Abstract
Slim amaranth (A. hybridus) having a C4 photosynthetic pathway with diverse variability is a climate-resilient crop that tolerates abiotic stresses. Owing to the high productivity of the C4 pathway, we have been searching for suitable accessions as preferable high-yielding antioxidant-enriched cultivars with ample bioactive compounds, or for future breeding programs to improve bioactive compounds as a source of natural antioxidants. Twelve slim amaranth accessions were tested for nutraceuticals, phytopigments, radical scavenging capacity (two different assays), vitamins, total flavonoids, and total polyphenols content. Slim amaranth leaves contained ample dietary fiber, protein, moisture, and carbohydrates. The current investigation demonstrated that there was remarkable K, Ca, Mg (8.86, 26.12, and 29.31), Fe, Mn, Cu, Zn, (1192.22, 275.42, 26.13, and 1069.93), TP, TF (201.36 and 135.70), pigments, such as chlorophyll a, ab, and b, (26.28, 38.02, and 11.72), betalains, betaxanthins, betacyanins (78.90, 39.36, 39.53,), vitamin C (1293.65), β-carotene, total carotenoids, (1242.25, 1641.07), and TA (DPPH, ABTS+) (27.58, 50.55) in slim amaranth leaves. The widespread variations were observed across the studied accessions. The slim amaranth accessions, AH11, AH10, and AH12, exhibited high profiles of antioxidants including high potentiality to quench radicals and can be selected as preferable high-yielding antioxidant-enriched cultivars with ample bioactive compounds. Phytopigments, flavonoids, vitamins, and phenolics of slim amaranth leaves showed intense activity of antioxidants. Slim amaranth could be a potential source of proximate phenolics, minerals, phytopigments, vitamins, and flavonoids for gaining adequate nutraceuticals, bioactive components, and potent antioxidants. Moderate yielding accessions having moderate phytochemicals can be used to develop new high-yielding antioxidant-enriched cultivars for future breeding programs to improve bioactive compounds as a source of natural antioxidants.
Keywords: slim amaranth, phytochemicals, nutrients, pigments, phenolics, antioxidants
1. Introduction
Amaranth is promising grains and vegetables with widespread divergence [1]. In Bangladesh, amaranth may be produced year-round, including in the leafy vegetable gaps, the periods of winter and summer [2,3]. It contains ample protein, including lysine and methionine, minerals, dietary fiber, bioactive pigments, and phytochemicals, including betacyanins and carotenoids betaxanthins, chlorophylls, ascorbic acids and β-carotene, phenolic profiles with sufficient antiradical activity [4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11]. Amaranths are used as folk medicine, especially antimicrobial, anticancer, antidiabetic, antimalarial, and snake antidotes [12].
Across the globe, the scarcity of calories and insecurity of foods results in malnourishment in 79.5 crores of people [13]. Approximately two crores of people are affected by hidden hunger because of the deficit in minerals or vitamins [14]. The principal energy source is the staple foods, although these include deficits of Fe, α-carotene, Zn, β-carotene, iodine, other carotenoids, ascorbic acid, and vitamin E [15]. Regular consumption of staple foods results in hidden hunger [14]. However, consuming staple foods, including vegetables and fruits, ensures a healthy diet with a balanced vitamin and mineral source. Phytochemical compounds, including vitamin C, phytopigments, and phenolic profiles, are believed to contribute to the promotion of health [16,17].
Recently, natural antioxidants from plant sources, especially vegetables, have attracted the attention of consumers and researchers. Leaf pigments (carotenoids, chlorophyll, betaxanthins, and betacyanins), vitamin C, flavonoids, and phenolics are accessible antioxidants in amaranths [4,18]. These bioactive compounds defend against numerous diseases, including cardiovascular diseases, atherosclerosis, emphysema, cancer, cataracts, arthritis, retinopathy, and degeneration of the neuron [18,19,20]. Amaranth can tolerate drought [21,22,23,24] and salinity [25,26,27,28].
Slim amaranth (A. hybridus) is the leafy vegetable of the C4 pathway of photosynthesis with diverse variability and phenotypic plasticity [29] and tolerates abiotic stresses and has many culinary uses. As a result of climate change, the world become warmer day by day. Amaranth may be the best crop for the next generation owing to the C4 pathway of photosynthesis as it increases productivity at a high light intensity and copes with the warmer climate. It originates from the Americas and is native to eastern North and Central America, parts of Mexico, and northern South America. It is widely dispersed worldwide, including Africa, India, Bangladesh, Australia, North and South America, South-East Asia, and Europe. The flavor, color, and taste of amaranth continuously enhance its popularity, and consumers’ acceptability in the Asian continent and around the globe [2].
The fleshy juvenile stem and leaves of slim amaranth are highly nutritious and mild-flavored, and can be consumed cooked or raw or as a substitute for spinach. It may be utilized to treat diarrhea, intestinal bleeding, excessive menstruation, etc. Slim amaranth leaves are used to make an astringent medical tea. It has abundant dietary fiber, minerals, protein, and health-promoting bioactive compounds. There is rare information on this species, albeit very little information on agronomic traits, minerals and proximate compositions of African, South and Central American cultivars of this species, which are available and represent different geographical locations to our Asian cultivars of this species. Furthermore, none of the studies were performed with well-designed experiments on well-recognized genotypes (with any identity, i.e., accession number or name) or cultivars of slim amaranth. There is no study on the proximate, nutrients, pigments, phytochemicals, or antioxidant potential of slim amaranth cultivars of the South Asian region at different geographical locations of the world. Earlier, we assessed different Amaranthus species other than slim amaranth for proximate, morphological, minerals, phytochemicals, and bioactive pigments [2,5,6,7,8,9,10]. It is the first report on unique pigments, such as betacyanins, carotenoids, betaxanthins, betalains, and β-carotene in slim amaranth, which make a vital contribution to the food industry as colorants of food products and antioxidants. It is also the first inclusive report on the nutraceuticals, phenolics, flavonoids, pigments, bioactive phytochemicals, and antioxidant potential of slim amaranth species. As slim amaranth is a climate-resilient crop and a source of diversified variability for morpho-nutritional, bioactive compounds along with antioxidant potential, we have been searching for suitability of these accessions as preferable high-yielding antioxidant-enriched cultivars, or for future breeding programs to improve bioactive compounds as a source of natural antioxidants. Hence, the present study was evaluated for details of nutraceuticals, phenolics, flavonoids, pigments, bioactive phytochemicals, and antioxidant potential in slim amaranth germplasms.
Therefore, the study was undertaken to achieve the following objectives:
-
(1)
To investigate nutraceuticals, phytopigments, bioactive phytochemicals, and the capacity to quench radicals in 12 slim amaranth accessions;
-
(2)
To evaluate the variations of these traits in 12 slim amaranth accessions;
-
(3)
To select appropriate accession(s) with superior capacity to quench radicals, including nutraceuticals, phytopigments, and bioactive phytochemicals for next-generation high-yielding antioxidant-enriched cultivars, or for future breeding programs to improve bioactive compounds of antioxidants from nature.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Experimental Materials
Seeds of 12 accessions of slim amaranth were collected from the Department of Genetics and Plant Breeding, Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman Agricultural University, Gazipur-1706, Bangladesh. The accession numbers of the germplasm are AH1, AH2, AH3, AH4, AH5, AH6, AH7, AH8, AH9, AH10, AH11, and AH12. All accessions have green leaves and stems with high but differential yield potential as leafy vegetables and belong to the same species Amaranthus hybridus. We grew 12 promising slim amaranth accessions to assess nutraceuticals, bioactive compounds, and activity to scavenge radicals.
2.2. Design and Layout
The research was implemented in 3 replications following a randomized complete block design (RCBD) at Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman Agricultural University. Individual accession was grown up in a 1 m2 plot using 5 cm and 20 cm plant and row spacing.
2.3. Intercultural Practices
First, 10 t/ha compost was applied during land preparation. Triple superphosphate, urea, gypsum, and murate of potash were applied at 100, 200, 30, and 150 kg/ha, respectively [2]. The spacing of plants in a row was maintained precisely by thinning. Hoeing and weeding were performed regularly to properly eradicate the weeds. Proper growth was maintained by providing regular irrigation in plots. The samples were collected from a 30-day old plant.
2.4. Solvent and Reagents
Solvent: Hexane, methanol, and acetone. Reagents: HClO4, cesium chloride, dithiothreitol (DTT), H2SO4, HNO3, ascorbic acid, Trolox, AlCl3 6H2O, gallic acid, rutin, Folin–Ciocalteu reagent, DPPH, ABTS+, 2,2-dipyridyl, Na2CO3, K acetate, and K persulfate.
2.5. Estimation of Proximate Composition
The ash, crude fat, moisture, fiber, protein, and gross energy were measured using the AOAC method. The Micro–Kjeldahl method was followed for nitrogen estimation [30]. Protein was estimated by multiplying nitrogen with 6.25 (AOAC method 976.05). The total protein, ash, moisture, and fat (%) were subtracted from 100 for an estimation of carbohydrate (g 100 g−1 FW). Gross energy was determined using a bomb calorimeter according to the ISO method 9831 [21].
2.6. Estimation of Mineral Composition
In an oven, slim amaranth leaves were dried at 70 °C for 24 h and ground in a mill. We determined Ca, K, Mg, Fe, Mn, Cu, and Zn from powdered leaves following the nitric-perchloric acid digestion method [31]. For this digestion, 400 mL HNO3 (65%), 10 mL H2SO4 (96%), and 40 mL HClO4 (70%) were added to the 0.5 g dried leaf sample in the presence of carborundum beads. We read the absorbance by atomic absorption spectrophotometry (AAS) (Hitachi, Tokyo, Japan) at wavelengths of 76 6.5 nm (K), 285.2 nm (Mg), 248.3 nm (Fe), 213.9 nm (Zn), 422.7 nm (Ca), 279.5 nm (Mn), 324.8 nm (Cu). Macro and microelements were calculated as mg g−1 and µg g−1, respectively.
2.7. Estimation of Chlorophylls and Carotenoids
Carotenoids and chlorophyll ab, b, and a were measured by extracting the samples in acetone (80%) [32]. The optical density was taken using a Hitachi spectrophotometer (Japan) at 646, 470, and 663 nm. Chlorophylls and carotenoids were measured as mg 100 g−1 and total µg g−1 of fresh weight.
2.8. Determination of Betacyanins and Betaxanthins
The samples were extracted in 80% MeOH comprising 50 mM AsA [33,34,35] to measure betaxanthins and betacyanins. The data were measured as µg of betanin and indicaxanthin equivalent to 100 g−1 of fresh weight for betacyanins and betaxanthins.
2.9. Estimation of Beta-Carotene
For the assessment of beta-carotene, we followed our previously described method [32]. Data were expressed as micrograms of beta-carotene per gram of fresh weight.
Beta-carotene = 7.6 (Abs. at 480) − 1.49 (Abs. at 510) × Final volume/(1000 × fresh weight of leaf) |
2.10. Estimation of Ascorbic Acid
A spectrophotometer (Hitachi, Tokyo, Japan) was set to determine dehydroascorbic acid (DHA) and ascorbic acid (AsA) from the fresh samples of a leaf. Dithiothreitol (DTT) was utilized to pre-incubate the sample. Dithiothreitol (DTT) reduced dehydroascorbic acid to ascorbic acid. As a result of the ascorbic acid reduction, a ferrous ion was formed from the ferric ion. 2,2-dipyridyl reacts to reduced ferrous ions to form complexes [32]. To estimate ascorbic acid, the absorbance of Fe2+ complexes with 2,2-dipyridyl was read at 525 nm using a spectrophotometric (Hitachi, Japan). The ascorbic acid was calculated in milligrams per 100 g of fresh weight.
2.11. Samples Extraction for TP, TF, and TAC Analysis
For TP, TF, and TAC determination, harvested 30-day-old leaves were extracted. The leaves were dried overnight and ground with a mortar and pestle. Leaf powder (0.25 g) was dissolved in 10 mL MeOH (90%) in a bottle capped tightly. Then it was placed in a water bath (Thomastant T-N22S, Thomas Kagaku Co. Ltd., Tokyo, Japan) with shaking. After 1 h, the extract was filtered for further analytical assays of TP, TF, and TAC.
2.12. Determination of TP
TP was determined using the Folin–Ciocalteu reagent [36]. The concentration of total phenolic compounds in leaf extracts was determined as μg g−1 of gallic acid equivalent using an equation (Y = 0.009X + 0.019) obtained from a standard gallic acid graph. Results are expressed as the μg g−1 gallic acid equivalent of dry weight (DW).
2.13. Estimation of Total Flavonoid Content
The aluminum chloride colorimetric method was used to estimate the total flavonoid content [37]. Rutin was used as a standard compound to make the standard graph (Y = 0.013X). Results are expressed as the μg g−1 rutin equivalent of dry weight (DW).
2.14. Radical Quenching Capacity Assay
The antioxidant activity was estimated by the diphenyl-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH) radical degradation method [36]. ABTS+ assay was carried out using the method of Khanam et al. [38]. The antioxidant activity was measured following the equation:
Antioxidant activity (%) = (Ab − As/Ab) × 100 |
where Ab is the absorbance of the control [150 μL methanol for TAC (ABTS, 10 μL methanol for TAC (DPPH)) instead of leaf extract] and As is the optical density of the test samples. The results were expressed as μg Trolox equivalent g−1 DW.
2.15. Statistical Analysis
Replication-wise data were averaged to obtain the replication mean. Statistix 8 software [39,40,41,42] was used to calculate ANOVA. Tukey’s HSD test was used to compare the mean at a 1% level of probability (p ≤ 0.01). The results were expressed as the mean ± SD.
3. Results and Discussion
ANOVA displayed a significant variation among treatments of traits. An extensive range of differences was also stated in agronomic traits of corn [43,44,45], paddy [46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60], lady’s finger [61,62,63], agronomic traits of coconut [64,65] and broccoli [66].
3.1. Composition of Proximate
The composition of the proximate of slim amaranth accessions is available in Table 1. AH10 showed the highest moisture (87.58), although AH8 and AH2 displayed the minimum moisture (83.49 and 83.52). The moisture was diverse from 83.49 to 87.58. As lower moisture ensured high dry mass, four accessions (16–17% dry matter) displayed sufficient dry mass. The maturity of the plant is directly associated with the moisture of slim amaranth leaves. The reports of sweet potato [67] and amaranth [21] were corroborated by the present results.
Table 1.
Energy (kcal per 100 g fresh weight, FW), dietary fiber (µg g−1 FW), and proximate (g per 100 g FW) of 12 slim amaranth accessions.
Accessions | Moisture | Protein | Fat | Carbohydrates | Energy | Ash | Dietary Fiber |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AH1 | 86.62 ± 1.62c | 3.25 ± 0.03b | 0.26 ± 0.02e | 7.59 ± 0.14f | 44.56 ± 0.58c | 2.28 ± 0.01j | 76.65 ± 0.43h |
AH2 | 83.52 ± 1.53h | 2.48 ± 0.03c | 0.41 ± 0.03a | 8.94 ± 0.12b | 45.14 ± 0.54b | 4.65 ± 0.02a | 82.43 ± 0.45e |
AH3 | 87.05 ± 1.06b | 3.63 ± 0.02b | 0.26 ± 0.02e | 6.11 ± 0.15i | 41.06 ± 0.54f | 2.95 ± 0.01h | 88.72 ± 0.48b |
AH4 | 86.92 ± 1.05c | 2.46 ± 0.04c | 0.31 ± 0.03c | 6.98 ± 0.19g | 36.27 ± 0.55j | 3.33 ± 0.02f | 87.64 ± 0.44c |
AH5 | 86.45 ± 1.18d | 1.83 ± 0.05d | 0.15 ± 0.02g | 8.89 ± 0.14c | 41.76 ± 0.58e | 2.68 ± 0.02i | 65.48 ± 0.42j |
AH6 | 85.55 ± 1.52f | 1.53 ± 0.05d | 0.31 ± 0.02c | 9.43 ± 0.13a | 42.98 ± 0.58d | 3.18 ± 0.03g | 77.82 ± 0.46g |
AH7 | 86.57 ± 1.46d | 1.53 ± 0.02d | 0.33 ± 0.02b | 8.16 ± 0.18e | 37.42 ± 0.51i | 3.41 ± 0.01e | 91.66 ± 0.42a |
AH8 | 83.49 ± 1.54h | 2.48 ± 0.05c | 0.43 ± 0.02a | 9.47 ± 0.13a | 45.15 ± 0.56b | 4.13 ± 0.02c | 80.55 ± 0.45f |
AH9 | 84.65 ± 1.34g | 2.47 ± 0.04c | 0.21 ± 0.02f | 9.02 ± 0.19b | 47.58 ± 0.56a | 3.65 ± 0.01d | 85.62 ± 0.48d |
AH10 | 87.58 ± 1.21a | 2.86 ± 0.04c | 0.28 ± 0.03d | 6.30 ± 0.16h | 38.42 ± 0.57h | 2.98 ± 0.01h | 73.52 ± 0.49i |
AH11 | 84.78 ± 1.46g | 1.55 ± 0.04d | 0.41 ± 0.03a | 8.71 ± 0.17d | 40.15 ± 0.52g | 4.55 ± 0.02b | 87.82 ± 0.45c |
AH12 | 86.24 ± 1.18e | 4.53 ± 0.04a | 0.20 ± 0.02f | 5.70 ± 0.10j | 43.14 ± 0.52d | 3.33 ± 0.02f | 61.25 ± 0.48k |
Mean | 85.79 | 2.55 | 0.30 | 7.94 | 41.97 | 3.43 | 79.93 |
CV% | 1.256 | 0.433 | 0.562 | 0.479 | 0.558 | 0.428 | 0.545 |
In each column, dissimilar letters are varied by Tukey’s HSD test significantly; Significant at 1% level; n = 3; CV, Coefficient of variation.
Slim amaranth leaves exhibited perceptible differences in protein. The accession AH12 displayed the maximum protein (4.53) although AH6 and AH7 displayed the lowest protein (1.53), which is statistically comparable to the accession AH11 and AH5. Four accessions achieved a better performance over the mean of protein values. The low-income public and vegetarians of low-income nations mostly depend on slim amaranth accessions as a source of protein. The protein of slim amaranth accessions (2.55) was superior to A. tricolor (1.26%) [2].
AH8 displayed the highest fat (0.43 g 100 g−1), which showed its statistical similarity to AH11 and AH2. AH5 had the minimum fat content (0.15) with an average of 0.30. Sarker and Oba [21] and Sun et al. [67] observed corroboratory findings in A. tricolor and sweet potato, respectively. They noticed that fat stimuli cell function upheld the temperature of the body and covered the organs. Fats displayed plentiful Ω-6 and Ω-3 fatty acids. Fats performed essential activities in the absorption and transportation of vitamins E, A, D, and K, and digestion. The accession AH8 and AH6 exhibited the highest carbohydrates content (9.47, 9.45), followed by AH9, AH2, AH5, and AH11. The carbohydrates were the lowest in AH12 (5.70) with an average of 7.94. The accession AH9 presented the maximum energy (47.58); thereafter AH8, AH2, AH1, AH6, and AH12, while the accession AH4 displayed the minimum energy (36.27) with an average of 41.97. AH2 revealed the maximum ash (4.65); thereafter AH11, AH8, and AH9, though AH1 unveiled the minimum ash content (2.28) with an average ash content of 3.43.
Notable variations were observed for dietary fiber in the 12 slim amaranth accessions studied. The accession AH7 disclosed the maximum dietary fiber (91.66); thereafter AH3, AH11, AH4, and AH9, though dietary fiber was the lowest in AH12 (61.25) with an average dietary fiber of 79.93. Dietary fiber played a significant role in the cure of digestibility, palatability, and constipation [6]. We observed that slim amaranth leaves had considerable protein, carbohydrates, dietary fiber, and moisture from the study. The findings of Sarker and Oba [21] corroborated the findings. The carbohydrates recorded in slim amaranth were much more pronounced than in red, green, and stem amaranth, A. spinosus, and A. blitum [68,69,70,71,72]. Conversely, slim amaranth protein was lower than red, green, and stem amaranth, A. spinosus, and A. blitum [68,69,70,71,72]. However, the moisture observed in slim amaranth was corroborative to red, green, and stem amaranth, A. spinosus, and A. blitum [68,69,70,71,72]. Slim amaranth dietary fiber was corroboratory to red amaranth [68] and was greater than green, stem amaranth, and A. blitum [70,71,72], although slim amaranth dietary fiber was lower than weedy amaranth [69].
3.2. Composition of Macroelements and Microelements
The macroelements and microelements of slim amaranth accessions are presented in Table 2. In the current study, K varied pronouncedly regarding accessions (5.86 to 10.46). AH1, AH11, AH9, and AH4 demonstrated high K, while AH5 demonstrated the minimum content of K, including the mean K of (8.86). K in six accessions was superior to the mean K. The Ca prominently differed regarding accessions (20.82 to 34.82). AH4, AH11, AH12, AH7, AH5, and AH6 demonstrated high Ca, whereas AH10 revealed the minimum Ca content, including the mean Ca content of 26.12. The Ca of seven accessions was more significant than their mean Ca. AH10 disclosed the maximum Mg (31.13) and AH1 disclosed the minimum Mg (24.51), including a mean Mg of (29.31). AH4, AH8, AH9, AH3, AH7, AH5, and AH2 had more significant Mg content. The Mg displayed the minimum variations regarding accessions (24.51 to 31.13). We noted ample Ca (26.12), K (8.86) and Mg (29.31) in the slim amaranth, although we estimated Ca on dry biomass. Our findings were corroborative of the results of A. lividus [73] and A. tricolor [21], respectively. Jimenez-Aguiar and Grusak [74] noted ample Ca, K, and Mg in several amaranth species. Additionally, they noticed that amaranth’s Mg, Ca, and K were much more prominent than in black spider flower, nightshade, kale, and spinach. In the current investigation, we found a much greater Ca, K, and Mg than the Ca, K, and Mg in the A. tricolor of Shukla et al. [75]. The Ca obtained from this study was more prominent than red morph amaranth of our previous studies [68], green morph amaranth [70], stem amaranth [71], and A. blitum [72], while those of weedy amaranth [69] were corroborative of our present findings. The K content of slim amaranth leaves was much more prominent than the K content of our previous studies of green morph amaranth [70] and weedy amaranth [69], while K content obtained from slim amaranth leaves was less than the K content of our earlier studies of red morph amaranth [68], stem amaranth [71], and A. blitum [72]. Mg noticed in slim amaranth leaves was corroborative of our previous findings of red morph amaranth [68], green morph amaranth [70], stem amaranth [71], A. spinosus [69], and A. blitum [72]. In contrast, Mg obtained from slim amaranth leaves was inferior to the Mg of our previous studies of A. viridis [69].
Table 2.
Minerals [Macroelements and microelements (mg g−1 DW and µg g−1 DW)] of 12 slim amaranth accessions.
Accessions | Macroelements | Microelements | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
K | Ca | Mg | Fe | Mn | Cu | Zn | |
AH1 | 10.75 ± 0.05a | 24.82 ± 0.06e | 24.51 ± 0.24f | 1472.26 ± 0.58b | 351.39 ± 0.25a | 16.03 ± 0.06j | 901.11 ± 0.35j |
AH2 | 10.21 ± 0.05e | 21.62 ± 0.05g | 29.26 ± 0.16d | 980.00 ± 0.62h | 244.14 ± 0.28i | 26.36 ± 0.03f | 1040.21 ± 0.34d |
AH3 | 7.27 ± 0.04j | 27.22 ± 0.04c | 28.95 ± 0.21d | 1020.57 ± 0.58g | 309.23 ± 0.24d | 20.06 ± 0.05i | 992.12 ± 0.39g |
AH4 | 10.24 ± 0.06d | 34.82 ± 0.04a | 30.51 ± 0.17b | 1055.33 ± 0.59e | 192.19 ± 0.26j | 24.02 ± 0.04h | 841.44 ± 0.32k |
AH5 | 5.86 ± 0.05k | 26.42 ± 0.04d | 29.26 ± 0.21d | 902.95 ± 0.46i | 283.14 ± 0.21g | 26.06 ± 0.04g | 1001.88 ± 0.38f |
AH6 | 9.49 ± 0.06f | 26.42 ± 0.05d | 29.88 ± 0.18c | 783.30 ± 0.52k | 316.31 ± 0.26c | 29.35 ± 0.04c | 1702.95 ± 0.39a |
AH7 | 7.46 ± 0.04i | 26.42 ± 0.06d | 29.26 ± 0.18d | 882.28 ± 0.49j | 176.49 ± 0.21k | 20.09 ± 0.06i | 1020.62 ± 0.38e |
AH8 | 7.83 ± 0.06h | 24.02 ± 0.05f | 30.51 ± 0.15b | 1176.16 ± 0.58d | 245.96 ± 0.24i | 28.12 ± 0.03e | 1102.38 ± 0.37c |
AH9 | 10.46 ± 0.04c | 24.82 ± 0.04e | 29.88 ± 0.20c | 904.90 ± 0.51i | 332.64 ± 0.22b | 29.08 ± 0.04d | 980.45 ± 0.32h |
AH10 | 8.50 ± 0.04g | 20.82 ± 0.06h | 31.13 ± 0.16a | 1393.34 ± 0.56c | 295.16 ± 0.24e | 24.12 ± 0.05h | 1000.44 ± 0.36f |
AH11 | 10.69 ± 0.05b | 28.02 ± 0.05b | 29.88 ± 0.23c | 1048.82 ± 0.51f | 291.83 ± 0.28f | 32.19 ± 0.06b | 1304.92 ± 0.34b |
AH12 | 7.55 ± 0.05i | 28.02 ± 0.05b | 28.63 ± 0.15e | 1486.72 ± 0.58a | 266.59 ± 0.24h | 38.10 ± 0.04a | 950.60 ± 0.37i |
Mean | 8.86 | 26.12 | 29.31 | 1092.22 | 275.42 | 26.13 | 1069.93 |
CV% | 2.358 | 1.368 | 1.554 | 0.673 | 0.588 | 0.872 | 0.248 |
In each column, dissimilar letters are varied by Tukey’s HSD test significantly; Significant at 1% level; n = 3; CV, Coefficient of variation.
The Fe displayed predominant differences regarding accessions (783.30 in AH6 to 1486.72 in AH12). AH1, AH10, and AH8 demonstrated high Fe content. Alternatively, AH6 showed the minimum Fe content, including the mean Fe content of 1092.22. Four accessions displayed more significant Fe than their mean Fe. The Mn range was diverse, from 176.49 to 351.39, including the mean Mn of 275.42. AH1, AH9, AH6, and AH3 demonstrated high Mn, whereas the minimum Mn was observed in AH7 (176.49). The Cu showed ample variability regarding accessions (20.06 to 38.10). AH12 displayed the maximum Cu (38.10); thereafter AH11, AH6, and AH9. Five accessions had more prominent Cu than the mean value. The accessions differed prominently regarding Zn (841.44 (AH4) to 1702.95 (AH6). Three accessions had more prominent Zn than the mean Zn of (1069.93). Slim amaranth leaves contained ample Fe and Zn compared to cassava [76] and beach pea [77]. We noted ample Mn (275.42), Fe (1092.22), Zn (1069.93), and Cu (26.13) in A. hybridus, although we calculated them based on the dry weight. In literature [74], adequate Mn, Fe, Zn, and Cu was found in several amaranth species. Furthermore, they reported that there was a greater preponderance of Mn, Fe, Zn, and Cu in amaranth than in black nightshade, spinach, kale, and spider flower. Our obtained Mn, Fe, Zn, and Cu content was much greater than the Mn, Fe, Zn, and Cu content of several amaranth species [74]. In the current investigation, Mn, Fe, Zn, and Cu in slim amaranth were corroborated by the findings of A. tricolor [21]. Fe content observed in our study was much superior to A. spinosus [69] and inferior to A. viridis, stem amaranth, and A. blitum [69,71,72]. Although Fe in slim amaranth was corroborative of that in red and green morph amaranth [68,69]. The Mn content noticed in our study was much superior to that in red, weedy, stem amaranth, and A. blitum [68,69,71,72], though the present findings of Mn were corroborative of green morph amaranth [70]. The Cu content found in the present study was much better than that found in red and green amaranth and A. spinosus [68,69,70], although slim amaranth Cu content was corroborative of stem amaranth and A. blitum [71,72]. Slim amaranth Zn content was superior to that in red and stem amaranth and A. blitum [68,71,72]. It corroborated with the Zn contents of green amaranth [70], although slim amaranth Zn content was less than that in weedy amaranth [69].
3.3. Bioactive Phytopigments
Table 3 shows the pigments of slim amaranth accessions. Chlorophyll a displayed significant and notable variations (12.63 to 47.55). AH8 disclosed the highest chlorophyll a (47.55), whereas the lowest chlorophyll a was recorded in AH6 (12.63). The accessions AH1, AH10, and AH11 showed high chlorophyll a. Four accessions disclosed higher chlorophyll a than the grand mean. Comparable to chlorophyll a, chlorophyll b also demonstrated significant and marked differences across accessions (5.47 to 27.22) in 12 slim amaranth accessions. AH8 displayed the highest chlorophyll b (27.22); thereafter AH10, AH11, and AH1. Contrariwise, AH6 had the minimum chlorophyll b (5.47). Chlorophyll ab had shown significant differences (18.12 to 74.80). AH1, AH10, and AH11 exhibited high chlorophyll ab. AH8 revealed the highest chlorophyll ab; however, AH6 displayed the lowest chlorophyll ab (18.12). Four accessions showed higher chlorophyll ab than the mean values. The notable chlorophyll ab, a, and b (38.02, 26.28, and 11.72) were obtained from slim amaranth; however, in literature [78], comparatively lower chlorophyll was observed in A. tricolor. Chlorophyll a, ab, and b in slim amaranth accessions were much superior to Chlorophyll a, ab, and b of green amaranth [70], although inferior to red, stem, weedy amaranth, and A. blitum [68,69,71,72].
Table 3.
The performance of phytopigments in 12 slim amaranth accessions.
Accessions | Chlorophyll a | Chlorophyll b | Chlorophyll ab | Betacyanins | Betaxanthins | Betalains | Total Carotenoids |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AH1 | 38.48 ± 0.06b | 13.60 ± 0.04d | 52.11 ± 0.14b | 28.75 ± 0.21e | 28.23 ± 0.16e | 57.10 ± 0.21e | 1538.28 ± 1.52e |
AH2 | 25.44 ± 0.08e | 9.23 ± 0.04h | 34.70 ± 0.15g | 22.67 ± 0.19h | 25.35 ± 0.19g | 48.03 ± 0.24h | 1641.07 ± 1.53a |
AH3 | 16.17 ± 0.07i | 6.68 ± 0.05 j | 22.88 ± 0.12j | 24.62 ± 0.22g | 26.77 ± 0.21f | 51.40 ± 0.24g | 721.51 ± 1.38j |
AH4 | 23.47 ± 0.08g | 7.65 ± 0.06i | 31.15 ± 0.16h | 17.57 ± 0.23j | 18.57 ± 0.16i | 36.14 ± 0.28j | 1492.79 ± 1.27f |
AH5 | 24.28 ± 0.08f | 10.78 ± 0.06f | 35.08 ± 0.16f | 21.46 ± 0.26i | 23.80 ± 0.21h | 45.27 ± 0.22i | 1314.34 ± 1.48g |
AH6 | 12.63 ± 0.07k | 5.47 ± 0.05k | 18.12 ± 0.14k | 34.13 ± 0.22c | 34.62 ± 0.22c | 68.75 ± 0.28c | 696.24 ± 1.25k |
AH7 | 23.60 ± 0.06g | 12.73 ± 0.06e | 36.36 ± 0.17e | 16.56 ± 0.25k | 16.59 ± 0.23j | 33.16 ± 0.22k | 1635.56 ± 1.23b |
AH8 | 47.55 ± 0.08a | 27.22 ± 0.06a | 74.80 ± 0.15a | 27.88 ± 0.25f | 28.33 ± 0.22e | 56.22 ± 0.22f | 748.24 ± 1.46i |
AH9 | 15.78 ± 0.08j | 6.57 ± 0.05j | 22.38 ± 0.13j | 31.28 ± 0.25d | 32.13 ± 0.19d | 63.43 ± 0.25d | 1583.61 ± 1.25d |
AH10 | 35.88 ± 0.06c | 15.84 ± 0.06b | 51.74 ± 0.15c | 35.43 ± 0.24b | 35.66 ± 0.16b | 71.09 ± 0.21b | 484.33 ± 1.54l |
AH11 | 34.48 ± 0.07d | 15.25 ± 0.05c | 49.76 ± 0.15d | 39.36 ± 0.26a | 39.53 ± 0.16a | 78.90 ± 0.23a | 1145.78 ± 1.32h |
AH12 | 17.58 ± 0.08h | 9.56 ± 0.04g | 27.15 ± 0.19i | 13.55 ± 0.26l | 12.84 ± 0.21k | 26.41 ± 0.21l | 1631.77 ± 1.32c |
Mean | 26.28 | 11.72 | 38.02 | 26.11 | 26.87 | 52.99 | 1219.46 |
CV% | 4.535 | 2.365 | 3.366 | 3.425 | 2.418 | 3.624 | 5.452 |
In each column, dissimilar letters are varied by Tukey’s HSD test significantly; Significant at 1% level; n = 3; CV, Coefficient of variation.
Betacyanins demonstrated prominent variability regarding accessions (13.35 to 39.36), including mean betacyanins of 26.11. AH11 showed the maximum betacyanins (39.36), and AH10, AH6, and AH9 demonstrated good betacyanins. In contrast, AH12 demonstrated the minimum betacyanins (13.55). Within accessions, prominent variability was noted in betaxanthins (12.84 to 39.53). The betaxanthins were the maximum in AH11 (39.53). AH10, AH6, and AH9 demonstrated good betaxanthins. Alternately, AH12 demonstrated the minimum betaxanthins (12.84). Five accessions displayed prominent betaxanthins, which were superior to mean betaxanthins. Betalains varied prominently and progressively regarding accessions (26.41 to 78.90). AH11 demonstrated the maximum betalains (78.90). AH10, AH6, and AH9 revealed good content of betalains. At the same time, AH12 showed the minimum betalains (26.41). Six accessions had many betalains, which were superior to the mean betalains. Total carotenoids varied progressively regarding accessions (484.33 in AH10 to 1641.07 in AH2). AH2 demonstrated the maximum total carotenoids (1641.07). Similarly, AH7, AH12, and AH9 demonstrated good total carotenoids. Seven accessions showed high total carotenoids, which was superior to the mean total carotenoids. In the current investigation, we noted marked betaxanthins (39.53), betacyanins (39.36), total carotenoids (1641.07), and betalains (78.90) in the slim amaranth; these findings of betaxanthin, total carotenoids, betalains, and betacyanins were corroborative to the findings of A. tricolor [78]. The recorded total carotenoid content was much more distinct than the total carotenoids in amaranth [78] and Raju et al. [79]. Betalains, betacyanins, and betaxanthins in slim amaranth were much more preponderant than betalains, betacyanins, and betaxanthins in green and stem [70,71]. At the same time, the pigments were inferior to red, weedy amaranth, and A. blitum [68,69,72]. Total carotenoids of slim amaranth were much superior to the total carotenoids of green and weedy amaranth, and A. blitum [68,69,72]. In contrast, the total carotenoid content of slim amaranth was corroborative of red and stem amaranth [68,71]. The accessions AH8, AH10, and AH1 had abundant chlorophyll a, ab, and b, while the accession AH11, AH10, and AH6 had abundant betacyanins, betaxanthins, betalains, and the accessions AH2, AH7, and AH12 had abundant total carotenoids content as well as the slim amaranth having significant scavenging activity of radicals [80]. The incidence of high betalains, betacyanins, chlorophylls, betaxanthins, and total carotenoids in slim amaranth AH11, AH8, AH10, AH1, AH6, AH2, AH7, and AH12 may make an indispensable contribution to the ROS detoxification of the human body. Hence, these components may prevent many deteriorating human diseases and act as an antiaging agent [18,33] that demands detailed pharmacological study.
3.4. Bioactive Components and Radical Scavenging Potentiality
Table 4 shows the TA, vitamins, TF, and TP of slim amaranth accessions. β-carotene was progressively varied regarding accessions (365.27 in AH10 to 1242.25 in AH7). AH7 demonstrated the maximum β-carotene content (1242.25), which was statistically similar to AH2 (1240.36) and AH12 (1241.65). AH9, AH1, and AH4 demonstrated good content of β-carotene. The β-carotene of six accessions was superior to the mean β-carotene. The ascorbic acid varied progressively regarding accessions (98.67 in AH11 to 1293.65 in AH5), including the mean ascorbic acid of 693.56. The ascorbic acid of six accessions was superior to the mean ascorbic acid. The accessions AH7, AH6, AH3, AH1, and AH10 displayed good ascorbic acid. Total polyphenols (TP) prominently differed regarding accessions [69.75 (AH8) to 201.36 (AH9)], including the mean value of TP (138.96). AH9 demonstrated the maximum TP. AH10, AH11, AH7, AH2, and AH1 demonstrated good TP. The TP of five accessions was superior to the mean TP. TF showed much notable variability regarding accessions (46.03 in AH4 to 135.70 in AH10). The mean value of TF was 91.94. AH10 demonstrated the maximum TF showing order: AH10 ˃ AH11 ˃ AH9 ˃ AH1. The TF of five accessions was superior to the mean TF. The total antioxidant activity (TA in DPPH) progressively varied regarding accessions [8.94 (AH9) to 27.58 (AH11)]. AH11 demonstrated the maximum TA. The high TA was recorded in AH10, AH12, and AH3. On the contrary, AH9 presented the minimum TA including the mean TA of 15.24. The TA of four accessions displayed superiority over the mean TA. The total antioxidant activity (TA in ABTS+) prominently varied regarding accessions [14.67 (AH9) to 50.55 (AH11)]. AH11 demonstrated the maximum TA. The high TA was noted in AH10, AH12, and AH7. Conversely, TA was at a minimum in AH9 including the mean of TA of 28.57. The TA of four accessions was superior to the mean TA. The beta-carotene of slim amaranth was superior to that in red, weedy, stem amaranth, and A. blitum [68,69,71,72]. Slim amaranth ascorbic acid was superior to that of green weedy and stem amaranth [69,70,71] and lower than in red amaranth and A. blitum [68,72]. TP was superior to A. blitum [72], though it was inferior to red and stem amaranth [68,71]. Total flavonoids in slim amaranth were superior to weedy amaranth [69] and corroborative of green amaranth [70]. In contrast, slim amaranth leaves’ TF content was inferior to red, stem, amaranth, and A. blitum [68,71,72]. The antioxidant capacity (DPPH and ABTS+) of slim amaranth was superior to the survey of green amaranth [70]. In contrast, the TA content of slim amaranth leaves in DPPH and ABTS+ was inferior to that of red morph, weedy and stem amaranth, and A. blitum [68,69,71,72].
Table 4.
The performance of β-carotene, TP, TF, vitamin C, TA (DPPH and ABTS+) of 12 slim amaranth accessions.
Accessions | β-Carotene | Vitamin C | TP (GAE) | TF | TA (DPPH) | TA (ABTS+) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AH1 | 1165.23 ± 1.44c | 805.66 ± 1.15e | 136.28 ± 0.27f | 108.38 ± 0.16d | 14.85 ± 0.15e | 27.75 ± 0.06e |
AH2 | 1240.36 ± 1.66a | 308.26 ± 1.26h | 156.21 ± 0.22e | 62.54 ± 0.15k | 10.18 ± 0.16i | 18.03 ± 0.05k |
AH3 | 551.72 ± 1.24h | 924.22 ± 1.24d | 104.25 ± 0.25j | 72.65 ± 0.15i | 15.55 ± 0.18d | 26.06 ± 0.04g |
AH4 | 1137.48 ± 1.11d | 431.57 ± 1.16g | 98.52 ± 0.24k | 46.03 ± 0.14l | 13.35 ± 0.16f | 25.95 ± 0.05h |
AH5 | 997.22 ± 1.24e | 1293.65 ± 1.22a | 135.29 ± 0.24g | 94.34 ± 0.19f | 12.78 ± 0.15g | 22.89 ± 0.04j |
AH6 | 530.22 ± 1.29i | 985.68 ± 1.18c | 112.42 ± 0.34i | 85.27 ± 0.12g | 11.62 ± 0.18h | 24.72 ± 0.03i |
AH7 | 1242.25 ± 1.19a | 1047.54 ± 1.28b | 165.24 ± 0.26d | 105.64 ± 0.15e | 13.35 ± 0.21f | 28.95 ± 0.06d |
AH8 | 562.92 ± 1.35g | 1047.22 ± 1.29b | 69.75 ± 0.26l | 65.39 ± 0.15j | 14.31 ± 0.19e | 27.75 ± 0.06f |
AH9 | 1206.55 ± 1.35b | 616.52 ± 1.28f | 201.36 ± 0.25a | 124.38 ± 0.23c | 8.94 ± 0.12j | 14.67 ± 0.05l |
AH10 | 365.27 ± 1.29j | 616.11 ± 1.39f | 196.77 ± 0.25b | 135.7 ± 0.16a | 24.28 ± 0.22b | 44.38 ± 0.05b |
AH11 | 868.27 ± 1.22f | 98.67 ± 1.29j | 175.27 ± 0.29c | 127.34 ± 0.19b | 27.58 ± 0.22a | 50.55 ± 0.04a |
AH12 | 1241.65 ± 1.32a | 147.64 ± 1.19i | 116.10 ± 0.27h | 75.64 ± 0.12h | 16.14 ± 0.14c | 31.17 ± 0.05c |
Mean | 925.76 | 693.56 | 138.96 | 91.94 | 15.24 | 28.57 |
CV% | 3.754 | 1.426 | 2.234 | 0.362 | 0.265 | 0.625 |
In each column, dissimilar letters are varied by Tukey’s HSD test significantly; Significant at 1% level; n = 3; TF, Total flavonoid content; CV, Coefficient of variation; TP, Total polyphenol content; TA, Total antioxidant capacity.
We found remarkable amounts of β-carotene (1242.25) and ascorbic acid (1293.65) in slim amaranth which was comparatively superior to A. tricolor [10]. TP (201.36) was also found to be higher than the literature values [38] in A. tricolor. TF (135.70), TA (DPPH) (27.58), and TA (ABTS+) (50.55) were supported by the earlier findings of A. tricolor [38]. The accessions AH11 and AH10 exhibited a high scavenging activity of radicals, including flavonoids, phenolics, color pigments, and vitamins. The accession AH12 had a high scavenging activity of radicals, including flavonoids, phenolics, total carotenoids, β-carotene, and vitamins. These three accessions had a high scavenging activity of radicals, including flavonoids, phenolics, total carotenoids, β-carotene, and vitamins. Slim amaranth leaves had ample nutraceuticals, phytopigments, bioactive phytochemicals and antioxidants, and presented enormous opportunities for nourishing nutraceuticals and phytopigments bioactive phytochemicals, and antioxidant-deficient communities. Hence, three slim amaranth accessions, AH11, AH10, and AH12, can be selected as preferable high-yielding antioxidant-enriched cultivars with ample bioactive compounds that offer huge prospects for detailed pharmacological study. The data from slim amaranth accessions could make a significant contribution to scientists, nutritionists, and pharmacologists. Moderate yielding accessions that have moderate phytochemicals can be used to develop new high-yielding antioxidant-enriched cultivars for future breeding programs to improve bioactive compounds as a source of natural antioxidants.
3.5. The Correlation Studies
The associations of the biochemicals in slim amaranth accessions are shown in Table 5. The correlation coefficient values in Table 5 showed encouraging results. TA (DPPH), betacyanins, chlorophyll ab, betaxanthins, chlorophyll a, betalains, TA (ABTS+), chlorophyll b and TF exhibited significant positive associations among them. The literature on A. tricolor [21] also supports the current findings. Likewise, betalains, betaxanthins, and betacyanins displayed significant positive associations with TA (ABTS+), TF, chlorophylls, TA (DPPH), and TP [21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28], indicating that the direct increment of any leaf pigment was closely associated with pigments. The positive and significant correlations of TA (DPPH), pigments, TA (ABTS+), TP and TF indicate that pigments displayed a strong capacity to quench radicals. β-Carotene and total carotenoids (TC) established negative and significant relationships with pigments. In contrast, these parameters displayed positive and significant relationships with TP, TA (ABTS+) and TA (DPPH), and TF [21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28]. The increment of pigment displayed a drastic decline in TC and β-carotene. Significant positive relationships of β-carotene and TC with TP, TA (ABTS+ and DPPH), and TF recommended that β-carotene and TC displayed a strong capacity to quench radicals which were corroborative of the previous amaranths [81,82,83]. β-carotene and TC were associated positively among them. Contrariwise, negligible and insignificant correlations were noted across vitamin C and the rest of the parameters, representing no role in slim amaranth antioxidant activity which was corroborative of an earlier study [74]. TP, TA (ABTS+ and DPPH) and TF displayed positive and significant relationships across them; pigments and vitamins showed the participation of antioxidant activity along with flavonoids and phenolics. Correlations of slim amaranth revealed that phytopigments, nutraceuticals and bioactive phytochemicals displayed a significant contribution to the antioxidant capacity of slim amaranth.
Table 5.
The interrelationships for pigments, β-carotene, ascorbic acid, TP, TF, TA (DPPH and ABTS) in 12 selected slim amaranth accessions.
Traits | Ch b | Ch ab | BC | BX | BL | T-car | β-Car | AsA | TP | TF | TA (DPPH) | TA (ABTS) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ch a | 0.85 ** | 0.87 ** | 0.76 ** | 0.76 ** | 0.78 ** | −0.76 ** | −0.87 ** | −0.02 | 0.77 ** | 0.86 ** | 0.89 ** | 0.86 ** |
Ch b | 0.85 ** | 0.77 ** | 0.86 ** | 0.77 ** | −0.78 ** | −0.84 ** | −0.04 | 0.78 ** | 0.78 ** | 0.87 ** | 0.88 ** | |
Ch ab | 0.73 ** | 0.79 ** | 0.76 ** | −0.74 ** | −0.81 ** | −0.03 | 0.79 ** | 0.89 ** | 0.85 ** | 0.86 ** | ||
BC | 0.83 ** | 0.86 ** | −0.85 ** | −0.78 ** | −0.14 | 0.76 ** | 0.86 ** | 0.78 ** | 0.89 ** | |||
BX | 0.93 ** | −0.78 ** | −0.76 ** | −0.16 | 0.75 ** | 0.86 ** | 0.86 ** | 0.87 ** | ||||
BL | −0.75 ** | −0.78 ** | −0.18 | 0.76 ** | 0.84 ** | 0.77 ** | 0.86 ** | |||||
T-car | 0.89 ** | −0.16 | 0.72 ** | 0.88 ** | 0.86 ** | 0.88 ** | ||||||
β-Car | −0.19 | 0.71 * | 0.84 ** | 0.88 ** | 0.87 ** | |||||||
AsA | 0.07 | 0.08 | 0.09 | 0.19 | ||||||||
TP | 0.77 ** | 0.88 ** | 0.96 ** | |||||||||
TF | 0.89 ** | 0.92 ** | ||||||||||
TA (DPPH) | 0.96 ** |
BC, betacyanins; Ch a, Chlorophyll a; Ch b, Chlorophyll b; BX, betaxanthins; BL, betalains; Ch ab, Chlorophyll ab; T-car, total carotenoids, β-Car, β-Carotene; TF, Total flavonoid content; AsA, ascorbic acid; TP, Total polyphenol content; TA, total antioxidant capacity; *,** Significant at 5% and 1% level.
4. Conclusions
Slim amaranth leaves contained ample K, Fe, Ca, Cu, Mg, Mn, Zn, chlorophyll, ascorbic acid, betacyanins, β-carotene, betaxanthins, TA, betalains, carotenoids, protein, digestive fiber, TP, carbohydrates, and TF. Hence, slim amaranth can be utilized as a possible source of pigments, β-carotene, vitamin C, phenolics, nutraceuticals and flavonoids in a regular diet, gaining nutraceuticals and antioxidants sufficiency. The accessions AH11 and AH10 had a high activity for scavenging radicals with flavonoids, phenolics, phytopigments and vitamins. The accession AH12 had a high scavenging activity of radicals with flavonoids, phenolics, total carotenoids, β-carotene, and vitamins. These three accessions had a high activity for scavenging radicals, including flavonoids, phenolics, total carotenoids, β-carotene and vitamins; these can be selected as preferable high-yielding antioxidant-enriched cultivars with ample bioactive compounds and offer huge prospects for detailed pharmacological study. A correlation study revealed that the phenolics, vitamins, flavonoids, and phytopigments of slim amaranth displayed intense activity to scavenge radicals. Slim amaranth could be a potential source of proximate phenolics, minerals, phytopigments, vitamins, and flavonoids for gaining adequate nutraceuticals, bioactive components, and potent antioxidants. The data from slim amaranth accessions could make a significant contribution to scientists, nutritionists, and pharmacologists. Moderate yielding accessions that have moderate phytochemicals can be used to develop new high-yielding antioxidant-enriched cultivars for future breeding programs to improve bioactive compounds as a source of natural antioxidants.
Acknowledgments
For supporting the research work, the authors acknowledged the Department of Genetics and Plant Breeding, Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman Agricultural University, Gazipur 1706, Bangladesh. The authors would like to extend their sincere appreciation to the Researchers Supporting Project number (TURSP-2020/53), Taif University, Taif, Saudi Arabia.
Author Contributions
Conceptualization, U.S.; methodology, U.S.; software, U.S.; validation, U.S., S.O., W.F.A. and A.G.; formal analysis, U.S.; investigation, U.S., resources, U.S.; data curation, U.S.; writing–original draft preparation, U.S.; writing–review and editing, U.S., S.O., W.F.A. and A.G.; visualization, U.S.; supervision, U.S.; project administration, W.F.A., A.G.; funding acquisition, W.F.A. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Institutional Review Board Statement
Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement
Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement
Data is contained within the article.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Funding Statement
The current work was funded by the Department of Genetics and Plant Breeding, the Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman Agricultural University, Gazipur 1706, Bangladesh. The study was also partially supported by the Researchers Supporting Project number (TURSP-2020/53), Taif University, Taif, Saudi Arabia.
Footnotes
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
References
- 1.Das S. Amaranthus: A Promising Crop of Future. Springer; Singapore: 2016. Amaranths: The Crop of Great Prospect; pp. 13–48. [Google Scholar]
- 2.Sarker U., Islam M.T., Rabbani M.G., Oba S. Variability, heritability and genetic association in vegetable amaranth. Span. J. Agril. Res. 2015;13:0702. doi: 10.5424/sjar/2015132-6843. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Sarker U., Islam M.T., Rabbani M.G., Oba S. Variability in Composition of Vitamins and Mineral Antioxidants in Vegetable Amaranth. Genetika. 2015;47:85–96. doi: 10.2298/GENSR1501085S. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Venskutonis P.R., Kraujalis P. Nutritional Components of Amaranth Seeds and Vegetables: A Review on Composition, Properties, and Uses. Comp. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 2013;12:381–412. doi: 10.1111/1541-4337.12021. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Sarker U., Islam M.T., Rabbani M.G., Oba S. Genotypic Variability for Nutrient, Antioxidant, Yield and Yield Contributing Traits in Vegetable Amaranth. J. Food Agric. Environ. 2014;12:168–174. [Google Scholar]
- 6.Sarker U., Islam M.T., Rabbani M.G., Oba S. Genetic Variation and Interrelationships among Antioxidant, Quality, and Agronomic Traits in Vegetable Amaranth. Turk. J. Agric. For. 2016;40:526–535. doi: 10.3906/tar-1405-83. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Sarker U., Islam M.T., Rabbani M.G., Oba S. Genotypic Diversity in Vegetable Amaranth for Antioxidant, Nutrient and Agronomic Traits. Indian J. Genet. Pl. Breed. 2017;77:173–176. doi: 10.5958/0975-6906.2017.00025.6. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Sarker U., Islam M.T., Rabbani M.G., Oba S. Variability in Total Antioxidant Capacity, Antioxidant Leaf Pigments and Foliage Yield of Vegetable Amaranth. J. Integr. Agric. 2018;17:1145–1153. doi: 10.1016/S2095-3119(17)61778-7. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Sarker U., Islam M.T., Rabbani M.G., Oba S. Antioxidant Leaf Pigments and Variability in Vegetable Amaranth. Genetika. 2018;50:209–220. doi: 10.2298/GENSR1801209S. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Sarker U., Islam M.T., Rabbani M.G., Oba S. Phenotypic Divergence in Vegetable Amaranth for Total Antioxidant Capacity, Antioxidant Profile, Dietary Fiber, Nutritional and Agronomic Traits. Acta Agric. Scand. Sect. B—Soil Plant Sci. 2018;68:67–76. doi: 10.1080/09064710.2017.1367029. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Sarker U., Lin Y.P., Oba S., Yoshioka Y., Ken H. Prospects and potentials of underutilized leafy Amaranths as vegetable use for health-promotion. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 2022;182:104–123. doi: 10.1016/j.plaphy.2022.04.011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Al-Mamun M.A., Husna J., Khatun M., Hasan R., Kamruzzaman M., Hoque K.M.F., Reza M.A., Ferdousi Z. Assessment of Antioxidant, Anticancer and Antimicrobial Activity of Two Vegetable Species of Amaranthus in Bangladesh. BMC Complement. Altern. Med. 2016;16:157. doi: 10.1186/s12906-016-1130-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.FAO. IFAD. WFP The State of Food Security in The World 2015. Meeting the 2015 International Hunger Targets: Taking Stock of Uneven Progress. 2015. [(accessed on 3 March 2020)]. Available online: http://www.fao.org/3/a-i4646e.pdf. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
- 14.Von Grebmer K., Saltzman A., Birol E., Wiesmann D., Prasai N., Yin S., Yohannes Y., Menon P., Thompson J., Sonntag A. 2014 Global Hunger Index: The Challenge of Hidden Hunger. Welthungerhilfe; Bonn, Germany: International Food Policy Research Institute; Washington, DC, USA: Concern Worldwide; Dublin, Ireland: 2014. [Google Scholar]
- 15.Afari-Sefa V., Tenkouano A., Ojiewo C.O., Keatinge J.D.H., Hughes J.D.A. Vegetable Breeding in Africa: Constraints, Complexity, and Contributions Toward Achieving Food and Nutritional Security. Food Secur. 2011;4:115–127. doi: 10.1007/s12571-011-0158-8. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Isabelle M., Lee B.L., Lim M.T., Koh W.P., Huang D., Ong C.N. Antioxidant Activity and Profiles of Common Fruits in Singapore. Food Chem. 2010;123:77–84. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2010.04.002. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Randhawa M.A., Khan A.A., Javed M.S., Sajid M.W. Green Leafy Vegetables: A health-promoting source. In: Watson R.R., editor. Handbook of Fertility. Academic Press; San Diego, CA, USA: 2015. pp. 205–220. [Google Scholar]
- 18.Repo-Carrasco-Valencia R., Hellstrom J.K., Philava J.M., Mattila P.H. Flavonoids and Other Phenolic Compounds in Andean Indigenous Grains: Quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa), Kaniwa (Chenopodium pallidicaule) and Kiwicha (Amaranthus caudatus) Food Chem. 2010;120:128–133. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2009.09.087. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Dusgupta N., De B. Antioxidant Activity of Some Leafy Vegetables of India: A Comparative Study. Food Chem. 2007;101:471–474. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2006.02.003. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Steffensen S.K., Rinnan Å., Mortensen A.G., Laursen B., de Troiani R.M., Noellemeyer E.J., Janovska D., Dusek K., Délano-Frier J., Taberner A., et al. Variations in the Polyphenol Content of Seeds of Field Grown Amaranthus Accessions. Food Chem. 2011;129:131–138. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2011.04.044. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Sarker U., Oba S. Response of Nutrients, Minerals, Antioxidant Leaf Pigments, Vitamins, Polyphenol, Flavonoid and Antioxidant Activity in Selected Vegetable Amaranth under Four Soil Water Content. Food Chem. 2018;252:72–83. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2018.01.097. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Sarker U., Oba S. Drought Stress Enhances Nutritional and Bioactive Compounds, Phenolic Acids and Antioxidant Capacity of Amaranthus Leafy Vegetable. BMC Plant Biol. 2018;18:258. doi: 10.1186/s12870-018-1484-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Sarker U., Oba S. Drought Stress Effects on Growth, ROS Markers, Compatible Solutes, Phenolics, Flavonoids, and Antioxidant Activity in Amaranthus tricolor. Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol. 2018;186:999–1016. doi: 10.1007/s12010-018-2784-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Sarker U., Oba S. Catalase, Superoxide Dismutase and Ascorbate-Glutathione Cycle Enzymes Confer Drought Tolerance of A. tricolor. Sci. Rep. 2018;8:16496. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-34944-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Sarker U., Oba S. Salinity Stress Enhances Color Parameters, Bioactive Leaf Pigments, Vitamins, Polyphenols, Flavonoids and Antioxidant Activity in Selected Amaranthus Leafy Vegetables. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2019;99:2275–2284. doi: 10.1002/jsfa.9423. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Sarker U., Oba S. Augmentation of Leaf Color Parameters, Pigments, Vitamins, Phenolic Acids, Flavonoids and Antioxidant Activity in Selected Amaranthus tricolor under Salinity Stress. Sci. Rep. 2018;8:12349. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-30897-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Sarker U., Islam M.T., Oba S. Salinity Stress Accelerates Nutrients, Dietary Fiber, Minerals, Phytochemicals and Antioxidant Activity in Amaranthus tricolor Leaves. PLoS ONE. 2018;13:0206388. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0206388. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Sarker U., Oba S. The Response of Salinity Stress-Induced A. tricolor to Growth, Anatomy, Physiology, Non-Enzymatic and Enzymatic Antioxidants. Front. Plant Sci. 2020;11:559876. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2020.559876. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Rajan S., Markose B.L. Horticultural Science Series-6. In: Peter K.M.V., editor. Propagation of Horticultural Crops. Volume 6. New India Publishing Agency; New Delhi, India: 2007. pp. 110–113. [Google Scholar]
- 30.Sarker U., Oba S. Nutritional and Bioactive Constituents and Scavenging Capacity of Radicals in Amaranthus hypochondriacus. Sci. Rep. 2020;10:19962. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-71714-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Sarker U., Oba S. Nutraceuticals, Phytochemicals, and Radical Quenching Ability of Selected Drought-Tolerant Advance Lines of Vegetable Amaranth. BMC Plant Biol. 2020;20:564. doi: 10.1186/s12870-020-02780-y. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Sarker U., Hossain M.N., Iqbal M.A., Oba S. Bioactive Components and Radical Scavenging Activity in Selected Advance Lines of Salt-Tolerant Vegetable Amaranth. Front. Nutr. 2020;7:587257. doi: 10.3389/fnut.2020.587257. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Sarker U., Oba S. Antioxidant Constituents of Three Selected Red and Green Color Amaranthus Leafy Vegetable. Sci. Rep. 2019;9:18233. doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-52033-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.Sarker U., Oba S. Leaf Pigmentation, Its Profiles and Radical Scavenging Activity in Selected Amaranthus tricolor Leafy Vegetables. Sci. Rep. 2020;10:18617. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-66376-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Sarker U., Oba S. Color Attributes, Betacyanin, and Carotenoid Profiles, Bioactive Components, and Radical Quenching Capacity in Selected Amaranthus gangeticus Leafy Vegetables. Sci. Rep. 2021;11:11559. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-91157-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Sarker U., Oba S. Phenolic Profiles and Antioxidant Activities in Selected Drought-Tolerant Leafy Vegetable Amaranth. Sci. Rep. 2020;10:18287. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-71727-y. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Sarker U., Oba S. Polyphenol and Flavonoid Profiles and Radical Scavenging Activity in Selected Leafy Vegetable Amaranthus gangeticus. BMC Plant Biol. 2020;20:499. doi: 10.1186/s12870-020-02700-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Khanam U.K.S., Oba S., Yanase E., Murakami Y. Phenolic Acids, flavonoids and Total Antioxidant Capacity of Selected Leafy Vegetables. J. Funct. Foods. 2012;4:979–987. doi: 10.1016/j.jff.2012.07.006. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 39.Rashad M.M.I., Sarker U. Genetic Variations in Yield and Yield Contributing Traits of Green Amaranth. Genetika. 2020;52:393–407. doi: 10.2298/GENSR2001393R. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Hasan-Ud-Daula M., Sarker U. Variability, Heritability, Character Association, and Path Coefficient Analysis in Advanced Breeding Lines of Rice (Oryza sativa L.) Genetika. 2020;52:711–726. doi: 10.2298/GENSR2002711H. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 41.Hasan M.J., Kulsum M.U., Majumder R.R., Sarker U. Genotypic Variability for Grain Quality Attributes in Restorer Lines of Hybrid Rice. Genetika. 2020;52:973–989. doi: 10.2298/GENSR2003973H. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 42.Azad A.K., Sarker U., Ercisli S., Assouguem A., Ullah R., Almeer R., Sayed A.A., Peluso I. Evaluation of Combining Ability and Heterosis of Popular Restorer and Male Sterile Lines for the Development of Superior Rice Hybrids. Agronomy. 2022;12:965. doi: 10.3390/agronomy12040965. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 43.Biswas A., Sarker U., Banik B.R., Rohman M.M., Mian M.A.K. Genetic Divergence Study in Salinity Stress Tolerant Maize (Zea mays L.) Bangladesh J. Agric. Res. 2014;39:621–630. doi: 10.3329/bjar.v39i4.22540. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 44.Azam M.G., Sarker U., Banik B.R. Genetic Variability of Yield and Its Contributing Characters on CIMMYT Maize Inbreds under Drought Stress. Bangladesh J. Agric. Res. 2014;39:419–426. doi: 10.3329/bjar.v39i3.21985. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 45.Azam M.G.A., Sarker U., Mian M.A.K., Banik B.R., Talukder M.Z.A. Genetic Divergence on Quantitative Characters of Exotic Maize Inbreds (Zea mays L.) Bangladesh J. Plant Breed. Genet. 2013;26:9–14. doi: 10.3329/bjpbg.v26i2.23844. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 46.Ganapati R.K., Rasul M.G., Mian M.A.K., Sarker U. Genetic Variability and Character Association of T-Aman Rice (Oryza sativa L) Int. J. Plant Biol. Res. 2014;2:1–4. [Google Scholar]
- 47.Sarker U., Mian M.A.K. Genetic Variations and Correlations between Floral Traits in Rice. Bangladesh J. Agril. Res. 2004;29:553–558. [Google Scholar]
- 48.Biswas P.S., Sarker U., Bhuiyan M.A.R., Khatun S. Genetic Divergence in Cold Tolerant Irrigated Rice (Oryza sativa L.) Agriculturists. 2006;4:15–20. [Google Scholar]
- 49.Sarker U., Biswas P.S., Prasad B., Mian M.A.K. Correlated Response, Relative Selection Efficiency and Path Analysis in Cold Tolerant Rice. Bangladesh J. Pl. Breed. Genet. 2001;14:33–36. [Google Scholar]
- 50.Sarker U., Mian M.A.K. Genetic Variability, Character Association and Path Analysis for Yield and Its Components in Rice. J. Asiat. Soc. Bangladesh Sci. 2003;29:47–54. [Google Scholar]
- 51.Ali M.A., Sarker U., MAK M., Islam M.A. Estimation of Genetic Divergence in Boro Rice (Oryza sativa L.) Int. J. BioRes. 2014;16:28–36. [Google Scholar]
- 52.Karim D., Sarker U., Siddique M.N.A., Miah M.A.K., Hasnat M.Z. Variability and Genetic Parameter Analysis in Aromatic Rice. Int. J. Sustain. Crop Prod. 2007;2:15–18. [Google Scholar]
- 53.Karim D., Siddique M.N.A., Sarker U., Hasnat Z., Sultana J. Phenotypic and Genotypic Correlation Co-Efficient of Quantitative Characters and Character Association of Aromatic Rice. J. Biosci. Agric. Res. 2014;1:34–46. doi: 10.18801/jbar.010114.05. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 54.Rai P.K., Sarker U., Roy P.C., Islam A. Character Association in F4 Generation of Rice (Oryza sativa L.) Bangladesh J. Plant Breed. Genet. 2013;26:39–44. doi: 10.3329/bjpbg.v26i2.23848. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 55.Hasan M.R., Sarker U., Hossain M.A., Huda K.M.K., Mian M.A.K., Hossain T., Zahan M.S., Mahmud M.N.H. Genetic Diversity in Micronutrient Dense Rice and Its Implication in Breeding Program. Ecofriendly Agril. J. 2012;5:168–174. [Google Scholar]
- 56.Hasan M.R., Sarker U., Mian M.A.K., Hossain T., Mahmud M.N.H. Genetic Variation in Micronutrient Dense Rice and Its Implication in Breeding for Higher Yield. Eco-Friendly Agril. J. 2012;5:175–182. [Google Scholar]
- 57.Siddique M.N.A., Sarker U., Mian M.A.K. Genetic diversity in restorer line of rice. In: Bhuiyan M.S.R., Rahman L., editors. Proceedings of the International Conference on Plant Breeding and Seed for Food Security. Plant Breeding and Genetics Society of Bangladesh; Dhaka, Bangladesh: 2009. pp. 137–142. [Google Scholar]
- 58.Nath J.K., Sarker U., Mian M.A.K., Hossain T. Genetic Divergence in T. Aman Rice. Ann. Bangladesh Agric. 2008;12:51–60. [Google Scholar]
- 59.Rahman M.H., Sarker U., Main M.A.K. Assessment of Variability of Floral and Yield Traits; I Restorer Lines of Rice. Ann. Bangladesh Agric. 2007;11:87–94. [Google Scholar]
- 60.Rahman M.H., Sarker U., Main M.A.K. Assessment of Variability of Floral and Yield Traits; II Maintainer Lines of Rice. Ann. Bangladesh Agric. 2007;11:95–102. [Google Scholar]
- 61.Ashraf A.T.M., Rahman M.M., Hossain M.M., Sarker U. Study of Correlation and Path Analysis in the Selected Okra Accessions. Asian Res. J. Agric. 2020;12:1–11. doi: 10.9734/arja/2020/v12i430087. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 62.Ashraf A.T.M., Rahman M.M., Hossain M.M., Sarker U. Study of the Genetic Analysis of Some Selected Okra Accessions. Int. J. Adv. Res. 2020;8:549–556. doi: 10.21474/IJAR01/10663. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 63.Ashraf A.T.M., Rahman M.M., Hossain M.M., Sarker U. Performance Evaluation of Some Selected Okra Accessions. Int. J. Plant Soil Sci. 2020;32:13–20. doi: 10.9734/ijpss/2020/v32i330254. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 64.Talukder M.Z.A., Sarker U., Harun-Or-Rashid M., Zakaria M. Genetic Diversity of Coconut (Cocos Nucifera L.) in Barisal Region. Ann. Bangladesh Agric. 2015;19:13–21. [Google Scholar]
- 65.Talukder M.Z.A., Sarker U., Khan ABM M.M., Moniruzzaman M., Zaman M.M. Genetic Variability and Correlation Coefficient of Coconut (Cocos Nucifera L.) in Barisal Region. Int. J. BioRes. 2011;11:15–21. [Google Scholar]
- 66.Kayesh E., Sharker M.S., Roni M.S., Sarker U. Integrated Nutrient Management for Growth, Yield and Profitability of Broccoli. Bangladesh J. Agric. Res. 2019;44:13–26. doi: 10.3329/bjar.v44i1.40900. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 67.Sun H., Mu T., Xi L., Zhang M., Chen J. Sweet Potato (Ipomoea batatas L.) Leaves as Nutritional and Functional Foods. Food Chem. 2014;156:380–389. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2014.01.079. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 68.Sarker U., Oba S. Protein, Dietary Fiber, Minerals, Antioxidant Pigments and Phytochemicals, and Antioxidant Activity in Selected Red Morph Amaranthus Leafy Vegetable. PLoS ONE. 2019;14:0222517. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0222517. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 69.Sarker U., Oba S. Nutraceuticals, Antioxidant Pigments, and Phytochemicals in the Leaves of Amaranthus spinosus and Amaranthus viridis Weedy Species. Sci. Rep. 2019;9:20413. doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-50977-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 70.Sarker U., Hossain M.M., Oba S. Nutritional and Antioxidant Components and Antioxidant Capacity in Green Morph Amaranthus Leafy Vegetable. Sci. Rep. 2020;10:1336. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-57687-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 71.Sarker U., Oba S., Daramy M.A. Nutrients, Minerals, Antioxidant Pigments and Phytochemicals, and Antioxidant Capacity of the Leaves of Stem Amaranth. Sci. Rep. 2020;10:3892. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-60252-7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 72.Sarker U., Oba S. Nutrients, Minerals, Pigments, Phytochemical, and Radical Scavenging Activity in Amaranthus blitum Leafy Vegetable. Sci. Rep. 2020;10:3868. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-59848-w. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 73.Chakrabarty T., Sarker U., Hasan M., Rahman M.M. Variability in Mineral Compositions, Yield and Yield Contributing Traits of Stem Amaranth (Amaranthus lividus) Genetika. 2018;50:995–1010. doi: 10.2298/GENSR1803995C. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 74.Jimenez-Aguilar D.M., Grusak M.A. Minerals, Vitamin C, Phenolics, Flavonoids and Antioxidant Activity of Amaranthus Leafy Vegetables. J. Food Compos. Anal. 2017;58:33–39. doi: 10.1016/j.jfca.2017.01.005. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 75.Shukla S., Bhargava A., Chatterjee A., Srivastava J., Singh N., Singh S.P. Mineral Profile and Variability in Vegetable Amaranth (Amaranthus tricolor) Plant Foods Hum. Nutri. 2006;61:23–28. doi: 10.1007/s11130-006-0004-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 76.Madruga M.S., Camara F.S. The Chemical Composition of “Multimistura” as A Food Supplement. Food Chem. 2000;68:41–44. doi: 10.1016/S0308-8146(99)00152-1. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 77.Shahidi F., Chavan U.D., Bal A.K., McKenzie D.B. Chemical Composition of Beach Pea (Lathyrus maritimus L.) Plant Parts. Food Chem. 1999;64:39–44. doi: 10.1016/S0308-8146(98)00097-1. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 78.Khanam U.K.S., Oba S. Bioactive Substances in Leaves of Two Amaranth Species, Amaranthus lividus, and A. hypochondriacus. Can. J. Plant Sci. 2013;93:47–58. doi: 10.4141/cjps2012-117. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 79.Raju M., Varakumar S., Lakshminarayana R., Krishnakantha P.T., Baskaran V. Carotenoid Composition and Vitamin A Activity of Medicinally Important Green Leafy Vegetables. Food Chem. 2007;101:1598–1605. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2006.04.015. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 80.Cai Y., Sun M., Corke H. Antioxidant Activity of Betalains from Plants of The Amaranthaceae. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2003;51:2288–2294. doi: 10.1021/jf030045u. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 81.Hossain M.N., Sarker U., Raihan M.S., Al-Huqail A.A., Siddiqui M.H., Oba S. Influence of Salinity Stress on Color Parameters, Leaf Pigmentation, Polyphenol and Flavonoid Contents, and Antioxidant Activity of Amaranthus lividus Leafy Vegetables. Molecules. 2022;27:1821. doi: 10.3390/molecules27061821. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 82.Sarker U., Oba S., Ercisli S., Assouguem A., Alotaibi A., Ullah R. Bioactive Phytochemicals and Quenching Activity of Radicals in Selected Drought-Resistant Amaranthus tricolor Vegetable Amaranth. Antioxidants. 2022;11:578. doi: 10.3390/antiox11030578. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 83.Sarker U., Rabbani M.G., Oba S., Eldehna W.M., Al-Rashood S.T., Mostafa N.M., Eldahshan O.A. Phytonutrients, Colorant Pigments, Phytochemicals, and Antioxidant Potential of Orphan Leafy Amaranthus Species. Molecules. 2022;27:2899. doi: 10.3390/molecules27092899. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Data Availability Statement
Data is contained within the article.