Next Article in Journal
Involvement of Organic Acid in the Control Mechanism of ε-Poly-L-lysine (ε-PL) on Blue Mold Caused by Penicillium expansum in Apple Fruits
Next Article in Special Issue
Yield, Antioxidant Activity and Total Polyphenol Content of Okra Fruits Grown in Slovak Republic
Previous Article in Journal
A Sustainable Intercropping System for Organically Produced Lettuce and Green Onion with the Use of Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Inocula
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:

Effect of Harvesting in Different Ripening Stages on the Content of the Mineral Elements of Rosehip (Rosa spp.) Fruit Flesh

Department of Plant Biology and Food Sciences, Vytautas Magnus University Agriculture Academy, Donelaičio Str. 58, 44248 Kaunas, Lithuania
Lithuanian Research Centre for Agriculture and Forestry, Instituto al. 1, 58344 Akademija, Lithuania
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Horticulturae 2022, 8(6), 467;
Received: 26 April 2022 / Revised: 19 May 2022 / Accepted: 21 May 2022 / Published: 24 May 2022


Studies on the mineral content of different rosehip species/cultivars during the ripening period are very limited. Therefore, the objective of this research was to evaluate the content and composition of the mineral elements of two species and two rosehip cultivars growing on an organic farm. The rosehip fruits were harvested at different ripening stages, five time per season. Mineral composition (K, Ca, Mg, P, Fe, Na, Ti, Cu, B, Mn, Al, Zn, Cr, Co, Ni, As, Mo, Cd and Pb) was analyzed by means inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP–MS). The results showed that the ripening stage and species/cultivars had an effect on the contents of the mineral elements. Significantly, the highest content of mineral elements was determined at ripening stage I (Ca, Mg, Ti, Mn, Al and Cr) and IV (K, P, Fe, Cu and B). Species of the Rosa canina accumulated the highest content of mineral elements. Correlation analysis showed that the hue angle had a positive and very strong relationship with six mineral elements: K (r = 0.909), Ca (r = 0.962), Mg (r = 0.965), P (r = 0.945), Fe (r = 0.929) and Ti (r = 0.944).

1. Introduction

For many years, rosehips have been used in traditional and folk medicine for their anti-inflammatory and pain-relieving, properties [1,2]. Nowadays rosehip fruit is used as an ingredient in foods (e.g., jam, jellies, teas, syrup), in the manufacture of supplements, vitamins and in cosmetics (e.g., lotion, cream, shower gel) [3].
Many previous studies have reported on rosehip’s nutritional aspects, bioactive components, antioxidant and anti-inflammatory effects, antimicrobial properties, etc., including the maturity stage effects on the bioactive compounds’ content [4,5,6,7,8,9,10]. There is little information about the changes of mineral content in rosehip fruit during ripening. Importantly, rosehips are rich in both macro- and micronutrients. The major mineral elements found in rosehip are potassium, calcium, phosphorus, magnesium, iron, sodium, copper, manganese and aluminum [11,12,13]. These macro and micro elements play an important role in various important biochemical and physiological processes in the human body, are important for the membrane and bone formation process, hormone functions, metabolic catalysis, etc. [14,15,16].
Mineral elements are scientifically recognized as essential constituents for human health. Moreover, the human body cannot synthesize these elements; therefore, we need to obtain them through food or supplements. There is growing recognition that various food products may help to maintain optimal health and prevent chronic diseases. Such foods are classified as functional foods or nutraceuticals. Rosehip can be potential sources of mineral elements to benefit human health [2].
Based on the scientific literature data, content of the minerals in rosehip depends on species, cultivars, cultivation conditions and weather, and also depends on the ripeness stages [11,12,17,18]. Currently, there is growing interest in nontraditional raw materials with higher amounts of mineral elements. It is important to establish at what stage of ripening the optimal amount of mineral elements accumulates. This research is novel due to the fact that mineral element composition in the rosehip flesh harvested at different ripening stages under an organic management system has not been studied.
For these reasons, the objective of this research was to evaluate the content and composition of the mineral elements in rosehips of two rose species and two rose cultivars in several ripening stages, grown under an organic management system.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Field Experiment

This research was conducted in 2018–2020 at the organic farm in Pakruojis District, Lithuania. Two species, Rosa rugosa and Rosa canina and two cultivars (cv.), Rosa rugosa ‘Rubra‘ and Rosa rugosa ‘Alba‘ were planted on 2011 field coordinates 56°10′29.0″ N 23°49′02.6″ E. The experimental site was arranged in a randomized design with four replicates and the plot area was 2000 m2. The distance between the rows was 4 m and the distance between rose shrubs was 2 m. During the plant vegetation period inter rows were loosened and weeds were removed. The soil pH at the experimental site was from 6.77 to 6.98, available potassium from 97.7 to 181 mg kg−1, available phosphorus from 120.6 to 153.3 mg kg−1 and total nitrogen was 25.1 mg kg−1. The rosehip fruits were harvested at five different ripening stages (Figure 1): the first stage (I) was performed when the fruit color changed slightly from green to yellow, pink or red on no less than 10% of the surface; the second stage (II) was performed when the fruit color changed from green to tarnish, yellow, pink or red on no less than 30% of the surface; the third stage (III) was when the fruit color changed from green to light orange or red or a combination thereof no less than on 60% of the surface; the fourth stage (IV) was performed when the fruit became pinkish or orange depending on the species; the fifth stage (V) was performed when the fruit surface was red [5,19].
According to the standard climate normal (SCN) data, the years 2018, 2019 and 2020 were warmer by 2.5, 1.4 and 0.7 °C, respectively (Table 1). During the rosehip vegetation period of 2018, 2019 and 2020, there was a drier climate, on average 86, 106.6 and 72.5 mm, respectively, compared with the SCN. According with the SCN, the sunshine in 2018, 2019 and 2020 years at this period was higher on average at 195, 118 and 8 h.

2.2. Soil Agrochemical Analyses

The soil agrochemical characteristic was conducted in Vytautas Magnus University Agriculture Academy Laboratory of Food Raw materials, Agronomical and Zoo-technical Investigations. The soil samples were air-dried in open plastic boxes and, having removed small stones, remains of roots and other organic plant parts, they were crushed. Homogenized soil was sieved through a 1 mm mesh size sieve. Soil samples were analyzed for pHKCl, amounts of available phosphorus, available potassium and total nitrogen. Soil pHKCl was established by the potentiometric method in 1N KCl extract [20]. Available phosphorus and potassium were extracted with ammonium lactate according to the Egner–Riehm–Domingo method [21]. Total nitrogen concentration (mg kg−1) was determined by the Kjeldahl method [22].

2.3. Samples Preparation

After harvesting the stem was removed from the rosehips, then cut in half and the seeds were separated. The rosehips flesh was frozen at −35 °C, then lyophilized for 48 h using a Freeze-Drying Plant Sublimator 3 × 4 × 5 (ZIRBUS technology GmbH, Bad Grund (Harz), Germany). Afterwards, material was milled (Grindomix GM 200, Retsch GmbH, Haan, Germany) and stored in sealed containers at 5 °C in the dark until mineral elements analysis.

2.4. Mineral Element Analysis

To determine the mineral composition (K, Ca, Mg, P, Fe, Na, Ti, Cu, B, Mn, Al, Zn, Cr, Co, Ni, As, Mo, Cd and Pb) in rosehip fruit samples, microwave-assisted extraction (MAE) was carried out using a CEM MARS 6® (Matthews, NC, USA) digestion system equipped with 100 mL Teflon vessel. Approximately 0.3 g of the homogenized sample was accurately weighed into a Teflon vessel and digestion using a nitric (HNO3) and hydrochloric (HCl) acid mixture (5:1). Digestion was performed under the following conditions: temperature—180 °C; pressure—800 psi; ramp time—20 min; hold time—20 min; microwave power—800 W. Then, the digested sample was cooled down and thoroughly transferred into a 100-mL volumetric flask and diluted using bi-distilled water till the mark. Each sample was prepared in triplicate and the blank sample was included in each digestion run. Digestion samples were analyzed by means ICP–MS (ThermoFisher Scientific, Branchburg, NY, USA). In the present experiment 4 macro-(K, Ca, Mg and P) and 9 micro-(Fe, Na, Ti, Cu, B, Mn, Al, Zn and Cr) elements were determined. Co, Ni, As, Mo, and Pb in rosehip samples were not identified.

2.5. Color Parameter Analysis

Fresh rosehip color parameters L* (lightness), a* (positive—red, negative—green) and b* (positive—yellow, negative—blue), NBS units, were evaluated with a spectrophotometer ColorFlex (Hunter Associates Laboratory, Inc., Reston, VA, USA) (Table 2). Chroma (C = (a*2 + b*2)1/2) and hue angle (h° = arctan (b*/a*)) were calculated. All analyses were performed in four replicates. An average of one ripening stage was calculated from 80 values (4 different species/cultivars × 20 rosehip fruits).

2.6. Statistical Analysis

Mineral element analyses were performed in triplicate. The data analysis was conducted with Microsoft®Excel®2016 MSO and verified by statistical software STATISTICA 10 (StatSoft, Inc, Tulsa, OK, USA, 2010) package.
The statistical analysis showed that there were no significant interactions between treatments; therefore, three-year averages are presented. The effect of the species/cultivars on the mineral element content was analyzed using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the effect of the species/cultivars and ripening stage on the mineral element content was analyzed using two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). The Fisher’s test was conducted to estimate the significant differences (p < 0.05). Correlation coefficient was calculated to assess the reliance between ripening stage (expressed as hue angle (h°) value) and mineral elements.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. The Effect of the Species/Cultivars on the Mineral Content

Quantitative results of macro- and micro- elements indicated significant differences only between species/cultivars and no significant interactions between years; therefore, averages are presented. K was the most abundant macro element in all rosehip species/cultivars; the content ranged from 8292.83 mg kg−1 in Rosa canina species to 13221.55 mg kg−1 in Rosa rugosa cv. ‘Rubra’ (Table 3). Kizil et al. [11] determined a 2.1 and 2.8 times lower content of this element in wild and cultivated rosehip, respectively. Other researchers determined that this macro element ranged from 23,095.4 mg kg−1 to 24,459.9 mg kg−1 in Rosa rubiginosa species [12]. K is one of the most important mineral elements in the human body. It is a major mineral in the extracellular fluid, regulates osmotic pressure, conduction of nerve impulses, muscle contraction, especially cardiac muscle, cell membrane function and blood pressure [16]. The recommended daily allowance for this element in adults is 2000 mg per day [23]. In accordance with Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011, consuming 100 g per day of Rosa rugosa cv. ‘Rubra’ powder yields 66%.
The second determined main macro element was Ca; the content ranged from 3106.68 mg kg−1 in Rosa rugosa cv. ‘Rubra’ to 4572.70 mg kg−1 Rosa canina species (Table 3). According to the other researchers’ data, the content of Ca ranged from 133.3 mg kg−1 to 3351.0 mg kg−1 [3,11]. Aguirre et al. [12] documented that in rosehip samples, from different experimental sites, content of Ca ranged from 654.9 mg kg−1 to 8169.94 mg kg−1. Research has confirmed that Ca is involved in vascular contraction, muscle functions, nerve transmission, intracellular signaling and hormonal secretion [14]. The RDA of Ca is 800 mg/day in adults [19]. The consumption of 17.5 g/day of Rosa canina powder supplies 100% of RDA for Ca.
The highest content of Mg was determined in Rosa canina species 1501.64 mg kg−1 (Table 3). Ercisli et al. [24] reported that content of Mg varied from 990 mg kg−1 to 1254 mg kg−1 depending on the genotype. Kizil et al. [11] reported that content of Mg ranged from 1301.50 mg kg−1 in cultivated samples to 1435.00 mg kg−1 in wild rosehip samples. Mg in human body is an important mineral for bone mineralization, muscular relaxation and several other cellular functions, nucleic acids and regulates transmembrane transport [25]. The recommended daily allowance for Mg is 375 mg/day in adults [23]. The intake of 25 g/day Rosa canina powder supplies 100% of RDA for Mg.
The content of P in studied species/cultivars were found to range from 630.65 mg kg−1 in Rosa rugosa cv. ‘Rubra’ to 1015.44 mg kg−1 in Rosa canina species (Table 3). According to the investigation by Ercisli et al. [24], P varied from 4860 mg kg−1 to 5360 mg kg−1 for different genotypes.
The main function of P is support tissue growth, and also helps to maintain normal pH, the temporary storage and transfer of the energy derived from metabolic processes and by phosphorylation, as well as the activation of many catalytic proteins [26]. The recommended daily allowance for P is 700 mg/day in adults [23]. The consumption 69 g/day of Rosa canina powder supplies 100% of RDA for P.
Significantly, the highest contents of micro elements for Fe, B and Cr were determined in Rosa canina species (77.30 mg kg−1, 28.99 mg kg−1 and 0.38 mg kg−1, respectively), by the way Cr was not detected in other studied species/cultivars (Table 3). Demir et al. [3] studied samples of rosehip collected from different locations and determined that the Fe range from 59.4 mg kg−1 to 72.9 mg kg−1. A previous study established a 10 times lower content of B, 8.8 time lower content of Fe and 3.5 time higher content of Cr, compared with our results [13]. Kizil et al. [11] reported that in investigation of rosehip Cr was not detected. Content of Fe in the diet is very important for the formation of hemoglobin and other enzymes, functions as a carrier of oxygen in the blood and muscles. B is a bioactive element in nutritional amounts that beneficially affects bone growth and central nervous system function, facilitates hormone action and is associated with a reduced risk for some types of cancer. Cr is an also essential trace element needed for normal carbohydrate metabolism [27]. The biologic function of chromium is closely associated with that of insulin [24]. The recommended daily allowance for Fe is 14 mg/day and 40 mg/day for Cr in adults [19]. The WHO (World Health Organization) established acceptable safe range intakes for boron of 1–13 mg/day [28].
The Rosa rugosa cv. ‘Rubra’ significantly characterized the highest contents of Na and Mn (37.69 mg kg−1 and 8.10 mg kg−1, respectively) (Table 3). From the results presented by Bilgin et al. [29], content of the micro element, Na, ranged from 50.00 mg kg−1 to 100.00 mg kg−1 and content of Mn ranged from 50.85 mg kg−1 to 85.35 mg kg−1 in different species. Demir and Özcan [3] documented that the content of Na varied from 3.97 mg kg −1 to 4.67 mg kg−1 and Mn varied from 22.40 mg kg−1 to 44.80 mg kg−1 depending on the growing location. Na is an essential mineral for regulating body water content and electrolyte balance, transmission of nerve impulses and normal cell function [30]. In the human body, Mn functions both as a cofactor activating a large number of enzymes that form metal–enzyme complexes and as an integral part of certain metalloenzymes. It is also involved in the metabolism of biogenic amines and participates in the regulation of carbohydrate metabolism [31]. The recommended daily allowance for Mn is 2 mg/day in adults [23].
Our data showed that the highest contents of micro elements Ti, Cu, Al and Zn were significantly determined in Rosa rugosa cv. ‘Alba’ (18.03 mg kg−1, 13.44 mg kg−1, 6.13 mg kg−1 and 19.23 mg kg−1, respectively) (Table 3). The investigations by Koç [32] demonstrated lower contents of Cu (ranged 0.01 mg kg−1–5.83 mg kg−1) and Zn (ranged 0.10 mg kg−1–11.93 mg kg−1) compared with our results. The study by Aguirre et al. [12] also showed lower content of these micro elements compared with those reported in this study. The experiment carried out by Kizil et al. [11], with wild and culture rosehip, showed a 16.5 and 11 times higher content of Al compared with our results. Özcan et al. [13] showed a lower content of Ti (5.56 mg kg−1) compared with our results. Clinical studies showed that insufficient dietary Cu leads to elevated blood lipid levels and impaired heart function. Zn plays an important role in nucleic acid metabolism, cell replication, tissue repair and growth through its function in nucleic acid polymerases. This micro element also has many recognized and biologically important interactions with hormones and plays a role in production, storage and secretion of individual hormones, proving that Zn plays an important role in glucose metabolism [33]. The RDA for these micro elements is 1 mg/day of Cu and 10 mg/day of Zn in adults [23].

3.2. The Effect of the Species/Cultivars and Ripening Stage on the Mineral Content

Three-year averages are presented because differences were not significant between experimental years. The determined contents of macro elements demonstrated differences by ripeness stage and species/cultivars. K was the major determined macro element.
Our experiment showed that content of K ranged from 8292.83 mg kg−1 (Rosa canina at ripening stage V) to 14771.47 mg kg−1 (Rosa rugosa cv. ‘Rubra’ at ripening stage IV) (Figure 2A). The rosehip samples for Rosa canina, Rosa rugosa, Rosa rugosa cv. ‘Alba’ showed significant decrease content of K from I to V ripening stage, while in Rosa rugosa cv. ‘Rubra’ showed irregular increase at ripening stage IV. Türkben et al. [17] reported a K range from 1090.28 mg kg−1 in reddish-orange to 3113.31 mg kg−1 in red rosehips. The study by Ramesh et al. [34] indicated that higher content of this essential nutrient stimulated the enzymes responsible for the fruits softening. In addition, changes in the K levels may be due to its great mobility in plants, since it is an important component in the synthesis of proteins and starch, as well as is linked to the metabolism of carbohydrates and enzymatic processes [35].
Contents of Ca during ripening of different species/cultivars of rosehip ranged from 3106.68 mg kg−1 (Rosa rugosa cv. ‘Rubra’ at ripening stage V) to 6930.19 mg kg−1 (Rosa rugosa at ripening stage I) (Figure 2B). Based on the data from other researchers, Ca ranged from 3055.38 mg kg−1 to 3416.48 mg kg−1 (from reddish-red to red rosehip, respectively) [17]. According to Bilgin et al. [29], the mineral element content in rosehips also depends on the genotype. Compared with other fruits (strawberries and cherries), the contents of Ca also tended to decrease at maturity and the highest contents of Ca were significantly determined in unripe fruits [18]. The lower content of Ca was found to be integrated with the ripening stage. This may be because this macro element plays important physiological roles in fruit senescence, and especially is important in cell division, tissue hardness and the maintenance of cell permeability and cell integrity, all of which directly influence fruit firmness and elasticity [36,37,38]. Moreover, mineral element content depends on their mobility in phloem, a relatively immobile element such as Ca ceases to move into the fruit at later stages of development [39].
The significant highest content of the macro element of Mg in the present study was determined in the Rosa canina species at ripening stage I (2083.35 mg kg−1) and the lowest content was in Rosa rugosa species at ripening stage V (625.88 mg kg−1) (Figure 2C). In general, the contents of Mg in the Rosa canina, Rosa rugosa and Rosa rugosa ‘Alba’ species/cultivars decreased with changes in ripening stage, while, on the Rosa rugosa cv. ‘Rubra’, significant increases were observed at ripening stage IV. In the study by Türkben et al. [17], Mg decreased at maturity and the highest content was determined in orange-red maturity rosehip.
In plants, Mg is highly mobile. It is important as an activator for many enzymes required in plant growth processes, and also serves important biochemical functions in protein synthesis and stabilizes the nucleic acids [40]. Furthermore, Mg has been reported to be associated with higher antioxidant activity in plants and can prevent the toxic effect of Al on plants [41,42].
The content of P was found ranged from 630.65 mg kg−1 (Rosa rugosa cv. ‘Rubra’ at ripening stage V) to 1477.05 mg kg−1 (Rosa canina at ripening stage IV) (Figure 2D). The obtained results showed that in all studied rosehip species/cultivars, contents of P have tended to irregularly decrease depending on the ripening stage. Our study agrees with that published by Mahmood et al. [18], that content of P decreased as fruit maturity progressed. Results from Ozrenk et al. [43] demonstrated that the content of P was dependent on the genotype. In plants, P constitutes a main structural component of nucleic acids and phospholipids. It is important as a regulatory factor in oxidative metabolism and photosynthesis, it participates in signal transduction, and regulates the activities of proteins by way of covalent phosphorylation/dephosphorylation reactions [44].
Other micro elements also have important roles in plant development and growth. Furthermore, they are directly involved in plant protection as structural components and metabolic regulators but are needed at lower concentrations compared with macronutrients [44].
Our experiment has shown that Rosa canina species had the highest contents of Fe, Cu and B at the IV ripening stage (80.58 mg kg−1, 21.76 mg kg−1 and 29.85 mg kg−1, respectively) (Figure 3A,D,E) and Mn, Al and Cr at the I ripening stage (10.67 mg kg−1, 12.09 mg kg−1 and 1.49 mg kg−1, respectively) (Figure 3F,G,I). The results from Ercisli [24] demonstrated that the contents of Fe, Cu, Mn and Zn of rosehip were dependent on genotypes. In the scientific literature, no data were found about the content of these micro elements in Rosa sp. during ripening. Compared with other Rosaceae family fruits, such as medlar (Mespilus germanica L.) fruit, the highest content of Fe was determined at the 174 days after blooming and was 2.9 time lower than determined in our experiment (27.60 mg kg−1) [45]. Content of copper in this fruit increased up to the 164 day stage after blooming and reaching the highest content of 5.94 mg kg−1 [44]. The studies by Tosun et al. [46] indicated similar results of Fe in ripe blackberry, at 77.67 mg kg−1. Compared with tomato, a 2.9 times higher content of Mn in our experiment was determined, but in both cases, the highest content was determined at the beginning of the experiment [35]. The content of Al in rosehip was determined to be 6.1 and 5.5 times smaller compared with unripened strawberries and cherries [18].
In plants, Fe is a constituent of the haem complex, a naturally occurring plant chelate involved in electron transfer in a number of important plant enzymes [47]. Also, it was reported that Fe plays crucial role in pectin metabolism and thereby have influence on tissue softening during ripening [47]. Cu, Fe and Mn are known to play critical roles in governing enzymatic and non-enzymatic components of the anti-oxidative system of plants [47,48,49]. Cu concentration in plant tissues varies depending on plant species or ecotypes, developmental stage and environmental factors such as nitrogen supply and soil chemical properties [50]. Cu activates enzymes in plants, which are involved in lignin synthesis and is essential in several enzyme systems. It is also required in the process of photosynthesis, is essential in plant respiration and assists in the plant metabolism of carbohydrates and proteins. B is not required in high amounts by plants. It is important with Ca in cell wall synthesis and is essential for cell division. These functions include translocation of sugars and carbohydrates, nitrogen metabolism, formation of certain proteins, regulation of hormone levels and transportation of K to stomata (which helps regulate internal water balance). It has been reported that Al, with other beneficial elements, can increase tolerance to abiotic stress and resistance to biotic stress [51,52].
The highest significant content of sodium was established at the ripening stage I (39.73 mg kg−1) in Rosa rugosa species. (Figure 3B). Türkben et al. [17] determined a 13 times higher content of this mineral element in fully ripe rosehip. Compared with other Rosaceae family fruits, the contents of sodium in blackberry were lower (5.05 mg kg−1 in the mature stage) [50].
Soil pH also plays an important role in the mineral availability. In acid soils, most micronutrients are more available to plants than in alkaline and neutral soils [53]. For almost all terrestrial plants, Na is not essential for both growth and development or for reproduction [54].
The results showed that content of titanium during the ripening period was the highest at ripening stage I and zinc was highest at ripening stage V of Rosa rugosa ‘Alba’ (27.42 mg kg−1 and 19.23 mg kg−1, respectively) (Figure 3C,H). Compared with medlar fruits, the highest content of zinc was determined at the 134 days after blooming, 14.99 mg kg−1 [45]. Data were not found on the titanium content of rosehip or other Rosaceae family fruits during ripening.
Zn is a micronutrient essential and plays a key role in growth, development and defense in plants [55]. It has been reported that it is not only involved in the maintenance of the integrity of bio membranes, but it also protects membrane lipids and proteins against oxidative damage [56]. Furthermore, Zn plays a critical role in governing enzymatic and non-enzymatic components of the anti-oxidative system of plants and is a major player in plant immune responses [56].

3.3. Correlation Analysis

The results of the correlation analysis showed a very strong positive correlation between ripening stage (hue angle) and mineral element of K (r = 0.909), Ca (r = 0.962), Mg (r = 0.965), P (r = 0.945), Fe (r = 0.929) and Ti (r = 0.944) (Figure 4). As a result, it can be presumed that the content of the above-mentioned mineral elements increased with the hue angle and decreased with ripening.

4. Conclusions

The results of this study will be useful to choose suitable species/cultivars of rosehip for desirable mineral elements and optimal harvest time of the fruit. In the rosehip of Rosa canina at ripening stage I, the highest content of Mg, Mn, Al and Cr were determined and at ripening stage IV, the highest content of P, Fe, Cu and B were determined. The rosehip of Rosa rugosa at ripening stage I was determined to have significantly highest content in Ca and Na. The species of Rosa rugosa ‘Rubra’ at ripening stage IV accumulated the highest content of K. The rosehip of Rosa rugosa ‘Alba’ at ripening stage I were determined to have the highest content of Ti and ripening stage V had the highest content of Zn.
The correlation analysis confirmed that the hue angle has a positive relationship with the contents of K, Ca, Mg, P, Fe and Ti. The results are also valuable for the food and pharmaceutical industries, as the compounds contained in rosehip have a desirable influence on health.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, B.M. and J.K.; methodology, B.M. and J.K.; software, B.M., N.V. and J.K.; validation, B.M. and J.K.; formal analysis, B.M. and K.B.; investigation, B.M.; resources, B.M. and J.K.; data curation, B.M., N.V., D.L. and J.K.; writing—original draft preparation, B.M., N.V. and J.K.; writing—review and editing, B.M., N.V., D.L. and J.K.; visualization, B.M. and J.K.; supervision, J.K. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.


This research received no external funding.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.


  1. Winther, K.; Hansen, A.S.V.; Tofte, C.J. Bioactive ingredients of rose hips (Rosa canina L) with special reference to antioxidative and anti-inflammatory properties: In vitro studies. Botanics 2016, 6, 11–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  2. Mármol, I.; Sánchez-de-Diego, C.; Moreno, J.N.; Azpilicueta, A.C.; Yoldi, R.M. Therapeutic Applications of Rose Hips from Different Rosa Species. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2017, 18, 1137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Demir, F.; Özcan, M. Chemical and technological properties of rose (Rosa canina L.) fruits grown wild in Turkey. J. Food Eng. 2001, 47, 333–336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Medveckienė, B.; Kulaitienė, J.; Levickienė, D.; Hallmann, E. The Effect of Ripening Stages on the Accumulation of Carotenoids, Polyphenols and Vitamin C in Rosehip Species/Cultivars. Appl. Sci. 2021, 15, 6761. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Kulaitienė, J.; Medveckienė, B.; Levickienė, D.; Vaitkevičienė, N.; Makarevičienė, V.; Jarienė, E. Changes in Fatty Acids Content in Organic Rosehip (Rosa spp.) Seeds during Ripening. Plants 2020, 12, 1793. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Gao, X.; Björk, L.; Trajkovski, V.; Uggla, M. Evaluation of antioxidant activities of rosehip ethanol extracts in different test systems. J. Sci. Food. Agric. 2000, 80, 2021–2027. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Vasić, D.; Paunović, D.; Trifunović, B.Š.; Miladinović, J.; Vujošević, L.; Đinović, D.; Đorđević, P.J. Fatty acid composition of rosehip seed oil. Acta Agric. Serb. 2020, 25, 45–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Al-Yafeai, A.; Bellstedt, P.; Böhm, V. Bioactive Compounds and Antioxidant Capacity of Rosa rugosa Depending on Degree of Ripeness. Antioxidants 2018, 7, 134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  9. Pullar, J.M.; Carr, A.C.; Vissers, M.C.M. The Roles of Vitamin C in Skin Health. Nutrition 2017, 9, 866. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  10. Tumbas, V.T.; Brunet, C.J.M.; Simin, C.D.D.; Cetković, G.S.; Ethilas, S.M.; Gille, L. Effect of rosehip (Rosa canina L.) phytochemicals on stable free radicals and human cancer cells. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2012, 92, 1273–1281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Kizil, S.; Toncer, O.; Sogut, T. Mineral Content and Fatty Acid Compositions of Wild and Cultivated Rose Hip (Rosa canina L.). Fresen. Environ. Bull. 2018, 27, 744–748. [Google Scholar]
  12. Aguirre, G.U.; Loza, M.; Gazquez, J.; Fusco, M.; Sosa, A.; Ciuffo, M.G.; Ciuffo, L.E.C. The Potentiality of Non-Timber Forest Products. Fruit Availability, Phytochemical Properties of Rosa rubiginosa L. Rose Hips. Am. J. Plant Sci. 2016, 7, 2272–2287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  13. Özcan, M.M.; Ünver, A.; Uçar, T.; Arslan, D. Mineral content of some herbs and herbal teas by infusion and decoction. Food Chem. 2018, 106, 1120–1127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Beto, J.A. The Role of Calcium in Human Aging. Clin. Nutr. Res. 2015, 4, 1059788. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  15. Gupta, C.P. Role of Iron (Fe) in Body. IOSR J. Appl. Chem. 2014, 7, 38–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Soetan, K.O.; Olaiya, C.O.; Oyewole, O.E. The importance of mineral elements for humans, domestic animals and plants: A review. Afr. J. Food Sci. 2010, 4, 200–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Türkben, C.; Uylaşer, V.; İnceday, B.; Çelikok, I. Effects of different maturity periods and processes on nutritional components of rose hip (Rosa canina L.). J. Food Agric. Environ. 2010, 1, 26–30. [Google Scholar]
  18. Mahmood, T.; Anwar, F.; Iqbal, T.; Ahmad, B.; Ashraf, M. Mineral composition of strawberry, mulberry, and cherry fruits at different ripening stage as analyzed by inductively coupled plasma-optical emission spectroscopy. J. Plant Nutr. 2012, 35, 111–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Dolek, U.; Gunes, M.; Genc, N.; Elmastas, M. Total Phenolic Compound and Antioxidant Activity Changes in Rosehip (Rosa sp.) during Ripening. J. Agric. Sci. Technol. 2018, 20, 817–828. [Google Scholar]
  20. LST ISO 10390:2005; Soil Quality. Determination of pH. Lithuanian Organization for Standardization: Vilnius, Lithuania, 2005.
  21. Oreshkin, N. Extraction of mobile forms of phosphorus and potassium by the Egner–Riehm–Domingo method. Agrokhimiia 1980, 8, 135–138. [Google Scholar]
  22. ISO 11261:1995; Soil Quality. Determination of total nitrogen—Modified Kjeldahl method. International Organization for Standardization: Geneve, Switzerland, 1995.
  23. EU Regulation. No 1169/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 on the provision of food information to consumers, amending Regulations (EC) No 1924/2006 and (EC) No 1925/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council, and repealing Commission Directive 87/250/EEC, Council Directive 90/496/EEC, Commission Directive 1999/10/EC, Directive 2000/13/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, Commission Directives 2002/67/EC and 2008/5/EC and Commission Regulation (EC) No 608/2004. OJEU 2011, 304, 18–63. [Google Scholar]
  24. Ercisli, S. Chemical composition of fruits in some rose (Rosa spp.) species. Food Chem. 2007, 104, 1379–1384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Martin, K.J.; Gonzalez, E.A.; Slatopolsky, E. Clinical consequences and management of hypomagnesemia. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 2009, 20, 2291–2295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Institute of Medicine. Dietary Reference Intakes for Calcium, Phosphorus, Magnesium, Vitamin D, and Fluoride; National Academies Press: Washington, DC, USA, 1997; pp. 1–448. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Anderson, R.A. Nutritional role of chromium. Sci. Total Environ. 1981, 17, 13–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Worl Health Organization. Environmental Health Criteria 204 for Boron; International Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS): Geneva, Switzerland, 1998. [Google Scholar]
  29. Bilgin, N.A.; Mısırlı, A.; Şen, F.; Türk, B. Fruit Pomological, Phytochemical Characteristic and Mineral Content of Rosehip Genotypes. J. Food Eng. 2020, 6, 18–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Strazzullo, P. Sodium. Adv. Nutr. 2014, 2, 188–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  31. Hurley, L.S.; Keen, C.L. Manganese. In Trace Elements in Human and Animal Nutrition, 5th ed.; Mertz, W., Ed.; Academic Press: New York, NY, USA, 1987; Volume 1, pp. 185–223. [Google Scholar]
  32. Koç, A. Chemical changes in seeds and fruits of natural growing rosehip (Rosa sp.) from Yozgat (Turkey). Acta Sci. Polonorum. Hortorum Cultus 2020, 19, 123–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Dubey, P.; Thakur, V.; Chattopadhyay, M. Role of minerelas and trace elements in diabetes and insulin resistance. Nutrients 2020, 6, 1864. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Ramesh, V.; Paul, V.; Pande, R. Dynamics of mineral nutrients in tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) fruits during ripening: Part II—off the plant. Plant Physiol. 2020, 26, 23–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Trakner, M.; Tavakol, E.; Jakli, B. Functioning of potassium and magnesium in photosynthesis, photosynthate translocation and photoprotection. Physiol. Plant. 2018, 163, 414–431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  36. Gao, H.; Wu, X.; Zorrilla, C.; Vega, S.E.; Palta, J.P. Fractionating of Calcium in Tuber and Leaf Tissues Explains the Calcium Deficiency Symptoms in Potato Plant Overexpressing CAX1. Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 10, 1793. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Hocking, B.; Tyerman, S.; Burton, R.A.; Gilliham, M. Fruit Calcium: Transport and Physiology. Front. Plant Sci. 2016, 7, 569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
  38. Fallahi, E.; Conway, W.S.; Hickey, K.D.; Sams, C.E. The role of calcium and nitrogen in postharvest quality and disease resistance of apples. Hortic. Sci. 1997, 5, 831–835. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  39. Paul, V.; Pande, R.; Ramesh, K.V.; Singh, A. Role of mineral nutrients in physiology, ripening and storability of fruits. Plant Physiol. 2012, 13, 56–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Gransee, A.; Fuhurs, H. Magnesium mobility in soils as a challenge for soil and plant analysis, magnesium fertilization and root uptake under adverse growth conditions. Plant Soil 2013, 368, 5–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  41. Huber, D.H.; Jeff, B. The role of magnesium in plant disease. Plant Soil 2013, 368, 73–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Bose, J.; Babourina, O.; Rengel, Z. Role of magnesium in alleviation of aluminium toxicity in plants. J. Exp. Bot. 2011, 62, 2251–2264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  43. Özrenk, K.; Gündoğdu, M.; Doğan, A. Organic acid, sugar and mineral matter contents in rosehip (Rosa canina L.) Fruits of Erzincan Region. Yüzüncü Yıl Univ. J. Agric. Sci. 2012, 22, 20–25. [Google Scholar]
  44. Christian, T.; Husted, S.; Laursen, K.H.; Persson, D.P.; Schjoerring, J.K. The molecular–physiological functions of mineral macronutrients and their consequences for deficiency symptoms in plants. New Phytol. 2021, 229, 2446–2469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Rop, O.; Sochor, J.; Jurikova, T.; Zitka, O.; Skutkova, H.; Mlcek, J.; Salas, P.; Krsk, B.; Babula, P.; Adam, V.; et al. Effect of Five Different Stages of Ripening on Chemical Compounds in Medlar (Mespilus germanica L.). Molecules 2011, 16, 74–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  46. Tosun, I.; Ustun, N.S.; Tekguler, B. Physical and chemical changes during ripening of blackberry fruits. Sci. Agric. 2008, 1, 87–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Bai, Q.; Shen, Y.; Huang, Y. Advances in Mineral Nutrition Transport and Signal Transduction in Rosaceae Fruit Quality and Postharvest Storage. Front. Plant Sci. 2021, 12, 68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Fernando, D.R.; Baker, A.J.M.; Woodrow, I.E. Physiological responses in Macadamia integrifolia on exposure to Mn treatment. Aust. J. Bot. 2009, 57, 406–413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Yruela, I. Copper in plants: Acquisition, transport and interactions. Funct. Plant Biol. 2009, 36, 409–430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
  50. Jimenez, A.; Creissen, G.; Kular, B.; Firmin, J.; Robinson, S.; Verhoeyen, M.; Mullineaux, P. Changes in oxidative processes and components of the antioxidant system during tomato fruit ripening. Planta 2002, 214, 751–758. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Kaur, S.; Kaur, N.; Siddique, K.H.M.; Nayar, H. Beneficial elements for agricultural crops and their functional relevance in defense against stresses. Arch. Agron. Soil Sci. 2016, 62, 905–920. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Schulz, M.; Seraglio, S.K.T.; Betta, F.D.; Nehring, P.; Valese, A.C.; Daguer, H.; Gonzago, L.V.; Costa, A.C.O.; Fett, R. Blackberry (Rubus ulmifolius Schott): Chemical composition, phenolic compounds and antioxidant capacity in two edible stages. Int. Food Res. J. 2019, 122, 627–634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Gentili, R.; Ambrosini, R.; Montagnani, C.; Caronni, S.; Citterio, S. Effect of Soil pH on the Growth, Reproductive Investment and Pollen Allergenicity of Ambrosia artemisiifolia L. Front. Plant Sci. 2018, 9, 1335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  54. Maathuis, F.J.M. Sodium in plants: Perception, signalling, and regulation of sodium fluxes. J. Exp. Bot. 2014, 65, 849–858. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Gupta, S.K.; Rai, A.K.; Kanwar, S.S.; Sharma, T.R. Comparative analysis of zinc finger proteins involved in plant disease resistance. PLoS ONE 2012, 7, e42578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  56. Broadley, M.R.; White, P.J.; Hammond, J.P.; Zelko, I.; Lux, A. Zinc in plants. New Phytol. 2007, 173, 677–702. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Figure 1. Fruit ripening stages of Rosa samples, (A)—Rosa canina, (B)—Rosa rugosa, (C)—Rosa rugosa ‘Rubra’, (D)—Rosa rugosa ‘Alba’ (photos by B. Medveckienė).
Figure 1. Fruit ripening stages of Rosa samples, (A)—Rosa canina, (B)—Rosa rugosa, (C)—Rosa rugosa ‘Rubra’, (D)—Rosa rugosa ‘Alba’ (photos by B. Medveckienė).
Horticulturae 08 00467 g001
Figure 2. The effect of ripening stages on the content of macro element (mg kg−1 d.m.) (A)—potassium, (B)—calcium, (C)—magnesium, (D)—phosphorus of rosehip fruits (average for 2018–2020 years). * The differences between the rosehip species/cultivar and between the means of ripening stages marked (not by the same letter) are significant at p ≤ 0.05. RC—Rosa canina, RR—Rosa rugosa, RRR—Rosa rugosa ‘Rubra’, RRA—Rosa rugosa ‘Alba’.
Figure 2. The effect of ripening stages on the content of macro element (mg kg−1 d.m.) (A)—potassium, (B)—calcium, (C)—magnesium, (D)—phosphorus of rosehip fruits (average for 2018–2020 years). * The differences between the rosehip species/cultivar and between the means of ripening stages marked (not by the same letter) are significant at p ≤ 0.05. RC—Rosa canina, RR—Rosa rugosa, RRR—Rosa rugosa ‘Rubra’, RRA—Rosa rugosa ‘Alba’.
Horticulturae 08 00467 g002
Figure 3. The effect of ripening stages on the content of micro elements (mg kg−1 d.m.) (A)—iron, (B)—sodium, (C)—titanium, (D)—copper, (E)—boron, (F)—manganese, (G)—aluminum, (H)—zinc, (I)—chromium of rosehip fruits (average for 2018–2020 years). * The differences between the rosehip species/cultivar and between the means of ripening stages (not marked by the same letter) are significant at p ≤ 0.05. RC—Rosa canina, RR—Rosa rugosa, RRR—Rosa rugosa ‘Rubra’, RRA—Rosa rugosa ‘Alba’.
Figure 3. The effect of ripening stages on the content of micro elements (mg kg−1 d.m.) (A)—iron, (B)—sodium, (C)—titanium, (D)—copper, (E)—boron, (F)—manganese, (G)—aluminum, (H)—zinc, (I)—chromium of rosehip fruits (average for 2018–2020 years). * The differences between the rosehip species/cultivar and between the means of ripening stages (not marked by the same letter) are significant at p ≤ 0.05. RC—Rosa canina, RR—Rosa rugosa, RRR—Rosa rugosa ‘Rubra’, RRA—Rosa rugosa ‘Alba’.
Horticulturae 08 00467 g003
Figure 4. Correlations between hue angle (h°) and mineral element content. (A)—potassium, (B)—calcium, (C)—magnesium, (D)—phosphorus, (E)— iron, (F)—titanium (average for 2018–2020 years).
Figure 4. Correlations between hue angle (h°) and mineral element content. (A)—potassium, (B)—calcium, (C)—magnesium, (D)—phosphorus, (E)— iron, (F)—titanium (average for 2018–2020 years).
Horticulturae 08 00467 g004
Table 1. Weather conditions during the rosehip vegetation period in 2018, 2019 and 2020 (Šiauliai meteorological station, Lithuania).
Table 1. Weather conditions during the rosehip vegetation period in 2018, 2019 and 2020 (Šiauliai meteorological station, Lithuania).
Air temperature, °C
SCN *12.815.718.
Rainfall, mmSum
Sunshine, hSum
* SCN—Standard climate normal is the 30-year average from 1981 to 2010.
Table 2. Color parameters change of rosehip at ripening stage (average for 2018–2020 years).
Table 2. Color parameters change of rosehip at ripening stage (average for 2018–2020 years).
Color Parameter
I39.32 ± 3.01−4.66 ± 0.6933.98 ± 2.5034.32 ±2.4397.80 ± 2.23
II36.73 ± 3.43−2.26 ± 0.3334.90 ± 3.7934.98 ± 3.7893.70 ± 0.79
III36.33 ± 3.4314.62 ± 4.5435.68 ± 5.5938.79 ± 6.0667.71 ± 6.06
IV34.60 ± 2.6728.98 ± 3.80 33.72 ± 3.82 44.53 ± 4.6549.32 ± 3.37
V26.61 ± 2.0635.16 ± 1.7524.93 ± 3.1243.93 ± 1.5135.33 ± 4.29
Table 3. Mineral content (mg kg−1 DW) of different rosehip species/cultivar fruits (average for 2018–2020 years).
Table 3. Mineral content (mg kg−1 DW) of different rosehip species/cultivar fruits (average for 2018–2020 years).
Mineral ElementSpecies/Cultivars
Rosa caninaRosa rugosaRosa rugosa cv. ‘Rubra’Rosa rugosa cv. ‘Alba’
Macro element
K8292.83 ± 62.00 a*8735.83 ± 70.98 b13,221.55 ± 26.59 d12,151.82 ± 12.27 c
Ca4572.70 ± 32.91 d3980.24 ± 8.38 c3106.68 ± 14.58 a3355.77 ± 7.74 b
Mg1501.64 ± 8.18 d625.883 ± 3.29 a909.75 ± 7.74 c679.43 ± 0.67 b
P1015.44 ± 5.10 d702.46 ± 1.40 c630.65 ± 1.01 a684.69 ± 2.77 b
Micro element
Fe77.30 ± 0.19 d27.61 ± 0.18 a31.29 ± 0.21 c30.10 ± 0.44 b
Na11.62 ± 0.18 a26.73 ± 0.83 b37.69 ± 0.19 d28.41 ± 0.43 c
Ti17.20 ± 0.02 c14.05 ± 0.06 a16.43 ± 0.23 b18.03 ± 0.05 d
Cu11.83 ± 0.25 b6.42 ± 0.21 a12.91 ± 0.06 c13.44 ± 0.01 d
B28.99 ± 0.29 c6.93 ± 0.08 a5.49 ± 0.02 a7.30 ± 0.02 b
Mn6.20 ± 0.02 c4.00 ± 0.04 b8.10 ± 0.02 d3.60 ± 0.03 a
Al5.89 ± 0.04 b3.62 ± 0.04 a3.28 ± 0.03 a6.13 ± 0.16 b
Zn2.75 ± 0.08 b0.77 ± 0.05 a7.12 ± 0.14 c19.23 ± 0.42 d
Cr0.38 ± 0.03 b0.00 ± 0.00 a0.00 ± 0.00 a0.00 ± 0.00 a
* In the same line, different letters represent significant different between species/cultivars, (p < 0.05).
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Medveckienė, B.; Kulaitienė, J.; Vaitkevičienė, N.; Levickienė, D.; Bunevičienė, K. Effect of Harvesting in Different Ripening Stages on the Content of the Mineral Elements of Rosehip (Rosa spp.) Fruit Flesh. Horticulturae 2022, 8, 467.

AMA Style

Medveckienė B, Kulaitienė J, Vaitkevičienė N, Levickienė D, Bunevičienė K. Effect of Harvesting in Different Ripening Stages on the Content of the Mineral Elements of Rosehip (Rosa spp.) Fruit Flesh. Horticulturae. 2022; 8(6):467.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Medveckienė, Brigita, Jurgita Kulaitienė, Nijolė Vaitkevičienė, Dovilė Levickienė, and Kristina Bunevičienė. 2022. "Effect of Harvesting in Different Ripening Stages on the Content of the Mineral Elements of Rosehip (Rosa spp.) Fruit Flesh" Horticulturae 8, no. 6: 467.

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