0.367.56 ± 5.4412.12 ± 3.9513.13 ± 5.6121.13 ± 5.3722.66 ± 5.0022.30 ± 5.6822.4 ± 5.35
Notes: E: emergence; VE: vegetative emergence; R1: bud visible; R3: immature bud; R5.1: first flowering; R5.5: 50% in flowering; R6: last flowering; R9: physiological maturity.
Table 3. The average nutrient composition of native sunflower, canola, soybean, sesame, and peanut seeds per 100g.
Table 3. The average nutrient composition of native sunflower, canola, soybean, sesame, and peanut seeds per 100g.
OilseedsMoisture (g)Protein (g)Lipids (g)Carbohydrates (g)Ash (g)Fiber (g)Ref.
Maíz de teja 4.24 ± 0.118 ± 0.2346 ± 0.266.56 ± 0.283.67 ± 0.3121.75 ± 1.08_
Domesticated sunflower4.0–7.020.851.520_8.6[50]
Canola/rapeseed3.75–4.7219.50–28.1730.60–50.4014–155.69–6.9315.72[51,52,53]
Soybean _36.4919.9422.11–33.184.879.3[54,55]
Sesame _18–4049.5–53.914.90–14.70_26–33[56,57]
Safflower_14.9–1725–4030–40_11[58]
Peanut_254825_8[59,60]
Notes: (_) no information.
Table 4. Total phenolic and total flavonoid contents of native sunflower, canola, soybean, sesame, and peanut seeds.
Table 4. Total phenolic and total flavonoid contents of native sunflower, canola, soybean, sesame, and peanut seeds.
Oilseeds Total Phenolic Contents (TPC) (mg/g)Total Flavonoid Contents (TFC) (mg/g)Ref.
Maíz de teja3.434 ±0.030.67 ± 0.02_
Domesticated sunflower0.8 ± 0.10.01 ± 0.02[65,66]
Canola/rapeseed59.17 ± 0.120.07 ± 0.01 [67,68]
Soybean 3.23 ± 0.080.03 ± 0.01[68]
Sesame 6.96  ±  0.034.99  ±  0.03[69]
Safflower 1.76 ± 0.290.26 ± 0.01[68]
Peanut0.069 ± 0.010.049 ± 0.01[70]
Notes: mean ± standard error.
Table 6. Total mineral composition of native sunflower, canola, soybean, sesame, safflower, and peanut seeds (mg/100 g).
Table 6. Total mineral composition of native sunflower, canola, soybean, sesame, safflower, and peanut seeds (mg/100 g).
OilseedsNaKMgMnZnFeCaCuRef.
Maíz de teja N.DN.D6.99 ± 2.07N.D17.28 ± 1.242.51 ± 0.080.97 ± 0.175.91 ± 0.45_
Domesticated sunflowerN.D645325N.D55.2578N.D[50]
Canola/rapeseed0.01251.240.130.03670.0170.04521.0511.8[53]
Soybean 217972802.5174.8915.72771.658[86]
Sesame N.DN.D5212.53.89.31200150[87]
SafflowerN.D352.354132.8810.9180.09182.682146.3310.631[88]
Peanut66581762.083.312.26540.671[70,89,90]
Notes: N.D = not detected.
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

Arenas-Salazar, A.P.; Schoor, M.; Nieto-Ramírez, M.I.; García-Trejo, J.F.; Torres-Pacheco, I.; Guevara-González, R.G.; Aguirre-Becerra, H.; Feregrino-Pérez, A.A. Morphological and Nutritional Characterization of the Native Sunflower as a Potential Plant Resource for the Sierra Gorda of Querétaro. Resources 2025, 14, 121. https://doi.org/10.3390/resources14080121

AMA Style

Arenas-Salazar AP, Schoor M, Nieto-Ramírez MI, García-Trejo JF, Torres-Pacheco I, Guevara-González RG, Aguirre-Becerra H, Feregrino-Pérez AA. Morphological and Nutritional Characterization of the Native Sunflower as a Potential Plant Resource for the Sierra Gorda of Querétaro. Resources. 2025; 14(8):121. https://doi.org/10.3390/resources14080121

Chicago/Turabian Style

Arenas-Salazar, Ana Patricia, Mark Schoor, María Isabel Nieto-Ramírez, Juan Fernando García-Trejo, Irineo Torres-Pacheco, Ramon Gerardo Guevara-González, Humberto Aguirre-Becerra, and Ana Angélica Feregrino-Pérez. 2025. "Morphological and Nutritional Characterization of the Native Sunflower as a Potential Plant Resource for the Sierra Gorda of Querétaro" Resources 14, no. 8: 121. https://doi.org/10.3390/resources14080121

APA Style

Arenas-Salazar, A. P., Schoor, M., Nieto-Ramírez, M. I., García-Trejo, J. F., Torres-Pacheco, I., Guevara-González, R. G., Aguirre-Becerra, H., & Feregrino-Pérez, A. A. (2025). Morphological and Nutritional Characterization of the Native Sunflower as a Potential Plant Resource for the Sierra Gorda of Querétaro. Resources, 14(8), 121. https://doi.org/10.3390/resources14080121

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