Superfruit Science

Posted By elissa on Jul 18, 2009 | 2 comments

Kewl: someone’s actually gone and developed comprehensive criteria for superfruit status… and the few relatively fruits that actually merit the title might surprise a few people.

The creator of the rubric is Dr. Paul Gross.  It consists of the following measures:

• Popularity and sensory appeal of the whole fruit
• Nutrient diversity and density
• Phytochemical diversity and density
• Basic medical research intensity
• Clinical applications

And the winners are:

Using the five criteria above, there are eight fruits with popularity as mainstream raw fruit or juice products, sound scientific records, exceptional nutrient qualities and potential for clinical progress. These include cranberry (Vaccinium macrocarpon), fig (Ficus carica), goji (Lycium barbarum), mango (Mangifera indica), orange (Citrus sinensis), papaya (Carica papaya), red grape (Vitis vinifera) and strawberry (Fragaria ananassa).

The only one of the more exotic superfruits to make the list is goji…the rest are pretty mainstream.

What about some of the others we’ve heard so much about…like acai?

Acai (Euterpe oleracea Mart.) scored a 13 out of 25 in this criteria model. Its highest score came in the area of nutrient content (5/5), as it contains protein, prebiotic fiber, minerals, phytosterols, essential fatty acids (EFAs) and lignans. Phytochemical content ranked a 4/5 for its numerous anthocyanins, although it lacks carotenoids. Acai had 3 out of 5 for popularity and sensory appeal…It is in the area of research that acai currently falls short, with a score of 1 in basic research intensity (primarily in vitro results, and really only a focus in science since 2004) and 0 in clinical applications, due to its very recent entrance on the global health stage.

Mangosteen? Noni?

Further down on the scoring are mangosteen (Garcinia mangostana) at 9 points and noni (Morinda citrifolia) with a 7 out of 25. Mangosteen scored high on popularity and sensory appeal, but was hampered by the sparse nutrient content, lack of medical research and clinical applications. It does have high levels of certain anthocyanins, xanthones and tannins, but only in the inedible rind; some companies have extracted those compounds to add in to consumer products. With noni, its foul odor and taste resulted in a 0 on sensory appeal, with low scores on nutrient content and phytochemical content (isolated phytochemicals and polysaccharides, vitamin C, fiber). Also, there is a lack of basic and clinical research, with slow progress on exploring its potential health effects.

Obviously, it’s a provisional list – certain fruits that lack sufficient research may eventually earn the title… Dr. Gross specifically mentions kiwi fruit, blueberries and sour cherries as possibilities.  But it’s clear that the term “superfruit” is more hype than substance: fruits don’t need to be exotic or expensive to be considered “super.”