Cited by 150Ethnobotanical and Medicinal Plants StudiesFood and Agricultural SciencesAfrican Botany and Ecology Studies

Composition of tubers used by Hadza foragers of Tanzania.

Schoeninger, Margaret J., Bunn, Henry T., Murray, Shawn S., Marlett, Judith A.·2001·Journal of Food Composition and Analysis

Abstract

Data are presented on three edible species of tuber (Vigna frutescens, Eminia entennulifa, and Ipomoea transvaalensis) consumed by Hadza foragers in northern Tanzania. These species are collected almost year-round by Hadza women but previous analyses of their micronutrient composition are variable and provide results based on the analysis of whole tuber. We examined only edible portions of tuber by simulating chewing in the presence of salivary amylase and by removing from analysis the typically expectorated inedible component. Edible portions of the three peeled tubers ranged from 42.5 to 91.8 g/100 g dry wt., were low in protein (2.3-6.9 g/100 g dry wt.), and contained 19.6-26.0 g/100 g of starch. The sum of monosaccharides and disaccharides ranged from 6.2 g/100 g in the Vigna frutescens to 48.3 g/100 g of edible portion of Ipomoea transvaalensis. In addition, our analysis of 5 samples of Vigna frutescens had a 5-fold range in energy available to consumers, an important consideration for energetic studies. This range was due, in part, to the variation in edible portion (20.8-75.4 g/100 g of edible dry tuber). Our data, in comparison with those reported previously, show generally lower energy levels and higher levels of indigestible material for some of these tubers. These discrepancies are likely due to differences in analysis of whole tuber versus edible portion, method of measuring indigestible carbohydrate, and age of tuber.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1006/jfca.2000.0961

Cites

17 of 17 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Western diets are more sugar-rich and energy-dense than more "traditional" diets and wild foods.

    “For example, while Western diets are certainly more sugar-rich and energy-dense than more “traditional” diets and wild foods [4], [8], [9], many hunter-gatherers seasonally consume a large portion of their daily calories as honey [10], [11] (Fig. S2), which has high concentrations of glucose and fructose [12].”

    From Hunter-gatherer energetics and human obesity (2012) · cites this paper as [8]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Schoeninger, M. J., Bunn, H. T., Murray, S. S., & Marlett, J. A.
Affiliations
University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
Corresponding author
Schoeninger, Margaret J.
Venue
Journal of Food Composition and Analysis
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2001-02
Volume
14
Issue
1
Pages
15-25
ISSN
0889-1575 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2085354828
Cited by
150
References
17
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 54 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 4
FWCI
2.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Food Composition and Analysis (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Ethnobotanical and Medicinal Plants Studies
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Food and Agricultural Sciences
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Forestry › African Botany and Ecology Studies
Keywords
tubers, edible portion, macronutrient composition, starch, non-digestible carbohydrates, salivary amylase, energy availability, tuber age

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review