Screening potatoes for micronutrients

Yet more about iron (and other assorted micronutrients). A recent post of mine elicited a comment from Glenn to the effect that breeders have screened germplasm collections of the major staples for micronutrient composition. I was skeptical about the extent to which this has been done (though not, I must add, about the fact that there will be much more of it in the future). Another post, this one by Jeremy, suggested that there was precious little information out there about variety-level nutritional information.

Well, I’ve now come across a paper that allows us to put some numbers on the amount of screening that has been done for one staple crop, the potato. There’s only an abstract freely available online, but a paper by CIP scientists reports (among other things) on micronutrient levels in native potato varieties in Peru:

Several studies have reported mineral concentrations in improved potatoes… However, limited information was available about the mineral concentration of potato germplasm and breeding materials until 2006. A detailed study was undertaken to determine the levels of Fe and Zn in 37 native varieties, both grown by farmers as well as from the collection under custody at CIP.

The potatoes were grown in a couple of different places. There was lots of variation, both genetic and due to the environment where they were grown, and also an interaction between these factors. And the heritability was high, suggesting that there is potential for improvement through selection and breeding.

But let’s remember that the total CIP potato collection amounts to over 7,500 accessions. That means that some 0.5% has been screened. A good start, but still only a start.

A famous Italian lentil

I spent the weekend in the Abruzzo region of Italy, which is kind of in the middle of the peninsula, both north-south and east-west. L’Aquila, the seat of the provincial government, is a couple of hours’ drive east of Rome. One of the places we visited was Santo Stefano di Sessanio, which is actually in the Gran Sasso National Park. It’s a pleasant enough medieval village, very well restored, though it has a whiff of Disneyland about it these days, especially in the summer.

Anyway, one of the many interesting things about this place is that it is famous for a particular kind of lentil — very small, tasty and apparently not needing to be soaked before cooking. And expensive. I don’t think the Lenticchia di Santo Stefano (photo below) has been protected like France’s Puy lentil, though.

dscf4746.JPG

Incidentally, I came across that last link purely by coincidence today. I was going to talk about the Santo Stefano lentil anyway, but then a Google alert sent me to a posting in the Cookthink blog which mentions an article in The New Yorker about the place where I work, and refers back to the earlier piece about lentils.

Wheats and gluten

Sometimes it takes some personal connection to get me motivated enough to try and understand something a little more fully. Laziness, I guess. Anyway, for example, I vaguely knew about the gluten seed storage proteins of wheat and the coeliac disease they cause in about 1% of the population. But I decided to delve a little deeper only when an old friend I hadn’t seen for a while visited today and told me that she was a sufferer, and that she needed to know how to describe the condition in italian so she wouldn’t get into trouble eating in restaurants here in Rome.

Having sorted that out, I was interested to know whether there are differences among wheat species in the “toxicity” of their glutens. You’ll remember that wheat comes in a polyploid series: diploid, tetraploids and hexaploids. And that three distinct genomes are involved: AA, BB and DD. Diploid einkorn (AA) and BB genome species got together to form tetraploid emmer and durum wheat (AABB). And these hybridized with wild diploid Triticum tauschii to make hexaploid (AABBDD) bread wheat.

It turns out that differences in gluten toxicity do exist. An analysis of the ancestral A, B and D genomes of wheat found that DNA sequences associated with 4 peptides that have been identified as triggering a response in coeliac patients are not distributed at random. For example, the B genome sequences analyzed did not reveal any of the “guilty” sequences.

On the basis of such insight, breeding strategies can be designed to generate less toxic varieties of wheat which may be tolerated by at least part of the [coelic disease] patient population.

Oh, and coeliac disease is called celiachia in italian.

Food composition

The new issue of the Journal of Food Composition and Analysis has reviews of food composition activities in both Latin America and Oceania. I only have access to the abstracts, but I know that in the Pacific a lot of attention is being paid to differences in nutrient composition among varieties of crops like banana, pandanus and giant swamp taro. This is something that might be of interest to the authors of a third paper in the same issue of the journal. They look at differences in micronutrient composition within different cereal species in Mali but fail to mention this varietal dimension. They ascribe the differences to climate and ecology — at least in the abstract. Important, of course, but surely not the whole story. I’m going to try to get hold of the paper.

LATER: So it looks like what they did is collect various different samples of fonio, say, in each of several distinct eco-geographic zones and pool the samples collected in each zone for analysis. Nothing in the paper about trying to collect material with similar varietal names or anything like that. So any differences due to environment will be confounded with genetic variation. Seems to me like an opportunity missed, at best.