f. BtlmobioI. 8111:81-129 Summer 1988

A SURVEY OF TRADITIONAL METHODSEMPLOYED FOR THE DETOXIFICAnON OF PLANT FOODS

TIMOTHY JOHNSSchOtll of Dietetics and Human NutritionMacdonald College of McGill Un/veTS;PJ

Ste. Anne de BellevueQuebec H9XlCO, Canada

and

ISAO KUBOEntomology and ParasitologyCollege of Natural Resources

University of Cal(forniaBerkeley, CA 94720, USA

ABSTRACT.-From a survey of ethnobotankal reports a list of216 spedes of lichens,fungi, algae and vascular food plants that are detoxified during processing was com­plied. Major techniques of detoxification are categorized as heating, dil)solution, fermen­tation, adsorp"ion, drying, physicaJ processing and pH change, and a dassificationscheme that contains details of the specific ways these techniques are employed ispresented, An ancillary survey of chemical data indicates that detoxification is usedto remove a range of potential toxins. The Cycadales, the families Araceac,Djoscoreaceae, and Fabaceae, plus Quercus spp. and ,\1anmot esculertta stand out astaxa that are detoxified by people worldwide. Dense carbohydrates available jn theseplants may have motivated humans to develop detoxification techniques. Althoughtheir antiquity is unknown, these techniques may have played a role in the evolutionof human dietary patterns.

INTRODUCTION

Although human food procurement is constrained by the same allclochemicals(secondary compounds) that make many plants unavailable as food for herbivorousanImals, processing technology is one means employed by humans for making foodsmore palatable and less toxic. Selection for genetic changes during domestication risksexposing plants to attack by insects and plant diseases. By eliminating undesirablecompounds subsequent to maturation of the plant we allow chemicals to play theirnatural role in defense during vegetative and developmental stages. thus ensuringa harvest for ourselves. Technological innovations, then, allow humans to circum~

vent the coevolutionary competition that characterizes plant-herbivore interactions(Harborne 1982).

The extent to which plant resources were eaten by early humans and om hominidpredecessors is a concern that is relevant for understanding the evolution of the humandietary patterns (Milton 19B7; Stahl 1984). Processing techniques for detoxifying wild

82 IOHNS &KUBO VoL 8) No.1

and cultivated foods may have played an important role in early human food pro­curement by making plant foods more available. Cultural methods for dealing withtoxins augmented the biological detoxicatiun capabilities we share with other animals.Plants were probably always eaten by hominids but processing contributed toimproving their dietary quality.

While the use of fire dates back to at least 500,000 years B.P. (Clark and Harris1985; Isaac J984), evidence from which to determine the antiquity of other traditionalprocessing techniques is less available. The use of these techniques predates the originsof agriculture, indeed detoxification methods were probably important in allowinghumans to interact with certam plant foods to the extent that they could begin a selec­tion process leading to domestication. Study of processing techniques employed inhistorical times by agriculturalists and gather-hunter peoples, the mechanisms bywhich they function and their incidence patterns, may provide insights into thepossible ways by which they developed. Modern industrial food processes have apartial function in detoxifying foods; these techniques have their roots in practicesof the past.

Traditional detoxification techniques are essential tu the subsistence uf manypeople around the world, and their importance in specific instances both historicallyand in the present day has been noted repeatedly. The methods used globally todetOXify bitter cassava (Manihot esculenla Crantz.) have been the most extenSivelystudied (Lancaster et al. J982). Fewer authors have addressed detoxification as a generalphenomenon (d. Harris 1977; Hayden 1981). Through a compilation of individualcases, this study attempts to contribute to the understanding of the overall Significanceof this human activity.

While processing techniques have apparent value, little attention has been givento their efficacy (d. Christiansen and Thumpson 1977; Lancasterel al. J982). Residualamounts of toxins may be present even when acute toxicity is eliminated, and theireffectiveness may be relative. Cyanide poisoning, for example, continues to be aproblem in many parts of the world in spite uf cassava processing (Cock 1982).

Processing may eliminate nutrients along with toxins and requires greater evalua­tion from this perspective. In addition to cultural methods, humans have physiologicalways for avoiding plant toxicity, but little is known about the relationship betweenthe two. Microsomal enzyme activities may depend on nutritional status (Andersonelal. 1986). Where humans subsist on diets of limited diversity such as those dominatedby cassava, greater evaluation of the risks and benefits of processed toxic foods areneeded.

SURVEY OF TRADITIONAL PLANT DETOXlFlCATlON METHODS

Ethnobotanical reports from around the world were surveyed. One hundred andthirty-seven genera and 216 spedes from 65 families of lichens, fungi, algae andvascular plants that are used after some detoxification are listed in Table 1. Whilethis survey is comprehensive it is not exhaustive. Although similar processmg techni­ques are used in various other circumstances, this survey lists only those cases whereit was explicitly stated that the plants were being detoxified or bitterness was beingeliminated. Although the elimination of toxic and bitter constituents is the focus ofthis discussion, it must be recognized that processing techniques improve foods bymaking them more digestible or more palatable in several ways (Stahl 1988). For

Summer 1988 JOURNAL OF ETIlNOBIOlOGY

example cooking, soaking, grating and the addition of lye are used widely to softenfoods. Increasing the digestibility of foods makes nutrients more available.

Table 1 includes known toxic chemicals reported from the plants of interest. Itshould be noted that any particular plant may contain a number of potentially toxicallelochemicals, and until more detailed chemical data are available the listed chemicalsmay only provide an approximation of what compounds are the subject of detoxifi­cation efforts.

Of the taxa in Table 1 certain ones are conspicuous. The Cycadales, the familiesAraceae, D!oscore.ceae, and Fabaceae, plus Quercus spp. (Fagaceae) and Manihoteseutenta (Euphorbiaceae), are notable in their exploitation around the world and thisbecause of the role detoxification has played.

Processing techniques eliminate a large range of allelochemicals representing across-section of the classes of chemicals found in plants. No pattern is apparent inthese particular chemicals, Just the important taxa listed above include calciumoxalate, alkaloids, MAM (methylazoxymethanol) glycosides, cyanogenic glycosides,saponins; tannins, leerins and non-protein amino acids.

Why do humans bother to process certain plant foods and not others? Peoplewho utilize toxic plants exploit other plants which require little or no processing.Perhaps the answer lies in the fact that the major processed plants are all of widespreaddistribution and produce a reliable, recognizable and abundant food resource, Theamids, cycads, yams, acorns, and cassaVa are all important carbohydrate-supplyingstaples for various cultural groups. The legumes represent another source of abun·dant food. However, none of the major exploited legumes (e.g. beans, peas, andlentils), except edible lupines, require detoxification (other than cooking).

CLASSIFICATION OF TRADITIONAL FLANT DETOXlFICATlON METHODS

Processing methods show marked similarities worldwide and are classifiableaccording to the way in which they function to eliminate toxins, Coursey's 11973}classification of cassava proce,ssmg served as a basis for the more elaborate schemepresented in APPENDIX 1. Plants considered in Tahle 1were classified according to thisnew scheme. The classification codes provide a convenient way to analyze individualcases of detOXification.

Heat, solution} fermentation" adsorption, drylllgf comminution, and chemicalreaction due to pH change comprise the major means of detoxification" Many detoxi·fication procedures involve more than one of these functions, and it is a matter of judge·ment as to the most important part of the process. Thc classification is fuerl1Ichical anddesigned so that the more important a part of the process is in the overall detoxificationthe higher is its decimal point. For example boiling of a food may involve both detoxi·fication by heating and detoxification by solution. Either of the cooes LI2 or 2.27 ischosen over the other in specific cases where one function is considered the more crucial.The classification mJght be further complicated if, for example, the material is groundbenne it is boiled and/or if lye, acid, or clay is added to the water.

MErnODS OF PLANT FOOD DETOXlFICATION

1. Detoxification byheating.-Heat provides energy to drive chemical reactions withinfooels and those between chemical constituents of a food and envuonmental chemicalssuch as oxygen. TO.xins nlay be converted or degraded to less poisonous chemicals. Heat

TABLE L Survey of Traditio11ill Methods of Plant Detoxification, Each lepolt is categotized fat the seven basic techniques outlinedin the text and coded accolding to the schema in APPENDIX 1

t'

Plant GroupFamilyScientific NamePlant Part I

Location

Chemistry

Processing ClassificationI 2 3 4 5 6 7 Code

Reference

Lichens

Bzyoria fremontil (TucklBroda & D, Hawksw, (PI

Cetraria islandica 11.) Ach.{PI

Fungi

Gyromitra esculenta Pent ex

Morchella esculenta PelS, ex(fbi

BritishColumbia

Japan; N.temperate

FI.Europe

Fr.Temperate

vulpinic acidX X

x X

gyromitrinX

x

x 2.1216

2.2812

2.121

2.121

Turner 1977

Tanaka 1976

Gamier et al. 1978Tanaka 1976

Tanaka 1976

iI:>

~

Algae

Asparogopsis sanfordiana Harv.IT)

VASCULAR PLANTSAizoaceae

balogenated hydrocarbonsX X 2.212

Moore 1977Tanaka 1976 ~

.'"~~

u,_,.~_~ , '." .•". "<4. "'""" ; dO; (I lSi Q :; L jiJ!4.ttil

TABLE L Survey of Traditional Methods of Plant Detoxification, Each report is categorized for the seven ba&ic tee1mlques outlined rin the text and coded according to the schema in APPENDIX 1. Icontinued)

Plant Group Chemistry Reference~

:0Family QOQO

Scientific Name Location Processing ClassificationPlant Part I I I 2 3 4 5 6 7 Code

Clinu. oppositifolius A.DC. saponins Hegnauer 1964IP) Philippines X 2. II Burkill 1985

Sesuvium portulacastrum L. salt Burkill 1985 aIP) w. Africa X X 2.2812 Burkill 1985 ~

(Pallasl O.Ktze)-

Tetragona tetragonioides ....IFI W. Africa X 2.12 Burkill 1985 0

'TI

Alismaceae ~Alisma plantago 1. scsqultcrpcnoids, Oshima 1983 ill

triterpenoids, choline 15Eurasia X 2.51 Hedrick 1919 5

C)

'"Sagittaria cuneata SheM.W. North X 2.12 Johnston 1970America

Sagittaria lati!olia Willd.E. North X 2.12 Hussey 1974America

AmaranthaceaeAchyranthes ;aponica Nakai

QO

ill Asia X X 2.2812 Tanaka 1976 U>

TABLE L SUIVey of Traditional Methods of Plant Detoxification. Each report is categorized for the seven basic techniques outlinedin the text and coded according to the schema in APPENDIX 1. (contioued)

g;

I1

Plant Group Chemistry ReferenceFamilyScientific Name Location Proeessing ClassificationPlant Part { I 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Code

Amaryllidaceae

Lycons radiata Herb. alkaloids Wildman 1968[BI 'apan X 2.221 Tanaka 1976

L, sanguinea Maxima.[HI Japan X 2.221 Tanaka 1976 iL squamigera Maxima. alkaloids Wildman 1968{HI 'apan X 2.221 Tanaka 1976 ll!'

Anacardiaceae ~COJY!locQrptls laevigata nitropropanoyl glueopyranoses Moyer 1979Forst. (SF) New Zealand X X 2.251,

2.214,2.2111 Hedrick 1919;

Wright-St. Clair1972

Semecarpus anacardium L pentadecyleateehols Hembree et al. 1978IFJ Asia, X X 2.13, 2.51 Hedrick 1919

Australia ~,..'"S. austaliens;s Engl..

Australia X 2.131 Cribb & Cribb t1975, IIvine 1957

...\''7"' ..•. "" ~,••. _.~'"'~.~"''" "." ,"ue' ' ..",..", '?""'/"\ ", .'"~ .-",... .~ " ..".".,~ ...'!"'-"",""

TABLE 1. Survey of Traditional Metltods of Plant Detori!ication. &wb report is categorized for tlte ""VeIl basic techniques outlinedin tlte text ood coded according to tlte schema in APPENDIX 1. (continued)

Plant GroupFamilyScientific NamePlant Part I I

Location

Chemistty

Processing ClassificationI 2 3 4 5 6 7 Code

Referencei!

Annonaceae

Meuettia leptopoda IHook. f.& Thoms·1 King ITl

Api3£eae

Cymopterus fendleri A. Gray

Lomatium orientale Coulter&Rose IRI

Cogswellia orien'alis)

MalayPenninsula

W. NorthAmerica

Arizona

x X

furocoumarins

X

X

X X 2.31114

2.131

2.131

Skeat & Blagden1906

Yost et aL 1977,Hegoauer 1973Steggerda &

Edkardt 1941

Steggerda &Eckardt 1941

~~fil

I8

Apocynaceae

Apocynum spp.

Apocynum angustifDliumWooton ILa} New Mexico

cardiac glycosides

X 2.4115

Hegnauer 1964

C.stetter 1935 '"'"

TABLE L Survey of Traditional Methods of Plant Detoxification, Each report is categorized for the seven basic techniques outlined ""in the text and coded according to the schema in APPENDTX 1, (continued) ""

Plant Group Chemistry RererenceFamilyScientific Name Location Processing ClassificationPlant Part { I I 2 3 4 5 6 7 Code

Araceae

Alocasia macrorhiza Schott, cyanogenic glycosides Nahrstcdt 1975macrorhiza) proteinase inhibitors Sumathi & Patta·

biraman J977IStl Australia X X X 2.132, Cribb & Cribb

2,212 1975; Irvine 1957 ~Philippines X 2.121, Brown 1920 Z2.131 '"

iT! New Caledonia X 2.13 Tanaka 1976 '"'"Amorphophallus abyssinicus Ii

0N.E.Br. ITI S, Africa X X 2.2711 Scudder 1971

A, aphyllus (Hook. I Hutch.W. Africa X X X X 2.235, Burkill 1985;

2,1125, Busson 19652.235

A. campanuiatus (Roxb.1Blume. fTl India X X 2.2211 Singh & Arora

1965 <{TI Asia, Philippines X 2.121, 2.13 Hedrick 1919; 12-

Brown 1920 ,""Z

A, dracontioides N.E. Br. saponins Burkill 1985 ?

W. Africa X X X 2,22222 Burkill 1985~

.,.. ~-",,,- •.,,,..--.- g ,)Iii it4.l¥ ((111 ,$£2.kd.2S

TABLE 1. Survey of Traditional Methods of Plant Detoxification. Each report is categorized for the seven basic techniques outli:J:red '"in the text and coded according to the schema in APPENDIX 1. (continued) IPlant Group Chemi.try Reference

~

:0Family '"'"Scientific Name Location Processing ClassificationPlant Part I I I 2 3 4 5 6 7 Code

A. glabra EM. Bailey(TFStl Australia X 2.13 Cribb & Cribb

1975

~A. lyratus Kunth Tanaka 1976India X 2.121 ~

t"

Anchomanes difformis Burkill 1985 0.."

(Bq Engl IRhI W. Africa X X X X 2.31134 to

~A. we/witschii Rendle ITI W. Africa X X 2.2211 Burkill 19850

'"Arisaema amurense Tanaka 1976 i3Maxim (RI Asia X X X 2.2111 5A. curvatUfl1 Kunth. {TI India X X X 2.31112 Hedrick 1919

Q

A. triphyllum 1L.1 Torr. Kuhm 1961, Harris(Arum triphyllum) IT) E.N. Amenca X X X 2.11, 1890, Havard 1895

2.5122,2.132

Arisanlm vulgare T arg. IRI North Africa X 2.22 Hedrick 1919

.A.ru.m maculatum L. eyanogenic glycoside• Nahrstedt 1975(RI Europe X 2.11 Hedrick 1919(Ll Europe X X 2.281I5 Hedrick 1919 '"'"

- ·,""''''.".,,·..•'"'.'''''.L-.,''''

TABLE I. Survey of Traditional Methods of Plant Detoxification, Each report is categorized for the ..even basic techniques outlined <'5in the text and coded according to the schema in APPENDiX 1. (continued)

Plant Group Chemistry ReferenceFamilyScientific Name Location Processing ClassificationPlant Part I 1 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 Code

Calla palus/ris L. IRI Europe; N. Asia; X X X 2.112 Hedrick 1919North America

Coloca.sia antiquorum SchottAustralia X X 2.2812 Irvine 1957

C. esculenta ILl Schott IT) W. Africa X X 2.224 Burkill 1985 0IT,Stl Pacific X 2.61 Bascom 1965 ~ITI Australia X 2.12, 2.13 Cribb & Cribb '"1975 rl>

~

C, indica Hassk. rr) S. Asia X 2.11 Hedrick 1919 tiJ0

Lysicmton americaI2um Gunther 1973Hulten & St, John IR) W.N. America X 2.121

Peltandra virgioica Rafin.(AIllTU virginica) IT) EN. America X X X 2,514, Harris 1890;

2,1.31, Hedrick 19192,12

Ple8monium margaritiferum~SChOll IT! India X X X 2,28114 Tanaka 1976 ,..pc

Stilrxhiton lanetfolia ZKotschy & Feyr, ILl W. Africa X X 2.28112 Burkill 1985 p

IRhl W. Africa X X 2.2611 Burkill 1985

TABU! J. Sunrey of TzudilioDtJ1 Methods of Plant D<etoJdfU;tzti011. Each report is categori7.£d for the seven baaic ,echnique> outlinedin the text and coded accotrling to the scbema in APPBNDIX 1. (continued)

Plant GroupFamily'Scientific NamePlant Part ( I

Location

Chemistry

Processing Classification123 4 5 6 7 Code

Reference

7'41

I-~

xSymplocarpus foetidu ..Nutt.

Typhonium tlllg1.1_stilobiurnF.v. MucH. IT}

T. brown;; Schott. (TI

T. trilobatum IL.l Schott IRhI

Areacaceae

Ancistrophyllum secundi­florum (G. Mann &.

H. Wendl.'

Asclepiaceae

Ceropegia bulbosa Rosb.(RI

Asteraceae

R.N. America

Australia

Australia

West Africa

W. Africa

West Indes

x

x

x

x

cardiac glycosidesX

x

x

x

x

2.131

2.132

2.132

2.11, 2.5

2.12

2.121

Harris 1890

Cribb &. Cribb1975

Cribb &. Cribb1975; Irvine 1957

Burkill 1985

Irvine 1952

Hegnauer 1963Tanaka 1976

i~:;;

i

terpenaids, polyacetylenesX

Agosez::is retror,sa Greene

Artemisla laciniata Willd.

W.N. Africa

Manchuria

x X 2.2144

2.121

Zigmond 1981

Greger 1977Tanaka 1976 '"-

TABLE I. Survey of Traditional Methods of Plant Detoxification. Each report is rotegorized for the seven basic techniques outlined isin the text md coded according to the schema in APPENDIX 1. (continued)

Plant Group ChemistryFamilyScientific Name Location Processing ClassificationPlant Part ( ) I 2 3 4 5 6 7

Aster ageratoides Tura. III Asia X

Balsmnorrhiz.a spp. iRI W.N. America X

Hemizonia lllZulaefolia DC(5) California X

SCOlzonero hispanica L. (R) C. &. S. Europe X X

Vernonia amygalma Del. elemanolide lactonesW. Africa X X X X

2.131 Tanaka 1976

Reference

Code

i'"~

~

Hedrick 1919

Ganjian et ai. 1983Burkill 1985;Keshinro &. Ketiku1979; Bnsson 1965

Gasquet et at. 1985Burkill 1985

2.12 Tanaka 1976

2.61 Havard 1895

2.2112

2.2811,2.222,2.121

2.2811,2.22

elemanolide laetonesX XW. Africa

V colorata (Willd.) Drake

V. ulOmsoniana Olivo &.Hiem. (LI Gabon X X 2.2812 Burkill 1985

Brassicaceae

Arabis glabra Bernh.

Dentaria "PP.

Asia

America

glueosinolatesX X

glueosinolates

2.2812Hegnauer 1964Tanaka 1976

Hegnauer 1964

~,'"~

TABLE 1. Survey of TraditiOJUJ1 Method. of Plant Detoxification. Each report is categorized for the seven basic techniques outlined rin the text and coded accorrJ.ing to the schema in APPENDIX 1. (continued)

Plant Group Chemistry Reference~

<iFamily '"'"Scientific Name Location Processing Classificationplant Part I ! 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Code

Dentma maxima Nutt. (R) North America X X 2.31113 Tanaka, 1976

lsatis tinctona. L. ILl China X 2.211 Tanaka 1976

jSenebiera coronopus Poir.cosmopolitan X 2.121 Hedrick 1919

Stanleya p.innota (Ptrrshl 0."

Britton IL,Stl California X X X 2.2144 Zigmond 1981

~Capparaceae gBoscia senegalensis (pers.) Ahmed et al. 1972 0Lam. glucosinolate...., alk<lloids Delaveau et al. b

lSI W. Africa X 2.211 1973; Cl><i

Burkill 1985

Capparis retusQ Griesb. IFI Chaco, South X 2.2812 Metraux 1950America

C. salicifolia Griesb. glucosinolates Ahmed et al. 1972(FI Chaco, South X 2.2812 Metraux 1950

America

C. specioso Griseb. (S) Chaco, South X X X 2.221222 MEtraux 1950 ~America

-.,

TABLE 1. Survey of Traditional Methods of Plant Detoxification, Each report is categorized for the sev1\lJ basic techniques outlined 'C

'"in the text and coded according to the schema in APPENDIX 1, (continued)

Plant Group Chemistry ReferenceFamilyScientific Name Location Processing ClassificationPlant Part I I 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Cooe

--Cleome gynandrll L Hasapis et a1 1981,(Gynandropsis gynaudra) glucosmolates Ahmed et aI. 1972

ILl Tanzania X X 2,22, 2,11 Burkill 1985

G. Berrollltll Pursh, IL! Arizona X X 2,2812 Steggerda &Eckardt 1941

0GOlrrbonill edulis Gilg, & Delaveau et ai, 2Benedict alkaloids 1973, '"fiP

(FI E, Africa X 2,2812 Watt & Breyer-'"Brandwijk 1962 c:'"0

Mauua glauca Chiov, Taylor &. Henryalkaloids 197->,

S, Africa X X X X 2,28123 Scudder 1971

Thylachium africanum Lour, Ahmed ot al, 1972,glucosinolates, alkaloids DeJaveau et aL

IT) E, Africa X 2.12 1973;Weiss 1979 <:

::c,"-

Celastraceae Z?

Gelastrus scandens L, IB! United St.tes X 2,121 Tanaka 1976

'.,,';r-·"""~' --",""""".--' '''7'''''''''"'''?v':''''I:,-~ ......,._.",""'"",.""

TABLE 1. Survey of Traditional Melbods of Plant Detoxification. Each report is categorized for lbe seven basic techniques outlined

rin lbe text and coded according to lbe schema in APPENDIX 1. (continued)

Plant Group Chemistry Reference ~

Family'0

'"'"Scientific Name Location Processing ClassificationPlant Part I I I 2 3 4 5 6 7 Code

Euonymus sieboldianus Blume Bruning & Waguersesquiterpenester alkaloids 1978,

ILl W. Asia X 2.121 Tanaka 1976 0c:Chenopodiaceae "ZChenopodium pallidicaule

~0

Aellen. IS) Peru X 2.211 Gade 1970 "C. quinoa Willd. saponins Hegnauer 1964 @

IS) Andes, South 2.221 Sauer 1950, Z

America Kroeber 1950 ~t-<

Cucurbitaceae0C)><

Citrullus colocynthis IL.l cucurbitacins Hegnauer 1963Schrad lSI W. Africa X X X 2.212, 2.15 Burkill 1985

IFI S. Africa X X X 2.2812 Hedrick 1919

Hodgsonia capniocalpa Ridl.IS) Malaysia X 2.131 Tanaka 1976

Momoldica balsamina L. lSI Australia X X 2.2511 Burkill 1985

IFI China X X 2.2111 Hedrick 1919

M. charantia L. IF) India, S.E. Asia X X 2.2111 Burkill 1985 '0

'"IFI India X 2.2511 Hedrick 1919

TABLE I. Survey of Traditional Methods of Plant Detoxification. Bach report is categorized for the seven basic techniques outlined '"a-in the text and coded according to the schema in APPENDIX 1. (continuedj

Plant Group Chemistry ReferenceFamilyScientific Name Location Processing ClassificationPlant Part ( ) I 2 3 4 5 6 7 Code

Cupressaceae

Thuja orientalis L. (SI W. Asia 2. Tanaka 1976

Cycadaceae 0Cycas sp. de Luea et al. ~

MAM(methylazoxymethanol) glyeosides 1980; P>Australia X X X 2.211, Warner 1958

~2.2140

C. circinalis L. {SI Guam X X X X 2.2221 Brown 1920

C. media R. Br. IS) Australia X X X X X 2.2127, Crihh &. Cribb2.233, 1975; Tanaka 19762.132

Australia X X X X X 2.2127 Irvine 1957

C. revoluta Thunb. IStl Trop. Asia X X 2.132,2.64 Tanaka 1976

C. rumphii Miq. lSI Bay of Bengal X 2.121 Bhargava 1983 ~(St,SI Oeeania X X X 2.2112 Barrau & Peeters .?'

1972 Zp

C. thuarsii Guad 1St ) E. Africa 2.31212 -X X X X Weiss 1979

TABLE L Survey of Traditional Methods of Plant Detoxification. Each report is categorized for the seven basic techniques outlined '"in the text and coded according to the schema in APPENDIX 1. (continued) ~'I

Plant Group Chemistry Reference :;;Family 00

00

Scientific Nllme Location Processing ClassificationPI""t Part i ) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Code

Dioscoreaceae

Dioscorea spp. saponins, alkaloids Takcda 1972; ~IT) E, Alrica X X X 2,28222, Kamick 1971;

~2.31211 Weiss 1979

D. alata L. saponins Kamick 1971 0."

IT) Alrica X X Burkill 1985 '"~D, bolbifera 1. Takeda 1972;

Willaman 8< Li ~saponins) alkaloid: disocorine 1970; <-iT) Pacific X X X 2,2812, Lessa 1977; 0

2,2,,1, Ban:m & Peeters ~2.243 1972; Bascom 1965

D. cochlearj·apiculata ITI Africa X 2.2 Burkill 1985De Wild

D. dumetOtllnl Pax. alkaloids, phenanthrenes Willaman 8< Li1970, El·Olemy &.Reisch 1979

IT) Alric. X X X X 2,211, Coursey 19672.213,2.22, '"2A3,2.25 "

~

....- .,.,.. - .... ~ "A"'" _.- ,-

TABLE l. Survey of Traditional Methods of PlOtlt Detoxificatiotl. Each report is categorized for the seven basic techniques outlined '"'"in the text and coded according to the schema in APPENDIX 1. (continued)

Plant Group Chemistry Refen..."l1ceFamilyScientific Name Location Processing ClassificationPlant Part ( I I 2 3 4 5 6 7 Cooe

(TI Airica X X X X X 2.222, Corkill 19482.231,2.261,2.63,2.431,2.432 @(TI Airica X X 2.271 Watt & Breyer-

Brandwijk 1962 Z'"i>'

D. glabra Roxh. saponins, alkaloids Kamick 1971

®(T) Bay of Bengal X 2.121 Bhargava 1983

D. Ilispidu Dennst. saponins, alkaloids Kamick 1971,(D. daemona) Willaman & Li

1970(T) Malay X X X 2.1323 Skeat & Blagden

Penninsula 1906IT) Cambodia X X X 2.2326 Martin 1971(T) Philippines X X 2.232 Brown 1920

D. Iatifolia Benth. (T) West Africa X X 2.2211, Labouret 1937; <:2.2112 Busson 1965 f?.

-'"D. prochensilis Benth. (T) C. Airica X X 2.2812 Burkill 1939 Z

p

D. prainlOtla R. Kunth IT) Malaysia X 2.111 Tanaka 1976

TABLE 1. Survey of Traditional Methods of Plant Detoxification. Each report is categorized for the seven basic techniques outlinedin the text and coded according to the schema in APPENDIX 1. (continued)

Plant GroupFamilyScientific NamePlant Part ( )

Location

ChemistI)'

Processing ClassificationI 2 3 4 5 6 7 Code

Reference

-''',",.\1 k. •..~, .

fi

alkaloidsX X X

D. preussii Pax.

D, sansibarensis Pax.

Tamus communis 1.

Ebenaceae

Diospyros spp,

D, oieitera Cheng

Elaeocarpaceae

Eiaeocarpus sp.

ITI

(St)

(FI

W. Africa

Africa

Europe; Persia;N, Africa

China

x

saponinsl phenatlthrenesX X

naphthaquinones

indolizidine alkaloids

x 2.232,2,221

2,2132,253,2,233

2,2712

2.

Busson 1965;Tan.ka 1976

W ill.man &. Li1970; BurkiU 1939

Takeds 1972;El-Olemy &. Reisch1979; Hedrick 1919

Hegnauer 1966

Tanaka 1976

Tohns &. Lamberton1973

~~

~;

E, dematus Vah}, (FI New Zealand X X 2.5111 Wright-St. Clair1972 :s

TABLE L Survey of Traditional Methods of Plant Detoxification. Each report is categorized for the seven basic techniques outlined §in the text and ended according to the schema in APPENDIX 1. (continued)

Plant GroupFamilyScientific Nameplant Part { I

Euphorbiaceae

Elateriospeut1um tapos Blume.IS!

Euphorbia lathyrus L.

Hevea brasiliensis MuelI.-Arg.

Location

Malaysia,Indonesia

S. Europe.

S.E. Asia

Chemistry

Processing Classification1 234 5 6

x

igenane-type diterpenc estersX

cyanogenic glycosidesX

7

X

Code

2.121,2.131

2.251

2..311

Reference

Tanaka 1976

Hecker 1977Hedrick 1919

Hegnauer 1966Tanaka 1976

i9J'

~latropha Coreas L

f. multifida L

{51151

IS!

MexicoTrop. America!Asia

Trap. America,Asia

xx

x

2.1312.61

2.61

Dressler 1953Tanaka 1976

Tanaka 1976

Manihot esculenta Crantz. cyanogenic glycosidesmany methods of detoxification practiced worldwide

IT!

MalayPenninsulaCongo

x x

x

X 2.233

2.43

Hegnauer 1966Lancaster et a1.1982Skeat &. Blagden1906Miracle 1967

~pc

~-

"'~

TABLE I. Survey of Traditional Methods of Plant Detoxi!icotion, Each report is categorized for the seven basic techniques outlined Ifin the text and coded according to the schema in APPENDIX 1, (continued) !l

~

Plant GroupFamilyScientific NamePlant Part ( J

Location

Chemistry

Processing Classification1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Code

Reference i

Mercurialis annua L.IFI

Fabaceae

Abrus precatoriua L,IF,SI

Acacia "lbida DelHe 151

Canava1i" obtusifolia DC151

Cassi" occidentalis L. IS)

Germany

Bay of Bengal

S.Alrica

Australia

W. Africa

cyanogenic glycosidesX

lectins, alkaloidsX

X X

X X

X

X X

X

2,121

2.131

2,28123

2,2113

Hegnauer 1966Hendrick 1919

Wei er aI. 1974;Mears & Mabry1971, Bhargava1983

Scudder 1971

Irvine 1957

Irvine 1952

iI;l

~g

a

(5)

Castanospennum australe A,Cunningh. & Fraser

pyrrolizidine alkaloids

octahydroindolizine alkaloidX XX X

§

Hohenschutz et al.1981;Tanalta 1976Hams 1987

Mears &. Mabry1971

Tanaka 1976

2,1312.234

2.2147XXXE, Trop. Asia

Australia

(51C. mucronata Desv.

CrotaI"ria spp,

0-

TABLE L Survey of Traditional Methods of Plant Detox;fjcation. Bach report is categorized for the seven basic techniques outlined ~

in the text and coded according to the schema in APPENDIX 1. (continued) 13

Plant ~roup Chemistry ReferenceFamilyScientific Name Location Processing ClassificationPlant Part ( I 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Code

Entada phaseoloides Mem. Yasuraoka et aL1977,

saponinsl entcgcnic acid Cribb &lSI Australia X X X 2.2&3 Cribb 1975

Erythrina veriegata L. Dc Silva &.erythrina alkaloids Snieekus 1978, @

Trop. Asia X 2.131, Tanaka 1976 Z2.111 '"

Intsia retusa Kurz. (F) E. Malaysia X X X 2.214 Tanaka 1976J;l>

~Lupinus albus 1. Mean; &. Mabry 0quino]jzidine alkaloids, saponins 1971,

lSI Italy X 2.121 Hudson &.EI·Dilrawi 1979,Hendrick 1919

L. hirsutus 1. Batta &.quinolizidine alkaloids Rajagopalan 1978

IS) Europe X 2.121 Tanaka 1976

L. littoralis Dougl. IRI British X 2.121, Turner & Bell 1973~Columbia 2.151.'"

1. luteus 1. Murakoshi et al. tquinolizidine alkalOId 1979,

lSI Italy X 2.121 Tanaka 1976

TABLE I. Survey of Traditional Methods of Plant Detoxification, Eac1J report is categorized for the seven basic techniques outlinedin the text and coded according to the schema in APPENDIX 1, (continued)

Plant GroupFamilySCientific NamePlant Part ( I

Location

Chemistry

Processing ClassificationI 2 3 4 5 6 7 Code

Referencer~

proteinase inhibitors, canavanine

quinolizidinc alkaloids, saponinsX X

X

rotenoids, ptcrocarpans

"0

~fil

ITanaka 1976

Brink et al, 1977

Scudder 1971

Felger &. Moser1976

Gabrial &. Morcos1976;Tanaka 1976

Mears &. Mabry1971, Bell 1971

Hatzold et al, 1983;Hudson &.E1·Difrawl 1979;Gade 1969; Sauer1950

2.2182

2,2812

2.2.34,2,211

2,211

2,211

XXx

X

X

X

quinolizidine alkaloidsXMediterranean

Mexico

S, Airica

Andes, SouthAmerica

Trop, Asia

(SI

Mucuna sp,

Neorautanenia spp,

N, mitis lA, Rich,l Verd. IR)

Olneya tesota A. Gray (SI

M, cochinchinensis A. Chev,IS)

L, termis Forsk.

L. mutabilis Sweet

Pac1Jyrrhizus erosus Urb,IP, angulatus Rich,) (TI

Prosopis spp,

China X

non-protein amino acids

2,11 Hedrick 1919

Krauss &.Reinbothe 1973

~

TABLE I. Survey of Traditional Method., of Plant Detoxification, Each report is categorized for the seven basic technUjues outlined 0in the text and coded according to the schema in APPENDIX 1, (continued) '"Plant Group Chemistry ReferenceFamilyScientific Name Location Processing ClassificationPlant Part I I I 2 3 4 5 6 7 Code

P. pubescens Benth. (S) W, North X X X 2,13, 2,3, Castetter &. BellAmerica 2.41 1942

P, ;uliflora DC (S) W, North X X 2.41141 Hodge 1907;America Castetter 1935

Tamarindus indica L. Toms &. Western '0haemagglutinins 1971; ~

lSI 5, Africa X X X X 2,28123 Scudder 1971V>

!>'

~Fagaceae ~

Quercus spp. tannic acid Hegnauer 1966IS) E.North X X 2.261 Gilmore 1932;

Anlcrica Waugh 191615) W, North X X X X 2.28123; Zigmond 1981;

America 2.242 Barrett &. Gifford1933; Gifford 1936

(S) W, North X X X 2.4123 Barrett 1952;America Chestnut 1902

(5) Persia X X 2,232 Gifford 1936 <:(5) Japan X 2,281 Gifford 1936 il-lSI Sardinia X X 2.4123 Gifford 1936 .'"

Q, chrysoIepis Liebm, (5) W. North X 2.431 Gifford 1936 ~America

TABLE 1. Survey of Traditional Methods of Plant Deto;dfication. Each report is categorized for the seven basic techniques outlined rin the text and coded according to the schema in APPENDIX 1. (continued)

'plant Group Chemistry Reference ":0

Family '"'"Scientific Name Location Processing Classificationplant Part I I I 1- 3 4 5 6 7 Code

Q. garryana Doug!. 151 W. North X 2.4.31 Guther 197.3America

gFlacourtiaceae ZPougium edule Remw. cyanogenic glycosides Heguauer 1%6 i':ex Blume IFI Malay X X X 2.233 Skeat & Blagden ~

Peuumsula 1906

~151 Philippines X 2.211 Brown 1920151 Trop. Asia, X 2.311 Tanaka 1976 0

'"Microne.sia 6§

Fumariaceae ><

Corydalis ambigun Cham. 8< protoberberine alkaloids Heguauer 1%9Schlecht. IBI Saghalm Is. X X 2.2712, Laufer 19.30

2.4112

Haemadoraceae

Haemadonlm coccineum pheuylenone Heguauer 1986Hook. 18. corybosuml (RI Australia X X 2.41131, Grey 1841; Cribb

2.41142 & Cribb 1975, 5Laufer 1930

on

TABLE 1. Survey of Traditional Methods of Plant Detoxification. Each repoIt is categorized for the seven basic techniques outlined §iin the text and coded according to the schema in APPENDIX 1. (continued)

Plant Group Chemistry ReferenceFamilyScientific Name Location Processing ClassificationPlant Part I I I 2 ,3 4 5 6 7 Code

Hippocastanaceae

AescuJus spp. saponins {escinl Hegnauer 1966

A, califomica {Spach) Nutt. Chestnut 1902,151 California X X X 2.243, Zigmond 1981; 0

2.333 Barrett & Gifford ::t:

19,3,3, Barrett 1952 519J>

A. indica Colebr. ex Wall.~151 Himalayas X 2.211 Hedrick 1919 0

A. turbinata Blume saponins Hegnauer 1966,Japan X X X X 2.262 Tanaka 1976

IcacinaceaeIcacina spp. dite'1'ene alkaloids On'okoko &

Vanhaclen 1980

1. senegalensis A. Juss. IT! W. Africa X X X 2.2<326 Irvine 1952<:

Lamiaceae ?--'"

Ajuga nipponensis Makino Shimomura et al ~dite'1'ene: ajugamarin 1981,Japan X 2.221 Tanaka 1976

F' ,'",=cr,." .." ,j.TABLE L Survey of Traditional Methods of Plant Detoxification. Each report is categorized for the seven basic techniques outlinedin the text and coded according to the schema in APPENDIX 1. (continued)

Plant GroupFamilyScientific NamePlant Part I I

Location

Chemistry

Processing ClassificationI 2 3 4 5 6 7 Code

Relerencerill

Lauraceae

Beilschmeidia bancroftjj lSI Australia X X 2.233 Harris 1987 '8'"B. tarain Kirk. INesodaphne ~

tarair.il 151 New Zealand X LI21 Hedrick 1919~

R tawa Kirk. IN. tawal IFI New Zeallllld X X 2.5111 Wright-St. Clair

~1972New Zealand X 2.121 Hedrick 1919 @

Endiandra pubens Meissn, Bandaranayakc (55terpenoids et al. 1981; p

{51 Australia X X X 2.233 Cribb &Cribb 1975; ><HarriS 1987

E. palmerstomi c.T. WhiteAustralia X X X 2.233 Cribb & Cribb

1975; Harris 1987

E, tooram lSi Australia X X 2.233 Harris 1987

Neetandm spp. benzylisoquinoline alkaloids Dos Santos &Gilbert 1975

N. rodioei Hook. lSi Tropical South X X 2.222 Levi·Strauss 1950; -0America Kirchoff 1950 '"

r

TABLE I. Survey of Traditional Methoos of Plant Detoxification. Each report is categorized for the seven basic techniques outlinedin the teX! and coded according to the schema in APPENDIX 1. (continued)

Plant Group Chemistry ReferenceFamilyScientific Name Location Processing ClassificationPlant Part I I I 2 3 4 5 6 7 Code

Umbellularia californicaIHook. &. Am.) Nutt. IS) W. North X X 2.133 Chestnut 1902

America

o'"

<:2.12, 2.51 Tanaka 1976 fl.

_00

Hegnauer 1963 Z2,11 Harvard 1895 ?

Hegnauer 1966 a::t

2.131 Bhargava 1983 Z

'"X 2.261 WaU &. Breyer- 9J'Brandwljk 1962

~2.111 Tanaka 19760

Lecythidaceae

Barringtonia asiatica IL.) Kutz. saponinslB. racemosal lSI Bay of Bengal X

IL) X

Indochina X

LiliaceaeAllium geyera S. WatsIA. deserticolal IBI Arizona X

Allium tricoccurn Alt. saponinsE. North X XAmerica

Asphodelus ramosus L. Eumpe X X

Chlomgalum pomeridianum saponinsKunth. IB) W. North X

America

2,131

2,51, 2.52

Steggerda &.Eckardt 1941

Hegnauer 1963Kuhrn 1961

,....~ ,,~ e' ''','' ,·.·"..".":~h ..~~··"',~".",,._·:. 'lj i" "Iil.[ t £ i.jANiE

~

~

(5

~....iii'"~'"o~Tanah 19762.2116

Reference

Code

Hegnauer 19862. Tanaka 1976

Hcgnaucr 1986

2.222 Tanaka 1976

Windholz 19762.2376 Ray 1963

XX

veratrum alkaloids: zygadenineX

Asia

California

Malvaceae

Zigadenus venenosus Wats.(B]

TABLE 1. Survey of Tra<!itio:t1al Methods of Plant Detoxification. Eacb report 1s categorized for the seven basic techniques out.liDed i?in the text and coded according to the scbema in APPENDIX 1. (continued) I

Abutlion theopbrasrri Medik,ISl

plant Group ChemistryFamilyScientific Name Location Processing ClassificationPlant Part I I 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Opmopogon ;aponicus saponinsKer-Gawl. IR] Japan

Poiygonatum spp. saponins

P. lasiantlwm Maxim IRh] Japan X X X

Meliaceae

Owenia cera.ifera F. MueH,IF] Australia X 23 Irvine 1957

Moraceae

Artocarpus gomeziana Wall.Malaysia x 2.111 Tanili 1976 ~

,

TABLE 1. Survey of Traditional Methods of Plant Detoxification. Each report is categorized for the seven basic techniques outlinedin the text and coded according to the schema in APPENDIX 1. (continued)

~­oplant GroupFamilyScientific Nameplant Part I )

Location

Chemistry

Processing Classification123 4 5 6 7 Code

Reference

Myrtaceae

Eucalyptus bicolor A. Cunn. terpenoids Hegnauer 1969;IS! Australia X 2.2216 Roth 1897; Cribb

'" Cribb 1975 iE. largifJorens C.T. White '"

IS! Queensland, X 2.22 Cribb'" Cribb lO

'"Australia 1975 ~0

Olacaceae

Xirllenia americana L. (L) Australia X 2.ll Cribb &. Cribb1975

(S) Indonesia X 2.ll Brown 1920

Oleaceae

oleunopein Windholz 1976<:

Olea europoea L. ie.

(F! Mediterranean X X X 2.3115, Hartmann &. !?'2.2288, Bougas 1970 ~2.2588,2.71

''F_•.,,~ . L "I . Z. 44iiIIIII...,...

TABLE 1. SUlVeyof Traditional Method. of P1Jlnt Detoxification. Each report i. categorized for the seven banc techniques outlinedin the text and coded according to the .chema in APPENDIX 1. (continued)

Plant GroupFamilyScientific Nameplant Part ( )

Location

Chemistry

Processing Class:ifieation1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Code

Reference r~00

Orobanchaceae

Orobanche cooperi (GraYI ~Heller 1StI Mexico X 2.13 Felger & MoserZ

1976 :»".

Oxalidaceae0

"'Oxalis tuberosa Molina oxalic acid ~

IT) Andes, South X X 2.216 Sauer 1950 0America '"0

6Pandanaceae 0

"i

Pandanus spp. alkaloids, dimethyltryptamine Hynd=m 1984IF) Australia X 2.131 Cribb & Cribb

1975

Pinaceae

Pinus spp. terpenes{SI North America X 2.131 Havard 1895

P. ponderosa Doug!. lSI W. North X 2.131 Steedman 1930 --America -

r _.,..~~-~,......"""",.".- ~-.~~~~-

TABLE J. Survey of Traditional Methods of Plant Detaxification, Each report is categorized for the seven basic techniques outlinedin the text and coded according to the schema in APPENDIX 1. (continued)

-;:;Plant Group Chemistry ReferenceFamilyScientUic ~ame Location Processing CI"".ificationPlant Part { I 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Code

PoaceaeGigantochloa apus KuIZ &. hydrogen cyanide Hegoauer 1963Munro IShl Indonesi" X 2,11 Tanaka 1976

Setaria sphacelata {Schum.I Roughan &. Slack iStapf. &. Hubbard oxalic acid 1973,S, Africa X 2,12 Watt &. '"

Breyer-Brandwijk lIP

1962 ~Polygonaceae

Polygonum bistorta L. tannins Hegnauer 1969(R) ~. temperate X X 2.2113 Hedrick 1919

PontederiaceaeEichhornia erassipes Solms phenolic acids} £lavonoids, tannins Hegnauer 1986

(LF) Asia X 2.15, 2,11 Tanaka 1976

Portulacaceae <:~

Lewisia spp, saponins Hegnauer 1969 p'Z

L red1viva Pursh IR) British X 2.111 Steedman 1930p

Columbia

~f'"-"'-"',!,,~~"-- .\.,,~

~

<;;

iS;J

~

~

Plant Group Chemistry RefereneeFamilyScientific Name Location Processing ClassificationPlant Part ( I I 2 3 4 5 6 7 Code

Proteaceae

Hicksbeachia plnnatifolia(5) Australia X X 2.233 Harris 1987

Macadaunia spp. cyanogenic glycosides Hamilton &. Young1966

M. whe1anii F.M. Bailey Cribb &. Cribb(5) Australia X X 2.2113 1975; Harris 1987

Ranunculaceae

Clematis 'pp. rallunculin Ruijgrok 1966

C. iaulhina Koehne III Korea X X 2.12 Tmaka 1976

Ra.!lunculus bulbosus L. ranuncuJin Ruijgrok 1966Europe X 2.121 Hedrick 1919

R. eisenii KeJlog IS) W.North X 2.131 Tanaka 1976America

R. sce1erarus L. Misra &. Dixitranunculm 1980;

(T,.) Japan, Eurasia X 2.111 Tmaka 1976

TABLE 1. Survey of TraditioD11l Methods of Plaut Detoxification. Each report is categorized for the seven basic techniques outlined l?in the text aud coded according to the schema in APPENDIX 1. (continued) ~

:l

~

TABLE 1. $u.Iveyof Traditional Met.hodR of Plant. Detoxij;c~1tion. Each report is categorized for the seven basic techniques outlined~

in the text and coded according to the schema in APPENDIX 1. (continued) ...

Plant Group Chemistry ReferenceFamilyScientific Name Location Processing ClassificationPlant Part I J 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Code

Rhizophoraceae

Bruguiera sp. Barrau &. Peeters1972; Cribb &.

tannlus, tropane alkaloids Cribb 1975; iIFI Oceania X X X 2.2112 Saxton 1971;Barrau & if>

Peeters 1972 '"B. conjugata Merr. (R) Australia X X X 2.223,2.53 Cribb &. Cribb

~13

(B. gymnorhiza) 1975

Rosaceae

Potentilla totmentilla Neck. tannins Hegnauer 1973N. Asia, Europe X 2.121 Hedrick 1919

Prunus campanulara Maxim.IF) W. Asia 2. Tanaka 1976

Solanaceae ~,""

Datura inoxia Mill. tropane alkaloids Hegnauer 1973~ID. meteloides DC) IF) W. North X 2.41141, Castetter 1935

America 2.41142

,,,.- , ... ~.U""h'M,; !Ii kg; :.32I11III"'1

TABLE L SUlVey of Traditional Methods of Pbmt Detoxification. Each report is categorized for the seven basic techniques outlinedin the text and coded according to the schema in APPENDIX 1. (continued)

Plant GroupFamilyScientific NamePlant Part I )

Location

Chemistry

Processing Classification1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Code

Referencer'0

'"'"

Lycium pallidium Miers.IFI

Solanum spp.

S. X cllrtilobllm IliZ. & Buk.IT)

S. gilD !\add!

S. iamesii Torr. ITI

S. fendJeri A. Gray

S. X iuzepcZllkii luz. & Buk.IT)

S. simile F. Muen.semele)

W. NorthAmerica

Peru, Bolivia

W. Africa

W. NorthAmerica

W. NorthAmerica

Peru! Bolivia

CentralAustralia

x

glycoalkaloids

x

x X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

2.41252,2.41251,2.41242

2.366,2.41152

2.22122

2.41152,2.4125

2.41152,2.4125

2.366,2.41152

2.311

Whiting 1939;Steggerda &EckArdt 1941

Hegnaucr 1973

lohns 1986;Werge 1979

Keshioro & Ketiku1979

lohns 1986

lohns 1986

lohns 1986;Werge 1979

Irvine 1957

jlil

~

I

~

;;:

TABLE 1. Survey of Tramtional Method" of Plant Detoxificatio,l. Eacb report is categorized for tbe seven basic tecbniques outlined 0:in the text and coded according to the scbema in APPENDIX 1, (continued!

Plant Group Chemistry ReferenceFamilyScientific Name Location Processing ClassificationPlant Part ( I I 2 3 4 5 6 7 Cooe

Taccaceae

Tacco leontonpetalodes (1,) taccalin Scheuer et al, 1963Kuntze, IT, involucrata! IT) W, Africa X X X 2,112, Busson 1965,

2,222 Irvine 1952~

(T, pinnatifida! IT) Pacific X X X 2,222, Lessa 1977, BarrauZIn

2,2121, &. Peeters 1972, 9!'

2.2112 Basenm 1965, "'iiiHedrick 1919, 0Brown 1920

Australia X X X 2,2123 Cribb &. Cribb1975

Tiliaceae

Tilia japonica Simonk (P) Japan, China X 2,121 Tanaka 1976

Tropaeolaceae ~,""

Tropaeolwn tuberosum Ruiz Johns &. Towers Z&.Pav. gluensinolates 1981, "

IT) South America X X 2,11, 2,24 Sauer 1950

•

TABLE I. Survey of TraditioDJJ1 Methods of Plant Detoxification, Each report is categorized for the seven basic teclmiques outlinedin the text and coded according to the schema in APPENDIX 1. (continued)

i

~"? .,' ''''4IIIIIIII,- •.....-.._',._.,,/..-.~ '~''''',_ •.... - .- .

IReference

Code7Processing Classification123 4 5 6

Chemistry

Location

Plant GroupFamilyScientific NamePlant Part I I

Urticaceae

Urtica dioica L.{LJ

Valerianaceae

Valeriano edulis Nutt.IRI

Verbenaceae

Avicenma marina Vierh. lSI

Europe

W. NorthAmerica

Australia

histamine! serotonin/ acetylcholineX

alkaloids: valerianinX

x X

2,121

2.11,2.13

2,214

Hegnauer 1973,Hedrick 1919

Hegnauer 1973;Havard 1895;Hedrick 1919

Cribb"" Cribb1975

~~

Izamiaceae

Macrozamia spp_

lSI AustruliaMAM glycoside.X X 2.213,

2.2116

de Lucca et .1.1980;Cribb ""Cribb 1975

M, fraseri Miq.1M. macdonne11i) IStSI Australia x 2.214 Irvine 1957

~....

r- ~,~-""'-='-"'" .• :;*4"-&4 ;w -= .w-· _. "W::Z.{. £\!L , ;; At 4t L,. 1, . ..._~~

TABLE 1. Survey of Traditional Methods of Plant Detoldfication. Each report is categorize<! for the seven basic techniques outlinedin the text and coded according to the schema in APPENDIX 1, (continued)

~

~

00

Plant GroupFamilyScientific NamePlant Part I I

Location

Chemist<y

Processing ClassificationI 2 3 4 5 6 7

Reference

Code

M, miquelii A. Dc,

M. spiralis Miq.

151 Australia

E. Australia

x

x

x x

x

2.12,212

2.112

Tanaka 1976;lIvine 1957

Tanaka 1976

"Plant Part: B =< bulb; F ... frnit; Ph "'" £miting body; L Sleaf; La ... latex; P planti R = Toot; Rh == rhizomei S seed; Sh ... shoot; St "" stem; T tuber,

2,2 Palmer 1878

Hegnauer 19732,121 Burkilll9852,272 Busson 1965

Zamia sp.MAM glycosides

[51 Australia X X

Zamia chigua Cuatr. 151 Pananla. X X

Z. furfuracea Ait. (RI Mexico, CentralAmerica

Zamia pornila L(2. integrifolia) ITI Caribbean X

Zygophyllaceae

Balanites aegyptica Del. saponins(LI Africa X(51 W. Africa X

2.2116

2.2112

2.

de Lucca et al.1980,Grey 1841

Duke 1970

Tanaka 1976

i'"i"

~o

~!?"

~

6. Detoxification by physical processing.~Techniques such as grating, grinding,pounding, frcezmg etc. which break down the tissues of plants are collectively termed

S. Detoxification by d1ying. -Drying is likely to be an effective technique forremovingvolatile toxins from food and is usually used in combinationwith one of the other methodsof detoxification. More often than not material is simply dried by placing it in the sun,although ovens or kilns are used in some circumstances.

3. Detoxification by fermentation. -Simple fermentation techniques are part of therepertoire of detoxification of human groups worldWide. Microorganisms are ubiquitousand fermentation pro<eeds spontaneously under appropriate conditions. The metabolismof microorganisms alters the chemical composition of food. Basic techniques involveburying a food plant in the ground or in swamps, or enclosing it in some kind ofcontainer so that conditions conducive to fennentation can be achieved.

119JOURNAL OF ETIINOBIOLOGYSummer 1988

4. Detoxification by adsorption. --Chemical constituents in plants may be bound byphysical and chemical processe.• to other substances. Charcoal is the standard detoxi·fication substance used in cases of acute toxicity in clinical settings in modem medicine(Gilman et aI. 1985!. Both charcoal and clay are made up of small particles and havelarge surface areaS. They undergo weak interactions with organic compounds, primarilythrough van der Waals and electrostatic forces. Clay mineral lattices may be charged(usually negatively! and adsorption of chemicals may also be by ion-exchange (lohns 1986).

Humans deliberately usc the adsorptive properties of clay to bind toxins in food inways that appear to be elaborations of the geophagous behavior of animals IJohns 1986).Detoxification basically involves adding clay directly to food plants during processirigor at the time of ing.,~ion, or soaking the plant product in wet mud.

lWlyalso denature plant enzymes that are necessary to liberate certain active principalsfrom glycosides such as gluCQSinolates or cyanogenic glycoside•. However, in these casesliberation of active isothiocyarultes and hydrogen cyanide, respectively, may subsequentlybe canied out by bacterial or endogenous enzymes. Proteinaceous toxins such as leetinsand proteinase inhihitors are usually effectively denatured by heat.

Boiling and some form of roasting or bakmg are the most common cookingtechniques used worldWide. Althongh many plant foods are eaten raw, most are cookedin some way, However, more often than not detoxification is not the explicit functionof the cooking process. Roasting was perhaps the only cooking method used duriug mostof human history since boiling reqnires watertight and heat-resistant containers. Manypeoples solved the problem of applying heat to water by placing beated rocks directlyin tbe contents of watertight but not heat resistant containers. Clay pots can be usedfor boiling foods, but it was the introduction of metal pots that greatly increased thedistribution of this technique.

2. Detoxification by solution. -The use of water to remove toxins basically involvesthe dissolving of compounds in the water and their leaching from the food. The processis enhanced in specific and olten sophisticated ways and takes many forms as is apparentin level 2.2 of APPENDIX 1. Heat accelerates the leaching process. When the solubilityof a toxin is Iowa turnover of water, either by repeated pouring off and replacin& byplacing the obiect in running water, or by passing water throngh a food, will help. Saltincreases the polarity of the aqueous environment and can help in making certain com­pounda more soluble. Any process which causes more tissue to he exposed to the wateror which liberates plant constituents by destroying the integrity or the plant cells willspeed up leaching.

120 JOHNS & KUBO Vot 8, No.1

comminution ICoursey 1973). Comminution will greatly enhance fermentation,solubilization and other processes. In methods that utilize the metabolic machinery ofthe plant cell comminution is a primary means of detoxification. Enzymes containedin the same tissue breakdown certain more stable allelochemicals such as cyanogenicglucosides or glucosinolates to release compounds which are volatile, water·soluble orheat labile.

Grating of cassava (Manihot esculenta) is a widespread mechanism for detoxifyingbitter varieties of this important staple. Hydrogen cyanide, enzymat1cally liberated fromcyanogen1c g1ycosides, is released into the atmosphere during processing rather than whilethe plant is being chewed or digested. Processes employed with cassava are diverse andmany are elaborate seemingly beyond necessity since comminution followed by enoughtime for the enzymatic reaction to occur is sufficient (Seigler and Pereira, 1981!.

7. Detoxification by pH challge.-Change in pH can affect the solubility of manychemicals. In addition acidic and alkaline conditions can lead to the hydrolysis ofcompounds.

The additions ofashes and acids to foods play important roles in a number ofchemicalprocesses affected by pH change. Although acid hydrolysis will degrade many organiccompounds including g1ycosides and amidcs, concentrated acidic substances are rarelydirectly employed in traditional food processing. Acids formed during fermentation maycontribute to the breakdown andlor the solubilization of some toxins. Acidic fermentedproducts such as vinegar, and organie acids from fruits such as tamarrod, arc occasionallyadded to foods and may serve some role in detoxification. Pickling is carried out in com·bination with other techniques and may playa role in producing a final nontoxic pro­duct. Tamarind pulp is widely used in tropical regions as a flavor additive to food, althoughbecause of its acidity it may play other roles in alteting food quality. Tartaric acid whichmakes up 10% of the weight of tamarind pulp [Windholz 1976) is a good organic buffer.A concentrated solution of tamarind that we tested had a pH of 2.5 although its buffer·ing capacity was not assayed. We are familiar with three cases where tamarind is usedto detoxify food. Two of these cases involve plants in the Araccae which may have highlevels of calcium oxalate. Significantly tartaric acid may be effective in increasing thesolubility of the highly irritating crystals Iraphides) of this compound lOke 19691. Thethird case of tamarind use with toxic plants involves roots of the legume Neorautaneniamitis. The genus is characterized by rotenoids and other toxic flavonoid derivatives.

Alkali materials in the form of lye from plant ash and mineral lime are readilyavailable and widely applied. They participate in hydrolysis reactions of common chemicallinkages such as ester and acetals. Ashes are usually used in solution, often with heatwhich greatly enhances the hydrolysis process.

It is known that interactions occuning when different chemicals are ingested togetherby animals may reduce the toxicity of one or both of them. The documented casesinvolve interactions of tannins with cyanogenic glucosides IGoldstcin and Spencer 1985!and saponins IFreeland et al. 1985}. There is no indication from the present survey thatchemical interactions such as these are exploited by humans to detoxify foods. Manyprocesses are subtle, and even when effeetive would not necessarily be understood orarticulated by people practicing them. Further research examining the effectiveness oftraditional processing must recognize the complexity of chern1cal systems and shouldbe observant for more subtle ways by which humans may have exploited poisonous plantsto their advantage.

Summer 1988 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY

THE OIUGIN OF FOOD PROCESSING TECHNIQUES

121

The question of how humans learned to detoxify plants in particular ways isdifficult to answer. The ubiquity 01 the various tcchuiques and their sophisticationsupports their antiquity. The use of CUlys for their adsorption properties has antecedentsin animal behavior Hohns 1986). Heating, leaching, lennentation, and drying olloodsallhave simple cause and effect relationships with change in food palatability that conldbe observed in common events. Harris (1977) suggested that plants that are detoJdfiedby leaching were originally used lor fish poisons. Plants that had been left in streamscould be subsequently discovered to be aeceptable foods. Comminution of plants andthe use 01 lye and salt to facilitate detoxification require greater sophistication. However,the use 01 tools is a lcngstanding human trait that would have been involved in detoxi·fication since early in human history. Once tools were used to open nuts or other foods,teIining the teclmiques to dimlnjsh the roods further is not a great leap for humanbeings. The Use 01 salt in boiling would take place once boiling itself was established.Salt water could have been used initially in coastal areas simply because 01 its availability.The use of lye also would lollow cooking, and ashes would be readily available fromcooking sites. Perhaps hot coals or ash covered rocks were initially added only to heatwater, but consequently were discovered to improve the food. The use of alkali and acidicsubstances in processing appears to represent the mOSt sophisticated of the basictechniques.

A preference for nutrient dense loods such as animal protein and fats and concen·trated carbohydrates in fruits, tubers and seeds has characterized the genus Homo (Milton1987) and directed OUI technological achievements over the past 2 million years furscallllllging, hunting and processing plant products. The energetic reward offered by densecarbohydrate sources would have provided a strong motivation lor the development 01deto:xiflcation processcs and once a technology for detoxifying plant foods was establishedit is not surprising that deliberate elaboration using available resources would occur.Once the basic mechanIsms of detoJdfication were widespread, their refinement to dealin sophisticated ways with particnlar plants was a function of hnman adaptability andintelligence. The adaptation of humans to exploit the resource. of a new environmentinvolves the application of detoxification techniques to utilize the available plantresources. Where human groups wexc in intimate association with a food resource overmany generations it is not surprising that considerable refinements took place,

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We wish to acknowledge financial support from the Natural Sciences and Engineering ResearehCouncil of Canada (postdoctoral Fellowship and University Research Fellowship to TJ). P.1, Hankemade many helpful suggestions during the course of this pro;cct and K V. Milton and D. B. McKeymade useful comments on an earlier draft.

LITERATURE CITED

AHMED, Z. R, A. M. RlZK, F. M, HAM·MOUDA and M. M. SElF EL·NASR J972.Naturally occurring glucosinolates withspecial reference to those of f.arnily Cap'paridaeeae, Plan", Med, 21:35-60,

"""fDERSON, K. E., fl., H. CaNNEY andA. KAPPAS, 1986, Nutrition as anenvironmental influence on chemicalmetabolism in man, pp. 39~54. in Ethnicdi..Uerences in reactions to drugs and

122 JOHNS & KUBO

LITERATURE CITED (continuedJ

Vol. 8, No. I

xenohioti<:s, iW. K.low, H. W. Goedde,and D. P. Agarwal, eds.l. Alan R. Lis" NewYork.

BANDARANAYAKE, W., J. E. BANFIELD, D.ST. C. BLACK, G. D. FAlLON andB. M.GATEHOUSE. 1981. Constituents ofEndiandra species. 1. Endiandric acid, <1

novel carboxylic acid from EndiandraiDtrofsa j:Lamaceael, and a derived lactone,Aust. j. Chern. 34:1655·1677.

BARRAU, j. and A. PEETERS. 1972. Histoireet prehistoire de Ia pr~paration desaliments d'origine vegetale. J. Soci~te desOcemistes. 35:141·152.

IlARRETT, S. A. 1952. Material aspccts ofPorno culture. Part One. Bulletin PublicMuseum City Milwaukee 20:1,260.

and E. W. GIFFORD. 193.3,Miwok material culture. Bulletin PublicMuseum City Milwaukee 2:117-376.

BASCOM, W. R. 1965, Ponapc: a Pacificeconomy in transition. AnthropoI.Records, Dniv. Califomla Press, Berkeley22:1-156,

BATRA, V. and T. R. RAJAGOPALAN. 1976.Alkaloids of Lupinus hirsutus lLegumi.nosael, Indian j, Chem. Sect. B. 14B:636­637.

BELL, E, A. 197L Comparative hiochemistryof non-protein amino aCIDs. pp. 179·206 inChemotaxonomy of the Legummosae, O.B, Hathorne, D, Boulter and B. t. Turner,cds,), Academic Press, London.

BHARGAVA, N, 1983, EthnohotanicaI studiesof the tribes of Andaman and NicobarIslands, India. I, Onge. Econ. Botany 37:110·119,

BRINK, A, J., G, H. J, RALL and J, C. BREYEN­BACH. 1977, Preroearpans of Neorau·tanenia edulis and N. amboensis. Phyro·cl>em, 16:273'276.

BROWN, W, H. 1920, Wild food plants ofthePhiHppines. BulL No. 21. Departmentof Agriculture and Natural ResourcesBureau of Forestry, Manila.

BRUNING, R. and H. WAGNER. 1978, Uher·sicht iiber die Celastraceen·Inhaltsstoffe:Chemie1 Chemotaxonomie! Biosynthese,Pharmakologie, Phytochem. 17;1821·1858.

BURKItL, H. M, 1985. The useful plants ofWest Tropical Africa. Vol. I Royal BotanicGardens, Kew.

BURKlLL, 1. H. 1939. Notes on the genusDioscorea in the Belgian Congo, Bulletindu Jardin Botanique de L'Etat, Bmxelles.15:345·428,

BUSSON, F, 1965. Plantes Alimentaires deI'Ouest Africain. Leconte, Marseilles.

CASTETTER, E, F, and W, H. BELL 1942,Pima and Papago Indian agriculture. Univ,New Mexico Press, Albuquerque,

CASTETIER, E. F. 1935. Uncultivated ruttiveplants used as sources of foodl ethno~

biological studies in the American South­west I, Univ. New Mexico Bull. No, 2661

Biological Series. Vol. 4, No. I, 1';;2.CHE5TNUT, V, K. 1902. Plants used hy the

Indians of Mendocino County, Califomla,Contrib, United States National Herb­arium 7;295422.

CHRl5TIAN5EN, J. A. andN. R. THOMPSON,1977. The utilization at <lbiuer'J potatoesin the cold tropics of latin America,pp. 212·215 in Proceedings of the FourthSymposium of the International Societyfor Tropical Root Crops. [J. Cock, R,Macintyre and M. Graham, edsl inter­national Development Research Centre,IDRC-08Oe, Ottawa.

CLARK, J, D. and j, W, K. HARRIS. 1985.Fire and its roles in carly hominid life­ways. Aft, Areru.eoL Rev. 3:3-27.

COCK, r H. 1982. Cassava: a basic energy50= in the tropics. Science 218:755-762,

CORKIll, N. L. 1948, The poisonous wildcluster yam, Dioscolea dumetorurn Pax,as famine food in the Anglo·EgyptianSudan, Ann, Trap, Med. Parasit. 42:278·287.

COURSEY, D. G, 1967. Yams: au account ofthe nature, origins/ cultivation and utili­zation of the useful members of theDioscorea.ceae. longmans, London,

__-:_-," 1973. Cassava as food: toxicityand technology. Pp, 27·36 in ChronicCassava Toxicity, fB. Nestel and R.Macintyre, eds.) , International Develop­ment Research Centre, Ottawa,

CRIBB, A. B, and !' W, CRIBB. 1975, WildFood in AusUalia. William Collins PtyLtd, Sidney,

DELAVEAU, P., B. KOUDOGmO and J..t.POUSSET. 1973. AlcaloIdes chez lesCapparidaceae. Phytochem. 12:2983·2895.

DE LUCCA, P., A. MORETTI, S. SABATO, G.

JOURNAL OF ETIiNOBI0LOGY

LITERATURE CITED (continued)

SINlSCALCO GIGLIANO. 1980. Theubiquity of cYC9.sin in cycads. Phytochem.19:2230-2231.

DI51LVA, S. 0., and V. A. SNlECKUS. 1978.Brythrina and rela'ed alkaloids. Alkaloids{Londonl·8:137·143.

DOS 8ANTOS FlLHO, D., and B. GILBERT.1975. The alkaloids of Nectandra mega­potomica. Phytochem. 14:821·822.

DRESSLER, R. L. 1953. The pre-<:olumhiancultivated plants of Mexico. Bot. Mus.Lea1lets, HatVaro Univ. 16: liS· In.

DUlCE, r. E. 1970. Ethnobotanical ohservationson the Chad} Indians. Econ. Botany24:344-355.

IlWLEMY, M. M., and j. REISCH. 1979.lsolation of bat:1tsin I from Dioscoreadumetorum rhizomes. Z, Naturforsch.34:288·289.

PILGER, R. S., and M. B. MOSER. 1976. SeriIndian food plants: Desert subsistencewithout agriculture. Ecol. Food Nutt. 5:13·27.

PREELAND, W. J., P. H. CALCOTT and L. R.ANDERSON. 1981. Tannins and saponin:interaction in herbivore diets. Biochem.Sys,. Eenl. 13:189·193.

GABRIAL, G. N., and MORCOS, S. R. 1976.The use of Lupinus tennis L cultivatedin Egypt as a food p.rotein supplement, Z.Emaehrungswiss. 15:333·339.

GADE, D. W. 1969. Vanishing crops of ttadi·tional agriculture: the case of tarwi(Lupinus mutllbilis) in the Andes. Pro~

ceedings Assoc. Amer, Geographers.1:47·51.

GADE, D. W. 1970. Ethnobotany of Caiiihua(Chenopodium pallidic.aule), rustic seedcrop of ,he A1,iplano. Eeon. Botany 24:S5-61.

GAN)lAN, I., L KURD, and P. FLUDZINSKl.1983, Insect antifeedant elemanolidelaetones hom Vernonia amygdalina.Phytoehem. 22:2525·2526.

GARNIER, R., F. CONSO, M. L. EFTHY·M10U, G. R1BOULET and M. GAUTH·IER. 1978. Acute poisoning hy Gyromira6&culenta, Toxieol. Eur, Res, 1:359-364.

GASQUET, M., n BAMBA, A. BARDJAMlAN,G. BALANSARD, P. TIMON·DAVID,and J. METZGER. 1985. Aetion amoebi·eide et anthelminthique du vemolide etde IJhydroxyvemoilide isoles des fcuilles

123

de Vernonia co}orata IWilld.1 Drake. Eur.J. Med. Chern. Chim. Ther. 20:111·115

G[J'FDRD, E. W. 1936. Califomia balanophagy.Pp. 87-98 in Essays in Anthropology.Univ. California Press, Berkeley.

GlLMAN, A. G., L. S. GOODMAN, T. W.RALL, and F. MURAD, leds.!. 1985. Goed·man and GHman's the pharmacologicalbasis of therapeutics. 7th Ed, MacmillanPuhlishing Co., Inc., New York.

GILMORE, M. R. 1932. Some Chippewa usesof plants. Papers Mich, Acad. Sci. ArtsLetters. 17:119-143.

GOLDSTEIN, W. S., and K. C. SPENCER.1985, Inhibition of cyanogenesis bytannins. I. Chern. Eenlogy. II :847·858.

GREGER, H. 1977. Anthemidae-chernicalreview. l'p. 499· in The Biology andChemistry of the Compositae, Vol. II,IV. H. Heywood, J. B. Harborne, B. L.Turner, cds,]. Academic Press/ London.

GREY, G. 1841. Journals of two expedi'ionsof diseovery in northwest and westernAustralia during 'he yeatS 1837, 38 and39. Vol. 2. T. and W. Boone, London.

GUNTHER, E. 1973. Ethnohotany of WesternWashington. Uuiv, Washington Press,Seattle,

HAMILTON, R. A., and R. L YOUNG. 1966.Transfer of bitterness in Macadamiain tegd/olia by grafting, Caliiurnia Maca­ililmia Society Yearbook.

HARBORNE, I. B. 1982. In,roduetion toecological bioehemistry, 2nd Edition,Academic Press, London.

HARRIS, n R, 1977, Alternative pathwaystowaro agricul'me. pp. 179·243 ill Originsof Agricultule, /CA. Reed, ed,). MoutonPuhlishers, The Hague.

_.__.._ t987. Aboriginal subsistance in a'tropical ram forest environntent: foodproemement, cannibalism, and populationregulation in northeastern Australia, Pp.357~385 in Food and evolution: Toward atheory of human food habits, 1M. Harrisand E, B, Ross, eds.J, Temple Vniv. Press,Philadelphia.

HARKlS, G. H. 1890. Rootloods of the SeneeaIndians. Rochester Acad, Sci, 1:106-114,

HARTMANN, H. T, and P. G. BOUGAS.1970. Olive production in Greece, EC9n.Botany. 24:443-459.

HASAPlS, X., A. r. MACLEOD, and M. MaR·

124 JOHNS&KUBO

LlTERATIJRE CITED (continued!

Vol 8, No.1

EAU. 198 L Gluc()slnolates of nine Croci·fene and two Capparaceae speciesPhytochem. 20:2355·2358

HATZOLD, T., I ELMADFA, R. GROSS, M.WINK, T. HARTMANN and L. WTITE.1983. Quinolizidine alkaloids in seeds ofLupinwl: mutabilis. J, AgIie. Food Chern.31:934-938.

HAVARD, V. 1895. Food plants 01 the NorthAmerican Indians. B. Torrey Bot. Club.22:98·123.

HAYDEN, ll. 1981. Subsisteoce and ecologi01ladaptations of modem hunter/gatherers.Pp. 344-421 in Omnivorous prim.ates.(RS.a. Hardin<: and G. Teleki, eds I.Columbia Univ. Press, New York.

HECKER! E. 19n. New toxic, irritant andcocarcinogenic diterpene esters fromEuphorbiaceae and Thymelaeaceae_ PureAppL Chern. 49:1423-1431.

HEGNAUER, R 1962·1986. ChemotaxollOmieder Pllanzen. VoL I-VIT. Birkhauser Verlag,Ba.sel.

HEMBREE, J. A., C.·I· CHANGE, J. L.MCLAUGHUN, G. PECK, and I. M.CASSADY, 1978. The antICancer actiVItyof Semeaarpus anocardilIm, 1, 9KB activepentsdecylcatechols. LloydU!41:491-493.

HEDRiCK, U. P. (cdI1919, Sturtevant's Noteson Edihle Plants, New York AgriculturalExperimental Station; Albany.

HODGE, F. W. 1907. The Narrative of AlvarNunez Cabez. de Va",. pp. 12-126 inSpanish Explorers in the Southern UnitedStates 1528·1543. New York.

HOHENSCHUTZ, L D" E. A. BELL, P. J.j1'.WES5, D. P. LEWORTHY, R J. PRYCE,£. ARNOLD and J. CLARDY. 1981. Casta·nospermine, a 1,6,7,8-tetrahydroxyocta·hydroindolizme alkaloid) from seeds ofCastanospennum ausua]e, Phytochem.2O:81J.814.

HUDSON, B J, F., and E. A. EL-DIFRAWI.1979. The sapogenins of the seeds o£fourlupin species. I. Plant Foods. 3:181·186.

HUSSEY, J. S. 1974. Some usefulpLmts 01 earlyNew England. Econ. Botany. 24:311,337.

HYNDMAN, D. C. 1984. Ethnobotany 01Wopkaimin Pandnnus: significant PapuaNew Guinea plant resource, Econ, Botany,38:287-303.

IRVINE, F. R 1952. Supplementary and emer­gency' food plan" of West Africa. Bean,

Botany. 36:84-99.~__. 1957. Wild and emetgeoey foods

of Australian and Tasmanian Aborigines.Oceania. 28:113-142.

lSACC, G. L 1984. The archaeology 01 humanorigin..: studies of the Lower Pleistocenein East Africa 1971-1981 in Advances inworld archaeology, Vol. 6, IF, WemdoTfand A. E. Close, eds.!. Academic Press,Orlando.

JOHNS, S. R., and J. A. LA."IBERTON. 1973.Elaeocarpus alkaloids. Alkaloids 14:325·.146.

JOHNS_, T. 1986. Detoxification function ofgeophagy and domestication of the poUtto.I. Chem. EcoL 12:635·646.

___~_~, and G. H. N. TOWERS. 1981.lsothiocymates and thioureas in en:.tymehydrolysates of Trnpaenlum tuberosum.Phytochem. 20:2687-2689.

JOHNSTON, A. 1970. Blackloot Indian utili­zation of the flora of the northwesternGreat Plain. Eeoll. Botany. 24:301·324.

KARNlCK, C. R. 1971. Phytochemieal investi­gation of some Dioscorea species andvarieties found in India. Ouat. r. CrudeDrug Res. 11:1761-1773.

KESHlNRO, O. 0., and A. O. KETIKU. 1979.Eflect of traditio""l cooking methods onthe ascarbic acid content of some Nigerianleafy and fruit vegetahles. Food Chern.4:303-310.

KIRCHOFF, P. 1950. The Wattau. Pp. 869­881 in Handbook of South AmericanIndi""s, Vol, 3, iJ. H. Steward, cd.,. ButeJtuAmerican Ethnology i ";, Washington,

KRAUSS, G.-J., ""d H. REINBOTHE. 1973Die freien JUninosauren in Samen vonMinosaceae. Phytoehem. l2:125-142.

KROEBER, A. L. 1950. The Chibch., pp. 887·909 in Handbook of South AmericanIndians, Vol. 2, if. H. Steward, ed.l. BureauAmetican Ethnology 143, Washington.

KUHM, H. W. 1961. Uses of native heros byWisconsin IndWis. Wisconsin ArcheoI.42:9H32.

KUHNLEIN, H. V_, and N. J. TUIU'ER. 1986.Cow~parsnip {He.racleum lanatum Michx.Jan indigenous vegetable of native peopleof northwestern North America, J. £thno­bioI. 6:309..324.

LABOURET, H 1937. La gengraphie alimen­taire en Afrique Occidentale. Annales de

IOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY

LITERATURE CITED Icontinuedl

1988

Geographie.46:591-61O.lo\NCASTIlR, P. A., J. S. INGRAM, M Y.

LIM, D. G. COURSEY. 1982. Traditionalcassava-based foods: survey of processingteclmique" Econ. Botany. 36: 12-45.

IIA1JFER, B. 1930. Geoph"ID'. Field Mus, Nat.Riot. Anthropol. Set. 18:99-198.

W. A 1977. Traditional uses of thevucular plants of Ulithi Atoll! with com­parative notes, Micronesia 1-10:129-190.-sTRAUSS, C. 1950. The use of wildplant> in tropical South Ametica. Pp.465-486 in Handbook of South American1Ddian', Vol. 6, a. H, Sreward, ad.l. BureauAmerican Ethnology 143, Washington_TIN, M. A. 1971. Introduction al'Ethno­botanique du Cambodge_ Editions duCentre National de la Recherche Selenti·lique, Paris.

_MIS" J. A, and T. J. MABRY. 1971. Alka­loids in the Leguminosae. pp. 73-178 inCbemotaxonomy of the Leguminosae,a. B. HArborne, D. Boulter and B. 1.Turner! eda,J, Academic Pressl London,

i6IImLAUX, A. 1950. EthnographY 01 theChaco. pp. 197-370 in Handbook of SouthAmerican1ndians, Vol. I., II. H. Stewaro,ed.l. Bureau American Ethnology 143,Washington.roN, K. 1987. Pthuate diets and gutmwphology: implications lor hominid..mution. pp. 93·115 in Foods and Evolu­tion, 1M. Hanis andE. B. Ross, eas.l. Tern·pie Univ. Press, Philadelphia.

CLE, M, P. 1967. Agriculture in theCongo Basin, Univ, Wisconsin Press,Madison.

....ISR.~ S. B., and S. N. DIXIT. 1980. Anti·lunga1 principle of Rdnunculus scelerarus.Econ. Botany. 34:362-367.

.,MOORE, R. E. 1977. VolatUe compounds&om marine algae. Accounts Chem. Res.10:40-47.

'MOYER, B. G. 1979. 3-Nitropropanoyl.j).g1ycopyranoaes of CQrynocarpus laevj·g.tw!. Phytochem. 18:111·113.

OMtnVk1tOWSHl, L, K. TORIlZUKA, j. HAGI­N1WA, S. OHMIYA, H. OTOMASU.1979. (-I-ltrans·4'- -DGlucopfIanosylo­xycinnamoylj lupinine, . a new lupinalkaloid in Lupinu. seedlings. Chern.Pbarm. Bull. 27:144-146.

125

NAHRSTEDT, A. 1975. Triglochinin inAraceen. Phytochem. 14:2627·2628.

OKE, O. 1. 1969. Oxalic acid in plants andnutrition. World Rev, Nutr, Dietetics.10:262-303_

ON'OKOKO, P., and M. VANHAELEN. 1980.Two new diterpene-basoo alkaloids tromlcacina guesfeJdlli. Phytochern. 19:303·305.

OSHIMA, Y., T, rwAKAWA, and H. HIKlNO.1983. Alisnlol and alismoxide, sesqui~

terpenoids of Alisma rhizomes. Phyto·chern. 22:183·185.

PALMER, E. 1878. Plants used by the Indiansof the United Sute.. Am. Nat. 12:593-606,646-655.

RAY, V, F, 1963, Primitive Pragmatists; TheModoc Indians of Northern California:.Univ. Washington Press, Seattle.

ROTH, W. E. 1897. Ethnological StudiesAmong the North~west-centralQueens­land Aborigines. Edeound Gregor, Govern­ment Printer, Brisbane.

ROUGHAN, P. G., and C. R. SLACK. 1973.Simple methods for routine screening andquantitative estimation of oxalate contentof tropical grasses. I. Sci Food Agr. 24:803·811.

RUljGROK, H. W. L. 1966. Distribution ofnmUllcuHn and cyanogenetic compoundsin the llanunculaceae, Pp. 175·186 inComparative Phytochemistry, {T. Swain,ed.). Academic Press, London,

SAUER, C. O. 1950. Cultivated plants of Southand Central America.. pp. 487·543 inHandbook of Sourh American Indians,Vol. 6, II. H. Steward, ed.l. Bureau Amer·ican Ethnology 143, Washington.

SAJITON, j. E. 1971. Tropane alkaloid•.Alkaloids 1:55·58.

SCHEUER, P. j., C E. SWANHOLM, 1. A.MADAMBA and W. R. HUDGINS. 1963.The constituents of Tacco. leontopeta·Joide•. L1oyd!a 26:133-140.

SCUDDER, T. 1971. Gathering among AIticanwoodhtnd savannah cultivators A casesru<ly: The Gwembe Tonga. zambianPapers. 5: j.)50.

SEIGLER, D. S., ana I. F. PEREIRA. 1981.Modernized preparation of casave in theLlanos Orientales ot Venezuela, Econ,Botany. 35:356-362.

, -

126 JOHNS &. KUIlO

LITERATIJRE CITED Icontinued}

Vot 8; No.1

SHiMOMURA, H., Y. SAHIDA, K. OGAWAand Y. lITAKA. 1981. Ajugamarin, a newbitter diterpene from Aiuga m'pponensi.sMakino. Tet. Let. 22:1367-1368.

SINGH, H. B., and R. K. ARORA. 1978. Wild'Edible Plants of India Indian Council ofAgricultural Research, New Delhi.

SKEAT, W. W., and C. O. BLAGDEN. 1906.Pagan Races of the Malay Pennmsula.VoL 1, Macmillan and Co,! Limited,London.

STAHL, A. B. i964. Hominid dietary selectionbefore lire. Cure. Anthropol. 25:151·168.

STAHL, A. B. 1967: Plant food proc"",ing:implications for dietaI)" quality in Forag"ing and Farming: the Evolution of PlantDomestication, ID. R H.mi.s and G, C.Hillman, eds.). Allen and Unwin, London.In press.

STEEDMAN, E. V. 1929. Ethnobotany of theThompson Indians 01 British Columbia.Bureau of American Ethnology, 45thAnnual Report. Smithsonian Institution,Washington, nc.

STEGGERDA, M., andR. B. EDKARDT. 1941.Navajo loods and their preparation. J. Am.Diet. As'oc. 17:217·225.

SUMATIlI, S., TN.PATTABJRAMAN.1977.Natural plant enzymes inhibitors. V. Atrypsinfchymottypsin inhibitor fromA/ocasia macromiza tubers. Biochim,BJophys. Acta 485:167·178.

TAKEDA, K. 1972. The steroidal sapogeninsof the Dios<:oreaeeae. Prog. Phytochem.3:287·333.

TANAKA, T. 1976. Tanaka's Cyclopedia ofEdible Plants of the World. KeigakuPublishing Co., Tokyo.

TAYLOR, D. A., and A. J. HENRY. 1973.Alkaloids hom CourlX!1lIo gkJuca Ihizomr.Phytochem. 12:1l78·1180.

TOMS, G. C., and A. WESTERN. 197L Phyto·haemagglutinin•. Pp. 367·462 in Chemo·taxorlOmyu of the Leguminosae, II. B.Harbome, D. Boulter and B. L. Turner,eds.l. Academir Press, London.

TURNER, N. 1. 1977, Economic importanceof black tree liehen IBryo.tia fremontii) tothe Indians ot Western North America.Eeon. Botany. 31:461-470.

TURNER, N. J. 1964. Counter·irritant andother medicinal uses of plants in Ranun·

culaceae by n.ative peoples in BritishColumbia and neighboming """'- I. Ethno­pharmaool. 11:181·201.

TUR1'lER, N. c., and M. A. M. BELL. 1973.The ethnobotany 01 the Southern Kwa·kiml Indians 01 British Columbia. Eoon.Bot. 27:257-310.

WAKNER, W. L. 1958. A blaek civilization:a social study of an Austtalian tribe.Harper and Brothers Publishers.

WATT, J. M., and M. G, BREYER·BRAND­Wl)li.. 1962. The medicinal and poisonousplants of Southern and Eastern Africa.2nd ed. E. &. S. Livingsrone Ltd., Edin·burgh

WAUGH, F. W. 1916.lroquois foods and foodpreparation. Geol Sur. Can. Mem. 86IFac,imile edition 1973).

Will, C. H., F. C. HARTMAN, P. PFUDERER,W.·K. YANG. 1974. Purllication andcharacterization of two major toxic pro­terns from seeds of Abrus prccatotius. J.BioI Chern. 249:3061·3Q67.

WEISS, E. A. 1979. Some indigenous plantsused domestically by east African coastalfisherman. Econ. Botany. 33;35-51.

WERGE, R. W. 1979. Potato processing: in theCentral Highl:mds 01 Peru. Beol. FoodNutr. 7:229·234.

WHITING, A. F. 1939. Ethnobotany of theHopi. Museum Northern Arizona, Bull.15;1·120. •

wn.DMAN, W. C. 1968. The Amaryllidaceaealhloid,. The Alkaloids lJ:307-4Q5.

wn.LAMAN, /. J., and H.·L. U. 1970. Alkaloid·bearIng plants and their cont.mod alka·loids. Lloydia. 33, Supplement No. 3A.

WINDHOLZ, M.{ed.J 1976. The Merck Index.Merck and Co., Inc, Rahway, N.J.

WRIGHT·ST. CLAlR, R. E. 1972. Diet of theMaoris oINewz"aland. &oJ. Food Notr.1:213·223.

YASURAOKA, K., Y.lNE, K. TAKAMURA,H. SHlMOMURA, J. HASHIGUCHl, M. /'SANTOS, and A. T. SANTOS. 1977.Laboratory and field assessment of themolluscieidal aetivity of gogo (Entadaphaseoloides) againSt the amphibioussnail intermediate host of Schistosomajaponicum. Ipn. J. Exp. Mod. 47:463-467.

YOST, G. S., F. R. STERMITZ, and M. C.WILLIAMS. 1977. Toxic furocoumartns of

SUmmer 1988 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY

LITERATIJRE CITED (continued!

127

Cympoptems longipes. Phytochem. 16:1097-1098.

ZIGMOND, M. L. 191H. K.waiisu Etl:u1o·botany. Univ. Utah Pressl Salt Lake City.

APPENDIX 1Classification of Traditional Plant Processing Techniques

2. No special d.ztoxiikation techniques applied (subdivide as in Coursey, 1973)

2. Special detoxiikation techniques applied2.1 Detoxification by heat

2.11 Unspecified cooking

2.111 Cooking of whole pieces

2,1111 Cooking without the addition of salt,lyel or acid

2.1112 Cooking with the addition of salt

2.1113 Cooking with the addition of lye

2.1114 Cooking with the addition of add

2.1115 Cooking after drying

2.1116 Cooking after soaking

2,112 Cooking after comminution (Subdivide as for 2.I11)

2,113 Cooking after peeling (Subdivide as for 2.111)2.12 Boiling. stewing, etc. (Subdivide as for 2.11)

2.13 Roasting: baking (Subdivide as for 2.11)

2.14 Frying (Subdivide as for 2.11)

2.15 Steaming (Subdivide as for 2.11)

2.2 Detoxification by solution

2.21 Soaking in static water2.211 Soaking or leaching of whole pieces

2.2111 Followed by unspecified cooking

22112 Followed by boiling

2.21121 Simple boiling (Subdivide as in 2.111)

2.21121 Repeated boiling in changes of water (Subdivide as for 2.21121)

2.2113 FoUowed by roasting or baking

2.2114 Followed by frying

2.2115 Followed by steaming

2.2116 Followed by drying

2.2117 Followed by fennentation2.2118 Followed by pielding

2.212 Soaking or leaching after comminution (Subdivide as for 2.211)2.213 Soaking or leaching after cooking and comminution (Subdivide as for 2.211)

2.214 Soaking or leaching after rooking (Subdivide as for 2.211)

2.215 Soaking or leaching after boiling with lye (Subdivide as for 2.211)

2.216 Soaking or leaching after freezing (Subdivide as for 2.211)

2.217 Soaking or leaching after drying (Subdivide as for 2.211)

128 JOHNS &. KUIlO Vol 8, No, 1

2.218 Soaking or leaching after peeling or cutting (Subdivide as fDr 2,211)

2,22 Soaking with change(s) in water (Subdivide as for 2,21)

2.23 Soaking in running water (Subdivide as for 2.21)224 Leaching (SubdIvide as fot 2,21)

2.25 Soaking in salt water {Subdivide as for 2.21)

2.26 Soaking with the addition of ashes or lye (Subdivide as for 2.21)

2.21 Soaking with the addition of acidic substances (Subdivide as for 2.21)

2,28 Boiling

2,281 Boiling of whole pieces

2,2811 Simple boiling

2.28111 Without salt, lye, or acid

2.28112 With salt

2,28113 With lye

2.28114 With acid

2,28115 After dryIng

2.2812 Repeated boiHng in changes of water (SUbdiVide as ior 2.2811)

2,282 Boiling after comminution (Subdivide as for 2,281)

2,283 Boiling after peeling (Subdivide as for 2.281)

2.3 Detoxification by fermentation

231 Spontaneous fenrH~f'/tatioo

2.311 Fermentation ot whole pieces

2.3111 Without previous treatment

2,31111 Followed only by washing

2.31112 Followed by washing and heat treatment

2.31113 Followed by heat treatment

2.31114 Followed by comminution

2,31115 Followed by drying

2,3112 After cooking (SubdiVide as for 2.3111)

2,3113 After boiling with lye (SubdivIde as for 2,3111)

2.3114 After soaking (Subdivide as for 2.3111)

2,3115 With addition of salt (Subdivide as far 2,3111)

2,312 Fermentation after communition (Subdivide as: tor 2.311)

2.32 FennentatiQTI with use of inoculum from earlier preparations (SubdiVide as 2,31)

2.4 Detoxification by adsorption

2A.1 Addition of clay

2.411 Addition to whole pieces2.4111 Addition dUring soaking

2.41111 Addition without previous treatment

2-41112 Addition after cooking

2.4112 Addition during boiling (Subdivide as for 2.4111)

2,4113 Addition during cooking (Subdivide as for 2.4111\

2.4114 Addition during comminution (Subdivide as for 2.4111)

2,4115 Addition to consumed product (Subdivide as for 2.4111}

2.412 Addition after comminution (Subdivide as LOT 2.411)

2,42 Addition of charcoal (Subdivide as for 2.41)

2,43 Soaking in wet mud

20431 Soaking of whole pieces

J

JOURNAL OF ETIlNOBIOLOGY

2.432 Soaking after comminution

2.5 Detoxification by drying

2.51 Sundrying

2.511 Drying of whole pieces

2,5111 Sundrying followed by rooking

2.5112 Sundrying rollowed by soaking

2.5113 Sundrying followed by fermentation

2,5114 Sundrying followed by comminution

2.512 Drying after comminution (Subdivide as for 2.511)

2,52 Kiln or hot~arr drying (Subdivide as for 2.51)

2,6 Detoxification by physkal processing

2.61 Peeling

2,62 Grating or rasping

2.63 Squeezing

2.64 Pounding

2.65 Grinding

2.66 Culling

2.7 Detoxification by pH change

2.11 Lye or lime added

2,72 Acidic substance added

129