Hanna Dias
Pomegranates find ever more uses, also outside our kitchens. Besides turning them into juice, syrup (grenadine) and smoothies or pepping up our food dishes with them, the pomegranate is also used in the cosmetic industry and in nutritional supplements. But how does the pesticide picture look for these fruits? In 2019 we shined a light on this topic in our report, “Exotic Fruit – Not That Exotic and Better Than Imagined”, in which pomegranates from Turkey were especially conspicuous. Since then CVUA Stuttgart has intensified our analyses of the pomegranate, unfortunately, with comparable results.
The pomegranate (punica granatum) grows on an up to 4 meter high thorny bush that is cultivated in all tropical and subtropical countries around the world. In addition to the well-known red-yellow fruits, the pomegranate bush also carries magnificent orange-red flowers and is also cultivated as an ornamental bush. Not only are the fresh seeds used in various dishes, but also the dried seeds are used as spices. Pomegranates are low in calories and rich in phosphor and potassium [1, 2, 3]. Due to their ingredients, many positive health benefits are ascribed to the pomegranate, although these have not been proven thus far [4].
Ill. 1: Not only the pomegranates – also the flowers are beautiful
The defined maximum residue levels (MRL) for pesticides are based on good farming practices. Moreover, they are set at the lowest achievable residue levels, in order to protect especially vulnerable groups [5]. Annex I of Regulation (EC) No. 396/2005 lists the food parts to which these MRLs apply and are accordingly analyzed. This means, even if the peel of a pomegranate is not consumed, we analyze the entire fruit (with peel), in order to determine adherence to the MRL. The ready-to-eat product should thus be less contaminated with residues.
From August 2019 till the end of 2021 a total of 84 pomegranates from conventional cultivation were analyzed. More than half of the samples came from Turkey, several came from Peru and Spain, and individual samples came from India, Israel, South African and Uzbekistan. With the exception of one Spanish sample, all of the samples were detected with residues. Multiple residues were found in 92 % of the samples.
Origin |
No. of Samples
|
No. of Substances per Sample
|
Ave. Quantity
|
Ave. Quantity w/o Fosetyl*
|
Samples > Max Level (%)
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|
India |
2
|
9
|
0.069
|
0.069
|
0
|
Israel |
5
|
4
|
0.17
|
0.13
|
0
|
Peru |
13
|
3.6
|
0.34
|
0.28
|
0
|
Spain |
14
|
2.4
|
0.068
|
0.068
|
3 (21 %)
|
South Africa |
2
|
7
|
0.53
|
0.53
|
0
|
Turkey |
45
|
6
|
1.3
|
0.1
|
23 (51 %)
|
Unknown |
2
|
1.5
|
0.055
|
0.055
|
0
|
Uzbekistan |
1
|
3
|
0.009
|
0.009
|
0
|
Total |
84
|
4.9
|
0.81
|
0.13
|
26 (31 %)
|
The samples from India, South Africa and Turkey were found to contain the highest average number of different substances per sample, although the number of samples analyzed from India and South Africa was small. The samples from South Africa contained the highest average amount of pesticide (excluding fosetyl), just as in the analytical time frame of 2015–2021 (0.53 mg/kg vs. 0.52 mg/kg). A total of 26 of the 84 samples (31 %) were rejected for exceeding at least one MRL. Three of these violatory samples came from Spain and 23 from Turkey. Among the Turkish pomegranates were MRL exceedances for 43 substances, in particular the insecticides acetamiprid and sulfoxaflor and the fungicide fosetyl (sum) (Table 2).
Origin | No. of Samples |
Samples > MRL (%)
|
No. of Substances > MRL
|
Substances > MRL |
---|---|---|---|---|
Spain |
14
|
3 (21 %)
|
3
|
Acetamiprid; Lambda-Cyhalothrin (2x) |
Turkey |
45
|
23 (51 %)
|
43
|
Acetamiprid (10x); Azoxystrobin; Boscalid; Captan; Chlorpyrifos (2x); Cypermethrin, sum; Cyromazin; Deltamethrin (3x); (Es)-Fenvalerate; Fosetyl, sum (8x); Glyphosate; Imazalil; Propiconazole (2x); Spirodiclofen; Sulfoxaflor (6x); Tau-Fluvalinate, Thiabendazole (2x) |
For some individual countries we only had a few samples during the analytical period of August 2019 to the end of 2021, so Illustration 2 gives an overview of the total number of samples analyzed and samples with at least one exceedance of an MRL for the period of 2015 to the end of 2021.
Ill. 2: Number of analyzed pomegranate samples and MRL exceedances from 2015–2021 (CVUA Stuttgart)
The MRL rejection rate of 31 % for pomegranates during the analytical period of August 2019 to the end of 2021 is high compared to that of other fruits. However, all the detected residue levels lay under the toxicologically defined reference values, so none of the samples were determined to be a health risk. The pomegranates from Turkey were especially problematic, with every second sample in violation. The trend from previous years years thus continues, unfortunately. Pomegranates from other countries were less conspicuous, however, so it is certainly worth checking the country of origin when purchasing pomegranates.
©grafnata - stock.adobe.com
[1] Nutzpflanzenkunde, Nutzbare Gewächse der gemäßigten Breiten, Subtropen und Tropen, Wolfgang Franke, 2. überarbeitete und erweiterte Auflage, Thieme Verlag
[2] Nutzpflanzen und ihre Inhaltsstoffe, Susanne Bickel-Sandkötter, 2. Auflage, Quelle & Meyer Verlag
[3] Handbuch der Nahrungspflanzen, Ben-Erik van Wyk, 2005, Wissenschaftliche Verlagsgesellschaft mbH
[4] Verbraucherzentrale: Granatapfel – die gesunde Superfrucht?, downloaded on 21.01.2022
[5] Europäische Behörde für Lebensmittelsicherheit (efsa): Themenbereich Pestizide, downloaded on 10.01.2022
Translated by Catherine Leiblein