ArticlePloS one2019
Open-source food: Nutrition, toxicology, and availability of wild edible greens in the East Bay.
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Nutritional Composition, Mineral Profile, Bioactive Phytochemicals, and Antioxidant Activities of Selected Edible Weeds: A Comprehensive Analysis.Food science & nutrition · 2025Article
- Citizen science data on urban forageable plants: a case study in Brazil.GigaByte (Hong Kong, China) · 2024Article
- Article
- Food Security and Sustainability: Discussing the Four Pillars to Encompass Other Dimensions.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Home food procurement impacts food security and diet quality during COVID-19.BMC public health · 2021Article
- Correction: Open-source food: Nutrition, toxicology, and availability of wild edible greens in the East Bay.PloS one · 2020Article
- Antioxidant and Mineral Composition of Three Wild Leafy Species: A Comparison Between Microgreens and Baby Greens.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Article
- Trace Toxins: The Key Component of a Healthful Diet.Dose-response : a publication of International Hormesis SocietyReview
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
significanceForaged leafy greens are consumed around the globe, including in urban areas, and may play a larger role when food is scarce or expensive. It is thus important to assess the safety and nutritional value of wild greens foraged in urban environments.
methodsField observations, soil tests, and nutritional and toxicology tests on plant tissue were conducted for three sites, each roughly 9 square blocks, in disadvantaged neighborhoods in the East San Francisco Bay Area in 2014-2015. The sites included mixed-use areas and areas with high vehicle traffic.
resultsEdible wild greens were abundant, even during record droughts. Soil at some survey sites had elevated concentrations of lead and cadmium, but tissue tests suggest that rinsed greens of the tested species are safe to eat. Daily consumption of standard servings comprise less than the EPA reference doses of lead, cadmium, and other heavy metals. Pesticides, glyphosate, and PCBs were below detection limits. The nutrient density of 6 abundant species compared favorably to that of the most nutritious domesticated leafy greens.
conclusionsWild edible greens harvested in industrial, mixed-use, and high-traffic urban areas in the San Francisco East Bay area are abundant and highly nutritious. Even grown in soils with elevated levels of heavy metals, tested species were safe to eat after rinsing in tap water. This does not mean that all edible greens growing in contaminated soil are safe to eat-tests on more species, in more locations, and over a broader range of soil chemistry are needed to determine what is generally safe and what is not. But it does suggest that wild greens could contribute to nutrition, food security, and sustainability in urban ecosystems. Current laws, regulations, and public-health guidance that forbid or discourage foraging on public lands, including urban areas, should be revisited.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.