Screening for Innovative Sources of Carotenoids and Phenolic Antioxidants among Flowers

foods Article Screening for Innovative Sources of Carotenoids and Phenolic Antioxidants among Flowers Antonio J. Meléndez-Martínez 1, Ana Benítez 1, Mireia Corell 2,3 , Dolores Hernanz 4,*, Paula Mapelli-Brahm 1, Carla Stinco 1and Elena Coyago-Cruz 5   Citation: Meléndez-Martínez, A.J.; Benítez, A.; Corell, M.; Hernanz, D.; Mapelli-Brahm, P.; Stinco, C.; Coyago-Cruz, E. Screening for Innovative Sources of Carotenoids and Phenolic Antioxidants among Flowers. Foods 2021,10, 2625. https://doi.org/10.3390/ foods10112625 Academic Editors: Antonio De Haro Bailón and Fernando Cámara-Martos Received: 20 September 2021 Accepted: 24 October 2021 Published: 29 October 2021 Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Copyright: © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 4.0/). 1Food Colour and Quality Laboratory, Facultad de Farmacia, Universidad de Sevilla, 41012 Sevilla, Spain; [email protected] (A.J.M.-M.); [email protected] (A.B.); [email protected] (P.M.-B.); [email protected] (C.S.) 2Department Ciencias Agroforestales, Universidad de Sevilla, Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingeniería Agronómica, Carrera de Utrera Km1, 41013 Sevilla, Spain; [email protected] 3Unidad Asociada al CSIC de Uso Sostenible del Suelo y el Agua en la Agricultura (US-IRNAS), Crta. De Utrera Km 1, 41013 Sevilla, Spain 4Department Química Analítica, Facultad de Farmacia, Universidad de Sevilla, 41012 Sevilla, Spain 5Carrera de Ingeniería en Biotecnología de los Recursos Naturales, Universidad Politécnica Salesiana, Sede Quito, Campus El Girón, Av. 12 de Octubre, 170517 Quito, Ecuador; [email protected] *Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +34-954553804 Abstract: Flowers have been used for centuries in decoration and traditional medicine, and as components of dishes. In this study, carotenoids and phenolics from 125 flowers were determined by liquid chromatography (RRLC and UHPLC). After comparing four different extractants, the carotenoids were extracted with acetone: methanol (2:1), which led to a recovery of 83%. The phenolic compounds were extracted with 0.1% acidified methanol. The petals of the edible flowers Renealmia alpinia and Lantana camara showed the highest values of theoretical vitamin A activity expressed as retinol activity equivalents (RAE), i.e., 19.1 and 4.1 RAE/g fresh weight, respectively. The sample with the highest total phenolic contents was Punica granatum orange (146.7 mg/g dry weight). It was concluded that in most cases, flowers with high carotenoid contents did not contain high phenolic content and vice versa. The results of this study can help to develop innovative concepts and products for the industry. Keywords: antioxidants; edible flowers; functional foods; petals; phytochemicals; retinol activity equivalents 1. Introduction Flowers have long held an important place in human societies. They have been used for ornamental purposes as well as in diverse dishes, mainly due to their appealing and diverse colors [ 1 ]. In addition, flowers have been used in traditional medicine [ 2 ]. More specifically, the use of flowers in the diet or as medicine dates back at least to 4000 BC, as documented in the Mesopotamic and Egyptian cultures [ 3 ]. Their traditional use in other cultures (Roman, Greek, Chinese, Indian, and European) is also well-known [4]. In recent years, there has been a growing interest in the study from different points of view of the health-promoting secondary metabolites present in flowers, including carotenoids and phenolics [ 5 – 7 ]. Indeed, the study of agronomic practices that can enhance the levels of these compounds in flowers or non-conventional technologies for their extraction are timely topics [ 8 , 9 ]. Carotenoids (carotenes and xanthophylls) are widespread and versatile compounds in nature, where they are important in processes including photosynthesis, the communication within and between species, the protection against oxidizing agents, and the modulation of membrane properties [ 10 ]. They are responsible for the red, yellow and orange colors of many flowers [ 11 ], which are important for pollination [ 12 ]. One of the main differences between carotenoids relative and other bioactive compounds is that some of them can be converted into vitamin A, which is an essential micronutrient. Foods 2021,10, 2625. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods10112625 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/foods Foods 2021,10, 2625 2 of 23 Apart from their key role in combating vitamin A deficiency and as natural food colors, carotenoids are important in health promotion. In fact, these compounds can help to enhance the immune system and reduce the risk of developing some diseases, including cancers (prostate, breast, cervical, ovarian, and colorectal), cardiovascular disease, bone, skin, and eye disorders. Although the possible health-promoting actions of carotenoids are commonly attributed to their antioxidant capacity, they can act through other mechanisms, such as the modulation of signaling pathways (with antioxidant, detoxifying and antiinflamatory effects), the enhancement of intercellular communication, or the protection against light [ 13 ]. Due to their versatility, carotenoids have applications not only in the food industry (colorants, ingredients, source of vitamin A), but also in cosmetics [ 14 ], feeds [ 15 ], pharmaceuticals [16], and even as textile dyes [17]. Phenolic compounds are, like carotenoids, widespread compounds in nature in general and in plants in particular. They can be categorized as extractable or non-extractable. Phenolic acids (benzoic and hydroxycynnamic acids), flavonoids (flavonols, flavones, flavanols, isoflavones, flavanones, and anthocyanidins), estilbenes, extractable proanthocyanidins, and hydrolyzed tannins belong to the first group. Non-extractable proanthocyanidins (or condensed tannins) and hydrolysable phenolics are groups of non-extractable phenolics [ 18 ]. These compounds also elicit great interest due to their health-promoting activities, which are usually attributed to antioxidant activity, although there is also evidence that they could exhibit antiviral, anticarcinogenic, antiinflamatory or antimicrobial activities, among others [19]. Depending on their fitness for human consumption, flowers are classified as edible or inedible, which depends on factors including the levels of inherent toxic compounds and/or those of fertilizers, herbicides or pesticides that can be dangerous for human health [ 20 ]. Edible flowers are normally used as flavor enhancers, relishes, vegetables, or dish decorations [ 21 ]. Common examples are roses (Rosa spp.) in Italy, dandelions (Taraxacum officinale) in Europe, and violets (Viola tricolor) in USA [ 22 ]. All in all, there is an increased market demand for edible flowers [ 1 ], increasing the need to further study the presence of compounds with nutritional interest in them. In this context, the objective of this study was to evaluate the carotenoids and phenolics of 125 flowers through liquid chromatography, 2. Materials and Methods 2.1. Reagents and Standards The methanol, hexane, acetone, petroleum ether, dichloromethane, and hydrochloric acid were of analytical grade and were purchased from Labscan (Dublin, Ireland). The HPLC-grade methanol, HPLC-grade acetonitrile, HPLC–grade ethyl acetate, formic acid, sodium chloride, and potassium hydroxide were obtained from Panreac (Barcelona, Spain). The β -Carotene, all-trans- β -apo-8 0 -carotenal, α -carotene, phytoene, violaxanthin, lutein, β - cryptoxanthin, and lycopene were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (Taufkirchen, Germany) and the antheraxanthin from DHI (Hørsholm, Denmark). The lutein epoxide, luteoxanthin, zeinoxanthin, 9-cis-antheraxanthin, 9-cis-violaxanthin, 13-cis-violaxanthin, and 9-cis-lutein were obtained as described elsewhere [ 23 – 27 ]. The gallic acid, p-hydroxybenzoic acid, syringic acid, caffeic acid, m-coumaric, p-coumaric, chlorogenic acid, ferulic acid, naringin, naringenin, ethyl galate, quercetin, kaempferol, crisin, vanillic acid, and myricetin were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (Madrid, Spain). The quercitrin was obtained from Extrasynthese (Genay, France). All the aqueous solutions were prepared with purified water in a NANOpure DlamondTM system (Barnsted Inc., Dubuque, IO, USA). 2.2. Plant Materials The petals of one hundred twenty-five fresh flowers from 52 different families and 102 species were collected from a botanical garden (Real Jardín Botánico de Córdoba, Córdoba, Spain) and local greenhouses in Madrid and Seville (Spain). These places ensure the traceability in the growth of the floral species by providing identification. After Foods 2021,10, 2625 3 of 23 measuring the color of the petals, the samples were freeze-dried (Cryodos-80, Telstar, Terrasa, Spain) and the humidity was calculated. 2.3. Color Analysis The colors were measured using a CM-700d colorimeter (Minollta, Japan). Illuminant D65 and 10 ◦ observer were considered as references. The color parameters corresponding to the uniform color space CIELAB were obtained. The categorization of the samples by color (white, yellow, orange, red, pink, lilac and blue) was performed considering clusters of points in the a*b* plane. Thus, the samples were separated into three groups. Group A included white, yellow, and orange flowers, group B contained red and pink flowers, and group C included lilac and blue flowers. The color of some flowers could not be assessed instrumentally because of their small sizes. 2.4. Analysis of Carotenoids 2.4.1. Extraction and Saponification The micro-extractions were performed under dim light and in triplicate. The best extraction mixture was selected after evaluating different extraction mixtures (hexane: acetone (v/v) (1:1), methanol: acetone: dichloromethane (v/v/v) (1:1:2), acetone: methanol (v/v) (2:1), and ethyl acetate: methanol: petroleum ether (v/v/v) (1:1:1)). For this purpose, the petals of Calendula × hybrid were used. Approximately 20 mg of homogenized freeze-dried powder was mixed with 1 mL of the appropriate solvent mixture and then vortexed, sonicated for 2 min and centrifuged at 14,000 × gfor 3 min. After recovering the colored fraction, the extraction was repeated with aliquots of 500 µ L of the solvent mixture until color exhaustion. The organic colored fractions were combined and evaporated to dryness in a vacuum concentrator at a temperature below 30 ◦ C. Calendula × hybrid is known to possess high amounts of esterified carotenoids, so the extracts were de-esterified by saponification [ 28 ]. For this purpose, the dry extracts were re-dissolved in 500 µ L of methanolic potassium hydroxide (30%, w/v) and the mixtures were stirred for one hour in a nitrogen atmosphere at 25 ◦ C. Next, 500 µ L of dichloromethane and 800 µ L of 5% aqueous NaCl (w/v) were added. The samples were vortexed and centrifuged at 14,000 × g for 3 min and then the aqueous phase was removed. The carotenoid-containing phase was washed with water until neutrality of the wastewater. The colored phase was evaporated to dryness in a vacuum concentrator at a temperature below 30 ◦ C and stored in a nitrogen atmosphere at −20 ◦C until the analysis. The extraction mixture leading to the highest recovery of carotenoids was selected for the extraction of carotenoids from all the samples. All-trans- β -apo-8 ´ -carotenal was used as an internal standard. 2.4.2. Spectrophotometric Analysis The total carotenoid contents (TCC) of petroleum ether extracts of each flower were quantified by spectrophotometry by considering the absorbance reading at 450 nm and the molar absorptivity value of β -carotene in the solvent ( ε mol = 2592). The results were reported as µg/g dry weight (DW) [29]. 2.4.3. Rapid Resolution Liquid Chromatography (RRLC) Analysis The dry extracts were re-dissolved in 20 µ L of ethyl acetate prior to their analysis by RRLC. The analysis was carried out using the method reported by [ 30 ] on an Agilent 1260 system equipped with a diode-array detector and a C18 Poroshell 120 column ( 2.7 µm , 5 cm ×4.6 mm ) (Agilent, Palo Alto, CA, USA). The injection volume was 5 µ L, the flow rate was 1 mL/min, and the temperature of the column was set at 30 ◦ C. A mobile phase consisting of acetonitrile, methanol, and ethyl acetate was used with a linear gradient elution [ 30 ]. The chromatograms were monitored at 285, 350, and 450 nm for the quantification of phytoene, phytofluene, and the rest of the carotenoids (lutein epoxide, luteoxanthin, antheraxanthin, violaxanthin, lutein, cis-antheraxanthin, lycopene, Foods 2021,10, 2625 4 of 23 zeinoxanthin, β -cryptoxanthin, β -carotene, and α -carotene), respectively. UV–Vis spectra were recorded from 250 to 750 nm. The individual carotenoids were identified with their corresponding standards and quantified using external calibration curves made with them whenever possible. The limits of detection (LOD) and quantification (LOQ) were calculated as three and ten times, respectively; the relative standard deviation of the analytical blank values were calculated from the calibration curve, using Microcal Origin ver. 3.5 software (OriginLab Corporation, Northampton, MA, USA). The LODs and LOQs ranged from 0.002 µ g in phytoene to 0.070 µ g in lycopene and from 0.007 µ g in phytoene to 0.232 µ g in lycopene, respectively. The LOD and LOQ were established on the basis of signal to noise (S/N) ratio of 3 and 10, respectively. The samples were analyzed in duplicate with double sample injection. The concentrations were expressed in µ g/g DW and the TCC contents were calculated by adding up all the individual carotenoids. 2.5. Analysis of Phenolic Compounds 2.5.1. Extraction The protocol described by [ 31 ] was adapted for the extraction of smaller amounts of samples. Briefly, 1.5 mL of 0.1% acidified methanol was added to approximately 50 mg of freeze-dried petals, and the mixture was vortexed, sonicated for 2 min, and centrifuged at 4190 × gfor 7 min and at 4 ◦ C; the supernatant was collected and the residue was submitted to the same extraction process twice with only 0.5 mL of the acidified methanol. The combined supernatant was stored at −20 ◦C until the analysis. 2.5.2. Spectrophotometric Analysis The extract obtained was used for the determination of the total phenolic content (TPC) using the Folin–Ciocalteu assay, as described by [ 31 ], with slight modifications. Briefly, 50 µ L of extract, 0.25 mL of Folin-Ciocalteu reagent, 0.75 mL of a solution of sodium carbonate (20%), and 3.95 mL of distilled water were mixed and left to stand for 2 h for the reaction to take place. Gallic acid was employed as a calibration standard and the absorbance was read at 765 nm with a Hewlett-Packard UV-vis HP8453 spectrophotometer (Palo Alto, CA, USA). The results were expressed as mg of equivalents of gallic acid per g of dry weight (mg GAE/ g DW) and allowed to define the injection volumes for the quantification by Ultra-High Performance Liquid Chromatography (UHPLC). 2.5.3. Ultra-High Performance Liquid Chromatography (UHPLC) Analysis Prior to the injection, the extracts were concentrated to dryness, re-dissolved in 20 µ L of 0.01% formic acid, and centrifuged at 4190 × gfor 7 min and at 4 ◦ C. The UHPLC method was previously reported by [ 31 ]. An Agilent 1290 chromatograph equipped with a diode-array detector (Agilent Technologies, Palo Alto, CA, USA) set between 220 and 500 nm and an Eclipse Plus C18 column (1.8 um, 2.1 × 5 mm) were used. The column was kept at 30 ◦ C, the injection volumes were in a range between 0.3 and 1.5 µ L, the flow rate was 1 mL/min , and a linear gradient was used. Open lab ChemStation software was used for data acquisition and processing. The identification of the phenolic compounds was performed through a comparison of their retention times and UV-vis spectra, within the range 250–750 nm, with those of the available standards [ 31 ]. The chromatograms were monitored at 280 for the benzoic acids, hydroxycinnamic acids, flavones, and flavanones, and at 320 nm for the flavonols. Their quantification was carried out using external calibration curves of each of the compounds analyzed. The LODs and LOQs ranged from 0.006 µ g in chlorogenic acid to 0.012 µ g in p-hydroxybenzoic acid and 0.014 µ g in chlorogenic acid to 0.041 µ g in p-hydroxybenzoic acid, respectively. The LOD and LOQ were established on the basis of signal-to-noise (S/N) ratios of 3 and 10, respectively. The samples were analyzed in duplicate with double sample injection. The TPC was calculated by adding up all the individual phenolics. Foods 2021,10, 2625 5 of 23 2.6. Statistical Analysis All the experiments were performed in triplicate with double injection, and the results were expressed as mean ± standard deviation (SD). The mean separation was made via Tukey’s test. Differences were considered statistically significant for pvalues ≤ 0.01. The statistical analysis was performed using the STATGRAPHICS Centurion XVII software. 3. Results 3.1. Color Parameters and Other Characteristics The color parameters, humidity values, and culinary uses of the flowers are presented in Tables 1–3. 3.2. Carotenoids Selection of the Extraction Solvents Four different extraction solvents were tested for the extraction of carotenoids in Calendula ×hybrid (Figure 1). Acetone: methanol (v/v) (2:1) and ethyl acetate: methanol: petroleum ether (v/v/v) (1:1:1) showed the highest carotenoid extraction yields and there was no statistically significant difference between the two mixtures. The recovery of carotenoids obtained with this mixture, using all-trans- β -apo-8 0 -carotenal as internal standard, was 83%. Foods 2021, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 30 3.2. Carotenoids Selection of the Extraction Solvents Four different extraction solvents were tested for the extraction of carotenoids in Calendula × hybrid (Figure 1). Acetone: methanol (v/v) (2:1) and ethyl acetate: methanol: petroleum ether (v/v/v) (1:1:1) showed the highest carotenoid extraction yields and there was no statistically significant difference between the two mixtures. The recovery of carotenoids obtained with this mixture, using all-trans-β-apo-8′-carotenal as internal standard, was 83%. Figure 1. Carotenoid content recoveries (mg/100 g DW) after extraction of Calendula × hybrid using four different extraction solvents. H-A (1:1), hexane: acetone (v/v) (1:1); M-A-D (1:1:2), methanol: acetone: dichloromethane (v/v/v) (1:1:2); A-M (2:1), acetone: methanol (v/v) (2:1); AE-M-PE (1:1:1), ethyl acetate: methanol: petroleum ether (v/v/v) (1:1:1). Different letters among bars of the same carotenoid indicate significant differences by ANOVA test (p < 0.01). In addition, quantitative data on individuals and TCC, assessed by liquid chromatography, are presented in Tables 4–6. An example of the resulting chromatogram is presented in Figure 2, and the frequency, mean contents, and standard deviations of carotenoids and major sources are presented in Figure 3, sections A, B, and C. Figure 1. Carotenoid content recoveries (mg/100 g DW) after extraction of Calendula × hybrid using four different extraction solvents. H-A (1:1), hexane: acetone (v/v) (1:1); M-A-D (1:1:2), methanol: acetone: dichloromethane (v/v/v) (1:1:2); A-M (2:1), acetone: methanol (v/v) (2:1); AE-M-PE (1:1:1), ethyl acetate: methanol: petroleum ether (v/v/v) (1:1:1). Different letters among bars of the same carotenoid indicate significant differences by ANOVA test (p< 0.01). In addition, quantitative data on individuals and TCC, assessed by liquid chromatography, are presented in Tables 4–6. An example of the resulting chromatogram is presented in Figure 2, and the frequency, mean contents, and standard deviations of carotenoids and major sources are presented in Figure 3, sections A, B, and C. Foods 2021,10, 2625 6 of 23 Table 1. Mean color parameter values, humidity, and culinary uses (according to Coyago, et al., (2017) [32] and The-Plant-List, (2019) [33]) of white, yellow, and orange flowers. Samples Family Species Common Name Culinary Uses Humidity (%) L* a* b* C*ab hab White flowers 1Araceae Spathiphyllum montanum Grayum Peace flower Non edible 89.767 ±0.225 57.200 ±6.263 −9.210 ±0.676 24.800 ±1.495 26.456 ±0.709 110.333 ±0.697 2Agavaceae Chlorophytum comosum (Thunb.) Jacques Bad mother Infusion 99.130 ±0.701 na na na na na 3Amaryllidaceae Agapanthus africanus (L.) Hoffmanns African lily Infusion 76.112 ±0.306 73.517 ±0.804 −1.213 ±0.211 4.557 ±0.872 4.727 ±0.798 105.413 ±3.107 4Apiaceae Coriandrum sativum L. Coriander Salad, garrison 95.853 ±0.027 na na na na na 5Apocynaceae Nerium oleander L. Flower laurel Non edible 79.493 ±0.666 77.800 ±3.581 −2.627 ±0.316 7.637 ±0.301 8.092 ±0.268 109.291 ±3.447 6Apocynaceae Trachelospermum jasminoides (Lind.) Len. Starry jasmine Infusion 95.800 ±0.325 na na na na na 7Boraginaceae Heliotropium arborescens L. Vanilla Infusion 86.012 ±0.152 na na na na na 8Brassicaceae Matthiola incana (L.) R. Br. White violet Infusion 99.718 ±0.525 87.123 ±0.023 −1.740 ±0.017 21.623 ±0.323 21.693 ±0.124 94.558 ±0.023 9Campanulaceae Campanula shetleri Heckard Green bell na 93.548 ±0.011 67.010 ±0.001 0.730 ±0.001 14.050 ±0.001 14.050 ±0.001 87.070 ±0.000 10 Caryophyllaceae Dianthus chinensis L. Diantus Salad, tea 94.444 ±0.922 80.793 ±1.819 −3.137 ±0.110 11.687 ±2.201 12.106 ±0.156 105.231±2.077 11 Caryophyllaceae Gypsophila paniculata L. Veil Infusion 88.312 ±1.542 na na na na na 12 Convolvulaceae Convolvulus pseudoscammonia C. Koch L. Meadow bell Infusion 89.878 ±0.808 83.093 ±4.473 −1.800 ±0.171 5.767 ±1.140 6.043 ±0.120 107.501 ±1.604 13 Iridaceae Gladiolus communis L. Gladiolus Salad, garrison 79.592 ±0.349 67.010 ±0.001 0.730 ±0.001 14.051 ±0.008 14.069 ±0.002 87.070 ±0.001 14 Lamiaceae Mentha suaveolens Ehrh. Mentha suaveolens Infusion 79.771 ±0.902 na na na na na 15 Magnoliaceae Magnolia grandiflora L. Magnolia Tea 82.151 ±0.272 83.093 ±4.473 −1.800 ±0.171 5.767 ±0.140 6.043 ±0.410 107.501 ±0.764 16 Oleaceae Jasminum sambac (L.) Aiton Jasmine of Arabia Salad, tea 84.826 ±0.104 83.987 ±2.450 −2.927 ±0.401 16.497 ±0.901 16.757 ±0.918 100.059 ±0.129 17 Orchidaceae Phalaenopsis aphrodite Rchb. f. Orchid na 98.172 ±0.063 70.063 ±1.670 10.030 ±2.044 −7.103 ±1.079 12.297 ±2.201 325.161 ±1.368 18 Plumbaginaceae Plumbago auriculata Lam. Celestine Infusion 26.895 ±0.872 54.340 ±1.806 1.530 ±0.041 −16.017 ±0.154 16.208 ±0.157 275.041 ±0.289 19 Rosaceae Fragaria ×Duchesne ex Rozier Strawberry na 94.215 ±0.579 67.010 ±0.001 0.730 ±0.020 14.050 ±0.001 14.069 ±0.031 87.070 ±0.011 20 Rosaceae Rosa hybrid Vill. Rose Salad, desserts 79.739 ±0.888 86.353 ±0.915 0.030 ±0.041 14.207 ±0.059 14.207 ±0.024 89.924 ±0.005 21 Solanaceae Capsicum annuum L. Pepper na 98.960 ±0.921 na na na na na 22 Solanaceae Solanum laxum Sprengel False jasmine na 85.197 ±1.508 50.783 ±2.100 11.903 ±1.050 8.620 ±0.219 14.798 ±1.203 35.636 ±0.832 23 Verbenaceae Aloysia citriodora Palau Cedrón Tea 98.118 ±0.847 na na na na na 24 Verbenaceae Lantana camara L. Lantana Tea 86.986 ±0.183 64.770 ±0.143 2.703 ±0.246 17.780 ±1.362 17.991 ±1.326 81.447 ±1.244 Yellow flowers 25 Araceae Aglaonema commutatum Schott Aglaonema Non edible 91.958 ±0.900 66.330 ±1.411 −0.627 ±0.055 28.877 ±1.864 28.884 ±0.186 91.205 ±0.180 26 Asteraceae Anthemis tinctoria L. Golden Daisy Colorant 78.726 ±0.172 60.770 ±2.463 21.140 ±0.654 87.357 ±2.326 89.878 ±0.740 76.436 ±0.139 27 Asteraceae Dahlia coccinea Cav. Dahlia Salad 87.788 ±0.184 61.363 ±0.719 2.133 ±0.201 66.667 ±0.540 66.713 ±0.281 88.181 ±0.133 28 Asteraceae Dahlia pinnata Cav. Dahlia Salad 74.519 ±0.001 67.290 ±0.646 16.523 ±0.018 75.780 ±0.546 77.561 ±0.572 77.739 ±0.060 29 Brassicaceae Diplotaxis tenuifolia (L.) DC. Rucula Salad 87.218 ±0.528 na na na na na 30 Cannabaceae Cannabis sativa L. Cannabis Non edible 76.200±0.914 na na na na na 31 Celastraceae Euonymus japonicus Thunb. Burning bush Colorant 92.000 ±1.028 na na na na na 32 Fabaceae Sophora japonica L. Acacia Japan Infusion 73.629 ±0.384 79.180 ±1.871 −6.573 ±0.116 22.023 ±0.733 22.984 ±0.107 106.592 ±0.582 33 Fabaceae Senna papillosa H.S. Irwin & Barneby Senna Non edible 73.823 ±0.326 58.420 ±4.265 11.060 ±2.265 38.370 ±4.099 40.000 ±5.911 74.380 ±4.294 34 Juglandaceae Pterocarya stenoptera C. DC. Chinese fresno Non edible 84.572 ±0.611 73.000 ±1.279 −5.970 ±0.214 32.910 ±1.255 33.455 ±1.245 100.342 ±0.283 35 Lamiaceae Ocimum basilicum L. Basil Salad, tea 94.680 ±1.525 80.893 ±3.409 −7.227 ±0.657 32.187 ±1.419 32.990 ±0.712 102.602 ±0.691 36 Malvaceae Gossypium arboreum L. Cotton Non edible 81.410 ±0.114 80.873 ±3.412 −7.243 ±0.713 32.201 ±1.403 33.120 ±0.725 102.612 ±0.743 37 Plantaginaceae Plantago major L. Plantain Infusion 85.714 ±0.200 na na na na na 38 Polygonaceae Fallopia aubertii (L.Henry) Holub Gabriela falloppio na 92.411 ±0.332 na na na na na 39 Portulacaceae Portulaca oleracea L. Purslane Salad 98.092 ±0.661 71.643 ±0.965 4.887 ±0.240 29.533 ±0.397 29.906 ±0.401 80.624 ±0.311 40 Rubiaceae Gardenia jasminoides J. Ellis Gardenia Colorant 82.213 ±0.283 84.253 ±3.833 3.453 ±0.116 46.923 ±0.470 47.050 ±0.161 85.833 ±0.179 41 Solanaceae Solanum lycopersicum L. Tomato na 87.255 ±0.261 77.200 ±1.001 −4.500 ±0.121 22.034 ±0.704 23.036 ±0.111 106.603 ±0.612 42 Verbenaceae Lantana camara L. Lantana Tea 88.122 ±0.706 50.570 ±0.875 18.403 ±0.431 48.440 ±0.128 51.823 ±0.135 69.101 ±1.018 Orange flowers 43 Acanthaceae Justicia aurea Schltdl. na 94.207 ±0.184 68.817 ±1.399 4.123 ±0.456 88.640 ±3.326 88.736 ±3.433 87.386 ±0.191 44 Bignoniaceae Tecoma capensis (Thunb.) Lindl. Cape honeysuckle Infusion 72.225 ±0.506 53.233 ±2.266 40.633 ±2.053 34.833 ±2.048 53.572 ±0.299 40.635 ±3.084 45 Gesneriaceae Drymonia affinis (Mansf.) Wiehler Drymonia na 73.209 ±0.172 49.510 ±1.247 24.983 ±0.582 32.520 ±0.963 41.010 ±1.063 52.490 ±0.519 46 Gesneriaceae Drymonia brochidodroma Wiehler Drymonia na 91.041 ±0.703 46.622 ±1.207 25.043 ±0.604 32.511 ±1.000 41.002 ±1.333 52.512 ±1.302 47 Lythraceae Punica granatum L. Pomegranate Infusion 69.105 ±0.437 43.093 ±2.765 47.340 ±0.356 36.738 ±0.217 59.743 ±0.133 38.153 ±0.375 48 Zigniberaceae Renealmia alpinia (Rottb.) Maas Honeyy bract Spice 89.126 ±1.333 52.111 ±0.224 42.175 ±0.126 35.101 ±0.243 54.872 ±0.302 39.825 ±2.126 na, not available. Foods 2021,10, 2625 7 of 23 Table 2. Mean color parameter values, humidity, and culinary uses (according to Coyago et al., (2017) [32] and The-Plant-List, (2019) [33]) of red and pink flowers. Samples Family Species Common Name Culinary Use Humidity (%) L* a* b* C*ab hab Red flowers 49 Acanthaceae Aphelandra squarrosa Nees Zebra plant na 73.202 ±3.184 30.847 ±1.259 49.437 ±0.942 32.257 ±0.541 59.030 ±1.028 33.142 ±0.339 50 Amaranthaceae Celosia argentea L. Cockscomb na 71.704 ±0.126 36.837 ±2.878 23.600 ±2.946 −2.833 ±0.342 23.817 ±2.999 352.621 ±0.629 51 Apocynaceae Catharanthus roseus (L.) G. Don Vinca rosea Non-edible 96.519 ±0.015 46.001 ±0.012 49.863 ±0.285 −7.123 ±0.081 50.370 ±0.270 351.865 ±0.137 52 Apocynaceae Nerium oleander L. Flower laurel Non-edible 89.739 ±3.621 67.077 ±1.693 19.380 ±1.427 3.250 ±0.658 19.810 ±1.583 10.429 ±1.409 53 Araceae Anthurium andraeanum Linden ex Anus Non-edible 94.096 ±1.525 50.630 ±0.404 32.917 ±1.165 11.283 ±1.585 34.814 ±1.226 18.895 ±2.255 54 Balsaminaceae Impatiens balsamina L. Joy of home Salad, desserts 91.049 ±0.211 41.543 ±2.466 47.893 ±4.686 23.887 ±3.367 53.528 ±4.758 26.449 ±1.238 55 Balsaminaceae Impatiens walleriana Hook. F. My dear Salad, desserts 85.202 ±0.984 50.287 ±2.228 57.220 ±2.573 19.490 ±2.556 60.463 ±2.626 18.770 ±1.556 56 Begoniaceae Begonia cavaleriei H. Lév. Begonia na 76.748 ±0.253 54.793 ±4.344 19.460 ±2.899 12.267 ±0.498 23.311 ±2.381 33.935 ±3.613 57 Begoniaceae Begonia cucullata Willd. Sugar flower Salad, desserts 59.290 ±0.127 37.443 ±0.873 36.870 ±2.315 15.157 ±2.171 39.931 ±2.942 21.995 ±1.802 58 Begoniaceae Begonia ×tuberhybrida Voss Begonia Salad, desserts 99.736 ±0.834 32.067 ±1.391 53.383 ±2.036 33.483 ±1.014 63.018 ±2.134 32.121 ±0.720 59 Caryophyllaceae Dianthus caryophyllus L. Carmination Fruit salad 95.775 ±0.106 39.863 ±4.495 50.847 ±3.674 21.403 ±3.633 55.206 ±3.751 22.762 ±2.616 60 Ericaceae Rhododendron simsii Planch. Azalea Non-edible 41.527 ±2.572 41.543 ±2.466 47.893 ±3.468 23.887 ±3.367 53.528 ±1.265 26.449 ±1.238 61 Escalloniaceae Escallonia rubra Pers. Escalloniacea na 82.780 ±0.427 na na na na na 62 Euphorbiaceae Euphorbia milii Des Moul. Crown of christ Non-edible 98.893 ±0.165 40.683 ±2.678 32.693 ±2.356 13.493 ±1.152 35.384 ±1.765 22.483 ±2.048 63 Fabaceae Brownea macrophylla Linden Panama flame tree na 87.209 ±0.217 na na na na na 64 Geraniaceae Pelargonium peltatum (L.) L´Hér. Gitanilla na 96.390 ±0.028 14.157 ±0.337 17.037 ±0.491 1.823 ±0.161 17.135 ±0.472 6.124 ±0.694 65 Geraniaceae Pelargonium x hortorum H. Bailey Geranium Salad, desserts 86.548 ±0.281 30.353 ±2.168 46.593 ±2.431 27.520 ±2.095 54.119 ±2.408 30.563 ±0.945 66 Lamiaceae Salvia splendens Sellow ex Schult. Red sage Garrison 72.018 ±0.164 38.813 ±2.189 24.673 ±1.401 21.833 ±0.132 33.424 ±1.121 42.183 ±1.443 67 Malvaceae Malvaviscus arboreus Cav. Marshmallow Infusion 86.152 ±0.909 40.990 ±1.676 47.580 ±2.984 25.150 ±3.289 53.833 ±3.015 27.789 ±1.699 68 Onagraceae Fuchsia magellanica Lam. Fuchsia Tea 81.264 ±0.009 44.210 ±2.187 34.773 ±0.917 3.037 ±0.703 34.980 ±1.053 5.963 ±0.856 69 Rosaceae Rosa hybrid Vill. Rose Salad, desserts 78.682 ±0.325 28.440 ±1.591 46.303 ±0.280 17.863 ±1.013 49.635 ±0.356 21.100 ±1.027 70 Papaveraceae Papaver rhoeas L. Wheat poppy Garrison 72.111 ±0.263 40.683 ±2.678 32.693 ±3.566 13.493 ±1.520 35.384 ±3.653 22.483 ±2.048 71 Rubiaceae Warszewiczia coccinea Klotzsch Chaconia Tea 83.000 ±1.381 34.253 ±1.363 46.237 ±2.908 12.033 ±0.526 47.777 ±2.944 14.607 ±0.316 72 Scrophulariaceae Antirrhinum majus L. Dragon mouth Salad 94.967 ±0.288 24.040 ±1.152 18.920 ±0.593 15.050 ±1.283 24.201 ±0.367 38.489 ±3.222 73 Scrophulariaceae Russelia equisetiformis Schltdl. & Ruselia Infusion 89.257 ±0.129 41.543 ±2.466 47.893 ±4.686 23.887 ±3.367 53.528 ±4.765 26.449 ±1.238 74 Solanaceae Petunia hybrida Vilm. Petunia Salad, desserts 90.986 ±5.425 34.253 ±1.363 46.237 ±2.908 12.033 ±0.526 47.777 ±2.944 14.607 ±0.316 75 Verbenaceae Lantana camara L. Lantana Tea 83.774 ±2.182 33.210 ±0.439 38.610 ±2.384 30.187 ±0.335 49.124 ±0.282 38.024 ±0.478 76 Verbenaceae Verbena ×hybrid Groenland Verbena Salad, garrison 85.436 ±0.023 26.913 ±0.674 36.787 ±3.852 14.537 ±0.872 39.560 ±3.868 21.641 ±1.176 Pink flowers 77 Amaranthaceae Celosia argentea L. Cockscomb na 72.421 ±0.184 19.443 ±2.286 34.023 ±1.479 4.120 ±1.085 34.286 ±1.538 6.948 ±2.004 78 Apocynaceae Nerium oleander L. Flower laurel Non-edible 82.058 ±0.327 58.847 ±3.279 29.247 ±4.101 −2.743 ±0.145 29.387 ±4.139 354.364 ±0.711 79 Begoniaceae Begonia argentea Linden Begonia na 91.547 ±1.522 na na na na na 80 Bromeliaceae Guzmania hybrid Guzmania na 89.651 ±0.001 46.660 ±0.233 15.770 ±0.885 9.340 ±0.524 18.343 ±0.488 30.703 ±2.838 81 Caryophyllaceae Dianthus caryophyllus L. Carmination Fruit salad 84.678 ±0.325 43.320 ±1.501 34.690 ±0.436 3.987 ±0.127 34.918 ±0.447 6.558 ±0.126 82 Caryophyllaceae Saponaria officinalis L. Soap flower Non-edible 81.110 ±0.202 68.560 ±0.291 3.883 ±0.946 −3.333 ±0.818 5.133 ±0.760 318.436 ±5.235 83 Ericaceae Rhododendron simsii Planch. Azalea indica Non-edible 74.579 ±0.299 82.190 ±1.669 5.943 ±0.421 8.860 ±0.739 10.686 ±0.396 56.081 ±4.033 84 Fabaceae Trifolium cernuum Brot. Four leaf clover Salad, tea 81.411 ±0.303 50.783 ±1.421 11.903 ±0.850 8.620 ±1.397 14.798 ±0.203 35.636 ±5.324 85 Gentianaceae Eustoma grandiflorum G. Don Eustoma na 92.072 ±0.099 66.407 ±4.493 4.067 ±0.668 5.233 ±0.486 6.630 ±0.792 52.333 ±2.000 86 Geraniaceae Pelargonium domesticum Bailey Real geranium Salad, desserts 85.698 ±0.785 15.783 ±1.532 16.793 ±1.561 1.757 ±0.875 17.147 ±1.675 12.053 ±1.4800 87 Geraniaceae Pelargonium ×hortorum Bailey Geranium Salad, desserts 75.523 ±0.185 52.563 ±0.198 29.107 ±0.233 2.177 ±0.437 29.200 ±0.234 4.016 ±0.172 88 Hydrangeaceae Hydrangea petiolaris S. & Zucc. Hydrangea Infusion 74.361 ±0.725 58.440 ±1.439 24.807 ±1.436 −3.767 ±0.372 25.092 ±1.463 351.369 ±0.558 89 Lythraceae Cuphea hyssopifolia Kunth False breccia Infusion 95.948 ±0.811 na na na na na 90 Lythraceae Lagerstroemia indica L. Jupiter tree Tea 87.561 ±0.347 47.777 ±0.128 27.050 ±0.622 −4.687 ±0.063 27.456 ±0.622 350.173 ±0.302 91 Malvaceae Gossypium arboreum L. Cotton Non-edible 82.733 ±5.421 51.887 ±5.484 10.090 ±0.617 9.913 ±0.588 14.162 ±0.078 44.522 ±3.431 92 Nyctaginaceae Mirabilis jalapa L. Night Dondiego Colorant 85.593 ±0.206 53.100 ±1.815 15.547 ±0.213 7.133 ±0.445 17.175 ±0.143 24.759 ±1.630 93 Orchidaceae Phalaenopsis aphrodite Rchb. F. Orchid na 92.271 ±0.358 50.783 ±2.100 11.903 ±0.805 8.620 ±1.321 14.798 ±0.120 35.636 ±3.024 94 Portulacaceae Portulaca oleracea L. Purslane Salad 85.529 ±3.674 35.780 ±0.344 18.983 ±0.144 27.170 ±0.265 33.145 ±0.136 55.085 ±0.466 95 Rosaceae Rosa hybrid Rose Salad, desserts 89.769 ±0.105 47.763 ±3.951 55.923 ±5.390 19.007 ±0.679 59.088 ±5.045 18.886 ±1.936 96 Verbenaceae Verbena ×hybrid G. & Rümpler Verbena Salad, garrison 84.040 ±0.037 41.467 ±3.153 19.337 ±0.140 2.330 ±0.437 19.486 ±0.153 6.793 ±1.117 na, not available. Foods 2021,10, 2625 8 of 23 Table 3. Mean color parameter values, humidity, and culinary uses (according to Coyago et al., (2017) [32] and The-Plant-List, (2019) [33]) of lilac and blue flowers. Samples Family Species Common name Culinary use Humidity (%) L* a* b* C*ab hab Lilac flowers 97 Amaryllidaceae Allium schoenoprasum L. Chives Salad, garrison 74.820 ±0.222 20.333 ±3.502 2.915 ±0.126 −0.147 ±0.001 2.983 ±0.119 359.606 ±0.012 98 Apocynaceae Catharanthus roseus L. Vinca rosea Non-edible 87.648 ±1.291 54.233 ±2.573 30.217 ±2.145 −18.707 ±1.692 35.553 ±2.139 328.223 ±1.971 99 Asteraceae Centaurea seridis L. Spiny broom na 93.516 ±0.883 na na na na na 100 Asteraceae Cichorium intybus L. Chicory of Brussels Salad, tea 98.378 ±0.283 na na na na na 101 Asteraceae Osteospermun fruticosum Norl. Cape margarita Tea 82.523 ±0.317 47.673 ±2.091 29.153 ±0.459 −15.303 ±0.110 32.927 ±0.379 332.286 ±0.488 102 Brassicaceae Alyssum montanum L. Garlic herb Infusion 81.159 ±0.395 na na na na na 103 Campanulaceae Campanula carpatica Jacq. Little bell na 85.496 ±0.152 na na na na na 104 Geraniaceae Pelargonium domesticum Bailey Real geranium Salad, desserts 92.894 ±0.800 58.660 ±4.038 25.157 ±1.518 −12.213 ±0.319 31.101 ±1.325 335.566 ±1.634 105 Geraniaceae Pelargonium ×hortorum Bailey Common geranium Salad, desserts 83.186 ±0.001 38.290 ±2.736 53.403 ±1.538 −11.497 ±0.678 54.633 ±1.355 167.827 ±1.051 106 Lamiaceae Mentha ×piperita L. Peppermint Salad, garrison 94.503 ±0.063 na na na na na 107 Lamiaceae Ocimum basilicum L. Basil Salad, tea 89.677 ±1.222 41.423 ±1.120 6.436 ±0.311 −4.879 ±0.921 8.124 ±0.343 322.701 ±4.206 108 Malvaceae Hibiscus syriacus L. Rose of Syria Salad, tea 70.778 ±0.747 53.743 ±0.282 18.460 ±1.136 −12.697 ±0.616 22.407 ±1.202 325.356 ±0.302 109 Nyctaginaceae Bougainvillea spectabilis Willd. Bougainvillea Infusion 86.967 ±1.558 50.753 ±0.741 6.963 ±1.002 1.790 ±0.310 7.309 ±0.911 16.291 ±3.413 110 Plumbaginaceae Limonium sinuatum (L.) Miller Always alive Additive 91.656 ±0.184 na na na na na 111 Polygonaceae Fallopia aubertii (L. Henry) Holub Gabriela falloppio na 99.350 ±1.200 na na na na na 112 Solanaceae Petunia hybrida Vilm. Petunia Salad, desserts 86.068 ±0.315 69.300 ±0.566 9.533 ±1.230 −4.087 ±1.287 10.390 ±0.346 337.496 ±1.963 113 Solanaceae Solanum rantonnetti Carrière Blue flower solano Infusion 83.018 ±0.126 na na na na na 114 Verbenaceae Verbena ×hybrid G. & Rümpler Verbena Salad, garrison 84.238 ±1.282 41.367 ±1.086 6.397 ±0.303 −4.913 ±0.949 8.081 ±0.379 322.707 ±4.156 115 Verbenaceae Vitex agnus-castus L. Chilli pepper Infusion 82.257 ±0.666 33.417 ±1.246 9.887 ±1.320 −14.997 ±2.539 17.967 ±2.844 303.628 ±1.419 Blue flowers 116 Amaryllidaceae Agapanthus africanus Hoffmanns African lily Infusion 82.523 ±5.401 57.173 ±2.173 4.543 ±0.162 −15.723 ±1.030 16.367 ±0.233 286.099 ±0.508 117 Convolvulaceae Convolvulus althaeoides L. Bell of the virgin Non-edible 89.100 ±0.172 61.887 ±1.980 12.333 ±1.512 −3.312 ±0.001 12.709 ±1.520 345.099 ±1.657 118 Gesneriaceae Saintpaulia ionantha Wendland African violet Salad 89.577 ±0.065 na na na na na 119 Goodeniaceae Scaevola aemula R. Bronw Flower fan Infusion 93.812 ±0.273 36.913 ±1.770 8.497 ±0.619 0.539 ±0.016 8.431 ±0.623 3.380 ±0.521 120 Lamiaceae Agastache foeniculum Kuntze Anise hyssop Salad, desserts 79.731 ±0.288 na na na na na 121 Lamiaceae Lavandula angustifolia Mill. Lavender Infusion 88.511 ±0.173 37.582 ±1.607 8.8977 ±0.639 −12.101 ±0.812 15.026 ±0.922 306.212 ±0.144 122 Lamiaceae Rosmarinus officinalis L. Rosemary Garrison, desserts 89.483 ±0.211 na na na na na 123 Passiofloraceae Passiflora ×belotti Flower of the passion Tea 97.826 ±0.742 na na na na na 124 Polygonaceae Polygala vulgaris L. Common sparrow Infusion 88.391 ±0.364 49.780 ±1.113 17.963 ±1.319 −10.847 ±2.043 21.006 ±1.320 329.058 ±3.214 125 Solanaceae Petunia ×hybrida Vilm. Petunia Salad, desserts 83.425 ±0.779 23.210 ±1.458 23.027 ±1.216 −25.717 ±1.197 34.519 ±1.703 311.811 ±0.177 na, not available. Foods 2021,10, 2625 9 of 23 Table 4. Carotenoid contents (µg/g dry weight) of white, yellow, and orange flowers and retinol activity equivalents. Species Phytoene Lutein Epoxide Luteoxanthin Antheraxanthin 9-Cis- Violaxanthin Violaxanthin Lutein 9-Cis- Anteraxanthin Zeinoxanthin β-Carotene α-Carotene TOTAL Retinol Activity Equivalents FW White flowers 1S. montanum 47.724 ±0.633 96.839 ±1.304 32.235 ±2.525 82.001 ±0.789 258.863 ±0.843 0.629 ±0.123 2C. comosum 14.816 ±0.003 79.101 ±2.045 93.917 ±1.700 0.059 ±0.018 3A. africanus 3.648 ±0.460 4.478 ±0.373 8.125 ±0.069 4C. sativum 141.747 ±0.501 22.734 ±2.594 103.121 ±1.176 267.601 ±1.238 0.352 ±0.023 5N. oleander 2.748 ±0.3122 2.748 ±0.3122 6T.jasminoides 3.581 ±0.527 3.581 ±0.527 7H. arborescens 26.995 ±2.084 3.745 ±0.251 30.740 ±0.195 0.044 ±0.015 8M. incana 2.523 ±0.411 2.523 ±0.411 9C. shetleri 11.357 ±0.434 11.675 ±0.446 23.033 ±0.068 10 D. chinensis nd 11 G. paniculata 6.649 ±0.855 9.124 ±0.930 18.801 ±0.232 33.854 ±0.3168 0.980 ±0.029 12 C. scammonia 5.989 ±0.770 5.929 ±0.235 11.918 ±0.077 13 G. communis 3.146 ±0.107 3.146 ±0.107 14 M. suaveolens 38.523 ±2.621 6.901 ±0.415 21.677 ±1.936 71.278 ±0.439 11.611 ±0.001 149.990 ±0.687 0.195 ±0.001 15 M. grandiflora 20.359 ±1.259 20.359 ±1.259 16 J. sambac 4.877 ±0.136 4.877 ±0.136 17 P. aphrodite 1.901 ±0.411 6.822 ±0.330 8.273 ±0.125 0.063 ±0.023 18 P. auriculata nd 19 F. ×ananassa nd 20 Rosa hybrid 16.801 ±0.001 6.418 ±0.546 9.970 ±0.702 33.249 ±0.153 21 C. annuum 20.435 ±0.642 18.313 ±0.576 16.199 ±0.509 76.460 ±0.468 8.272 ±0.161 139.680 ±0.618 0.141 ±0.066 22 S. laxum 10.427 ±0.360 3.734 ±0.101 4.730 ±0.163 6.682 ±0.944 25.572 ±0.845 0.028 ±0.015 23 A. citriodora 1.741 ±0.264 1.741 ±0.264 24 L. camara* 44.352 ±1.586 6.914 ±0.238 13.515 ±0.321 64.782 ±0.420 0.148 ±0.011 *13-Cis-violaxanthin (43.503 ±0.722); 9-Cis-lutein (140.712 ±0.586); Zeaxanthin (147.8 ±2.502); β-Cryptoxanthin (361.422 ±7.638); α-Cis-anteraxanthin (232.215 ±12.126). Yellow flowers 25 A. commutatu 10.424 ±0.162 13.040 ±0.203 43.188 ±0.462 12.028 ±0.245 78.680 ±0.402 0.085 ±0.024 26 A. tinctoria 9.338 ±0.574 10.240 ±0.630 19.578 ±0.093 27 D. coccinea nd 28 D. pinnata 19.521 ±0.613 20.492 ±0.644 40.013 ±0.097 0.208 ±0.044 29 D. tenuifolia 17.464 ±0.549 33.122 ±3.642 41.066 ±1.291 13.755 ±0.432 105.408 ±0.455 0.021 ±0.021 30 C. sativa 16.949 ±0.585 2.878 ±0.099 19.826 ±0.057 0.057 ±0.035 31 E. japonicus 31.441 ±0.946 31.441 ±0.946 32 S. japonica 38.878 ±1.341 100.347 ±3.461 139.225 ±0.369 2.208 ±0.010 33 S. papillosa 86.001 ±0.021 1204.010 ±0.062 1311.876 ±0.052 170.316 ±0.001 2772.202 ±0.056 3.477 ±0.027 34 P. stenoptera 3.623 ±0.803 1.130 ±0.226 3.991 ±0.593 23.966 ±1.709 32.709 ±0.278 35 O. basilicum 7.293 ±0.106 7.992 ±0.124 205.176 ±1.318 284.137 ±1.924 504.597 ±2.895 1.255 ±0.030 36 G. arboreum 5.150 ±0.362 5.150 ±0.362 37 P. major 31.395 ±0.489 136.768 ±3.277 168.162 ±0.314 38 F. aubertii 3.725 ±0.394 3.725 ±0.394 39 P. oleracea 334.85 ±8.972 433.409 ±0.182 239.780 ±3.720 4.357 ±0.685 1012.431 ±7.860 0.051 ±0.041 40 G. jasminoides 6.895 ±0.150 6.895 ±0.150 41 S. lycopersicum 31.885 ±0.609 20.207 ±1.752 35.960 ±1.748 88.052 ±0.738 42 L. camaraa12.744 ±0.648 75.829 ±2.937 92.465 ±0.823 43.500 ±0.307 63.792 ±3.421 54.906 ±2.379 50.828 ±0.461 731.514 ±7.631 2056.065 ±7.148 4.796 ±1.027 Orange flowers 43 J. aurea 47.880 ±0.071 47.880 ±0.071 44 T. capensis 6.595 ±0.751 1.844 ±0.260 6.320 ±0.406 6.621 ±0.426 37.646 ±0.241 0.188 ±0.015 45 D. affinis 22.283 ±0.003 30.403 ±0.013 43.261 ±0.001 16.277 ±0.034 112.225 ±0.026 0.364 ±0.007 46 D. brochidodroma 97.582 ±0.011 258.828 ±0.078 76.733 ±0.022 433.144 ±0.080 47 P. granatum 24.981 ±0.309 8.891 ±0.279 33.872 ±0.260 0.229 ±0.075 48 R. alpinia 220.643 ±0.06 1372.181 ±0.001 1451.916 ±0.003 3044.739 ±2.120 19.058 ±0.019 nd, not detectable. Foods 2021,10, 2625 16 of 23 Foods 2021, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 17 of 30 3.3. Phenolic Compounds The quantitative data on individuals and TPC assessed by chromatographic analysis are presented in Tables 7–9. In addition, an example of the resulting chromatogram is presented in Figures 4 and 5 sections A, B, and C show the frequency, mean contents, and standard deviations of the phenolics and major sources. Figure 4. Chromatogram of lilac Catharanthus roseus phenolics at 280 nm (A) and 320 nm (B). 1. p-Hydroxybenzoic acid, 2. m-Coumaric acid, 3. Chlorogenic acid, 4. Quercitrin, 5. Quercetin, 6. Kaempferol. Figure 4. Chromatogram of lilac Catharanthus roseus phenolics at 280 nm ( A ) and 320 nm ( B ). 1. p-Hydroxybenzoic acid, 2. m-Coumaric acid, 3. Chlorogenic acid, 4. Quercitrin, 5. Quercetin, 6. Kaempferol. Foods 2021, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 18 of 30 Figure 5. Frequency, mean contents and standard deviations of phenolics and major sources. Frequency (A), mean contents of individual phenolics (B), total phenolics content (C), and list of species with high concentrations of phenolics. Number within the figures represent the sample under study. Concentration (mg/g DW) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Gallic p-Hydroxybenzoic m-Coumaric p-Coumaric Vanillic Caffeic Syringic Chlorogenic Pherulic Naringenin Naringin Ethyl galate Crisin Quercetrin Galangin Myricetin Quercetin Kaempferol 16 14 15 76 85 31 10 84 101 5 70 15 10 101 67 69 70 7 9 57 66 15 16 70 106 99 70 110 108 71 55 48 15 76 70 110 6 99 Gallic p-Hydroxybenzoic m-Coumaric p-Coumaric Vanillic Caffeic Syringic Chlorogenic Pherulic Naringenin Naringin Ethyl galate Crisin Quercetrin Galangin Myricetin Quercetin Kaempferol Frecuency 0 20 40 60 80 100 012 Total phenolics (mg/g DW) 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 70 16 76 101 15 110 106 14; 99; 12 Punica granatum L. 70) Pelargonium x hortorum L. H. Bailey 16) Plumbago capensis Lam. 76) Hydrangea petiolaris Siebold & Zucc. 101) 15) 14) Pelargonium x hortorum L. H. Bailey Pelargonium x hortorum L. H. Bailey Fragaria ananassa Duchesne ex Rozier 110) Fuchsia magellanica Lam. 106) 99) Saintpaulia ionantha Wendland 12) Pelargonium domesticum L. H. Bailey A C B Figure 5. Frequency, mean contents and standard deviations of phenolics and major sources. Frequency ( A ), mean contents of individual phenolics ( B ), total phenolics content ( C ), and list of species with high concentrations of phenolics. Number within the figures represent the sample under study. Foods 2021,10, 2625 17 of 23 4. Discussion 4.1. Color Parameters and Other Characteristics The great majority of the flowers were edible (n= 111, i.e., 89%); 70% of the families studied (52 families) included edible flowers. For example, the families Asteraceae and Lamiaceae contained six and seven edible species, respectively [ 20 ]. Concerning their uses, the most frequent were in salads (31.3% of the total use of the flowers) and infusions (28.9%), followed by teas (15.7%), desserts (13.3%) and others, including as garnishes and colorants (Tables 1–3). The different culinary uses of flowers depend to some extent on their size, shape, and color, as suggested by other authors [ 4 ]. These characteristics varied considerably among the samples surveyed in the present study. Different shapes were found, such as tubular (e.g., Russelia equisetiformis Schltdl. Et Cham.), bilabial (e.g., Rosmarinus officinalis L.), flared (e.g., Punica granatum L.), and flowers that form part of a cluster (e.g., Plantago major L., Salvia splendens Sellow ex Schylt., Vitex agnus-castus L., Allium schoenoprasum L., and Lantana camara L.). On the other hand, the flowers showed a great variety of colors (Tables 1–3), such as white (e.g., Portulaca oleracea L.), yellow (e.g., Anthemis tinctoria L.), orange (e.g., Punica granatum L.), pink (e.g., Diantuhus caryophyllus L.), red (e.g., Pelargonium × hortorum), lilac (e.g., Petunia hybrid), and blue (e.g., Lavandula angustifolia Mill.). The color parameters ranged between 14.2 and 87.1, − 9.2 and 57.2, − 25.7 and 88.6, 2.9 and 89.9, and 3.4 and 359.6 for L* (lightness), a* (ranging from green to red), b* (ranging from blue to yellow), C* ab (chroma, the quantitative expression of color), and h ab (hue angle, the qualitative expression of color), respectively. The variety of colors found in the petals of flowers under study can be explained by the different contents of carotenoids and phenolics, which are usually the main contributors to the color of these structures [34,35]. The humidity of the petals ranged between 54.5 and 99.7%, a wider interval compared to that recently reported by other authors (70 and 95%) [4]. 4.2. Carotenoids 4.2.1. Selection of the Extraction Solvents Regarding the quantification of carotenoids in flowers, there are several studies that use different extraction solvents; however, the mixtures acetone: methanol (2:1) and ethyl acetate: methanol: petroleum ether (1:1:1) in this study presented the highest extraction percentage. Acetone: methanol (2:1) was selected as the extraction solvent for the studied flowers due to its slightly higher yield and its simplicity of preparation. 4.2.2. Carotenoid Levels At this point it is important to notice that saponification, which simplifies the identification of carotenoids, has the disadvantage that it leads to carotenoid losses [ 30 ], so the information provided must be interpreted with this in mind. This fact has been observed in the TCC levels of red and lilac flowers of Catharanthus roseus (3.7 µ g/g DW and not detectable, respectively) and Pelargonium × hortorum (3.5 µ g/g DW and not detectable, respectively). Although the TCC levels measured in non-saponified extracts by spectrophotometry showed values of 185, 132, and 100 µ g/g DW, respectively, no individual carotenoids were detected by RRLC after the saponification of the extracts (data not shown). On the other hand, flowers of the same family but different species presented different profiles in most cases. At this point it is important to notice that the profiles of the secondary metabolites of plants in general and carotenoids and phenolics in particular are dependent on different factors, including genotype as one of the most important, along with ambient/seasonal (light quality and quantity, temperature), and agronomic factors (irrigation, fertilization, etc.), among others [36–38]. Lutein (31.7%), β -cryptoxanthin (16.6%), and β -carotene (15.4%) were the most frequent carotenoids (Figure 3, section A). These three carotenoids are, along with zeaxanthin, α -carotene, lycopene, phytoene, and phytofluene, the major carotenoids in human tissues and fluids, all of which are thought to promote health [ 13 ]. All of them, except phytofluene, Foods 2021,10, 2625 18 of 23 were identified in the set of samples, as well as others not reported in humans, such as lutein epoxide, antheraxanthin, violaxanthin, zeinoxanthin, luteoxanthin, and neochrome (Figure 3, section A). Figure 3, section B, presents the mean contents and standard deviations of the individual carotenoids. The levels of the colorless carotenoid phytoene ranged between 2.8 (Trifolium cernuum) and 126.4 µ g/g DW (Guzmania hybrid). The concentrations of lutein ranged from 0.7 to 1204.0 µ g/g DW. The best source by far was Senna papillosa yellow (1204.0 µ g/g DW), followed by Portulaca oleracea yellow (334.9 µ g/g DW) and Aphelandra squarrosa red (209.0 µ g/g DW), in descending order. The levels of lutein epoxide ranged from 2.9 to 75.8 µg/g DW . The highest amounts were found in Lantana camara yellow (75.8 µ g/g DW), Mentha suaveolens white (38.5 µ g/g DW), Solanum lycopersicum yellow (31.9 µ g/g DW), and Mentha × piperita lilac (23.4 µ g/g DW). The concentrations of luteoxanthin fell in an interval of 1.1–98.7 µ g/g DW, and the main sources were Brownea macrophylla red (98.7 µ g/g DW), Mentha suaveolens white (6.9 µ g/g DW), and Mentha ×piperita lilac (5.9 µ g/g DW). On the other hand, the concentrations of antheraxanthin ranged from 1.8 to 18.3 µ g/g DW. Capsicum annuum white (18.3 µ g/g DW), Campanula shetleri white (11.4 µ g/g DW), and Rosa hybrid pink (9.6 µ g/g DW) were the flowers with the highest contents. The 9-Cis-antheraxanthin concentration values fluctuated between 5.4 and 433.4 µ g/g DW. The highest levels were detected in Portulaca oleracea yellow (433.4 µ g/g DW) and pink (355.2 µ g/g DW) petals. The concentrations of violaxanthin ranged from 4.0 to 258.8 µ g/g DW. Drymonia brochidodroma orange (258.8 µ g/g DW), Aphelandra squarrosa red (140 µ g/g DW), and Senna papillosa yellow (86.0 µ g/g DW) were the best sources. The concentrations of the carotenoid identified as zeinoxanthin varied between 4.5 and 1311.9 µg/g DW . The best sources were Senna papillosa yellow ( 1311.9 µg/g DW ) and, to a much lesser extent, Portulaca oleracea yellow (239.8 µ g/g DW). The levels of the provitamin A carotenoid β -cryptoxanthin ranged from 4.2 to 33.4 µ g/g DW; the highest amounts were found in Brownea macrophylla red (33.4 µ g/g DW) and Lavandula angustifolia blue (19.3 µ g/g DW). The amounts of the provitamin A carotenoid α -carotene were in the interval of 12.3–1451.9 µg/g DW. Renealmia alpinia orange (1451.9 µg/g DW) and, to a lesser extent, Lantana camara yellow (731.5 µ g/g DW) and Spathiphyllum montanum white (82.0 µg/g DW) stood out as the main sources. Britton and Khachik proposed a criterion through which to classify food sources according to their carotenoid content expressed in mg/100 g fresh weight. According to this criterion, the contents of a specific carotenoid can be classified as low (0–0.1 mg/100 g), moderate (0.1–0.5 mg/100 g), high (0.5–2 mg/100 g), or very high (>2 mg/100 g). Using this criterion to categorize carotenoid sources, the petals with high ( 0.5–2 mg/100 g ) or very high (>2 mg/100 g) carotenoid levels are Renealmia alpinia (15.0 mg/100 g FW), Senna papillosa (4.5 mg/100 g FW), Sophora japonica,Brownea macrophylla ( 2.6 mg/100 g FW ) ( β -carotene), Tecoma capensis (0.5 mg/100 g FW) ( β -cryptoxanthin), Senna papillosa ( 31.8 mg/100 g FW ), Aphelandra squarrosa (5.6 mg/100 g FW), Portulaca oleracea ( 4.7 mg/100 g FW ) (lutein), Lantana camara ( 1.7 mg/100 g FW )(zeaxanthin), and Lantana camara (0.6 mg/100 g FW) (phytoene). On the other hand, the maximum daily intakes of carotenoids reported in recent reviews were 4.1 (lutein + zeaxanthin), 1.4 ( β -cryptoxanthin), 2.4 ( α -carotene), 8.8 ( β - carotene), 9.4 (lycopene), 2.0 (phytoene), and 0.7 mg (phytofluene) [ 13 ]. These intakes could be obtained with 87.2 g FW of Portulaca oleracea (lutein + zeaxanthin), 280 g FW of Tecoma capensis ( β -cryptoxanthin), 15.2 g FW of Renealmia alpinia ( α -carotene), 58.7 g FW of Renealmia alpinia ( β -carotene), and 153.8 g FW of Guzmania hibrid (phytoene). These data indicate that the consumption of just a few grams of petals of some flowers (for instance, Portulaca oleracea or Renealmia alpinia) can be useful to increase considerably the intakes of health-promoting carotenoids. The petals of the edible flowers Renealmia alpinia (15.0 mg/100 g FW of β -carotene and 15.8 mg/100 g FW of α -carotene) and Lantana camara (0.6 mg/100 g FW of β -carotene and 8.6 mg/100 g FW of α -carotene) showed the highest values of provitamin A carotenoids. The values of vitamin A activity of the samples can be expressed in terms of retinol Foods 2021,10, 2625 19 of 23 activity equivalents (RAE), considering the equivalences 1 RAE = 12 µ g of all-trans- β-carotene = 24 µg of other provitamin A carotenoids [ 39 ]. Thus, the RAE per gram of fresh weight of Renealmia alpinia and Lantana camara are 19.1 and 4.1, respectively. Given that 1 RAE equals two retinol equivalent (RE), it can be estimated that 10 g of fresh flowers from Renealmia alpinia would provide 381.2 retinol equivalents (RE), which is approximately half the daily recommendation of vitamin A for adults (750 RE/day) by FAO and OMS [40]. The TCC values obtained as the sum of the levels of individual carotenoids ranged from 1.7 (Aloysia citriodora, pink) to 3044.7 µ g/g DW (Renealmia alpinia, orange). The flowers with the highest TCC levels were Renealmia alpinia orange (3044.7 µ g/g DW), Senna papillosa yellow (2772.2 µ g/g DW), Lantana camara yellow (2056.0 µ g/g DW), and Portulaca oleracea yellow (1012.4 µ g/g DW). The TCC content of R. alpinia was outstanding, as it was 23 times higher than the mean TCC of all the flowers. Foods with high or very high carotenoid levels are: green vegetables, apricot, carrot, mango, palm oil, buriti, and sweet potato ( β -carotene); persimmon, pitanga, papaya, pumpkin, and tangerines ( β -cryptoxanthin); green vegetables, pumpkin, sastra, and egg yolk (lutein); Chinese wolfberry, sastra, corozo, sapote, quince, orange, and red peppers (zeaxanthin); tomato, watermelon, red grapefruit, and papaya (lycopene); tomato, apricot, red pepper, carrot, and red grapefruit (phytoene and phytofluene) [5,15,17,28]. 4.3. Phenolic Compounds The most frequent phenolic compounds in the set of flowers evaluated were mcoumaric acid (a phenolic acid), quercitrin, and quercetin (flavonoids) (Figure 5, section A), which agrees well with the information reported by other authors indicating that phenolic acids and flavonoids are the predominant phenolic compounds in flowers [ 41 ]. On the other hand, values between 4.83 and 222.00 mg GAE/g DW of total phenolics have been described in 23 edible flowers elsewhere [4]. Flowers of the same species with different colors showed different profiles of phenolics, as opposed to what was observed in the case of carotenoids. Flowers of different species also exhibited different phenolic patterns. This may have been due to the fact that, as already mentioned, the contents of phenolic compounds and other secondary metabolites in plants are dependent on genetic factors, as well as climatic and agronomic conditions, among others [37,38]. In addition, the influence of different methods on the extraction efficiency of different compounds (in this case not only phenolics but also carotenoids), and therefore on their, quantification must be taken into account. 4.3.1. Benzoic Acids Gallic acid displayed ranges between 0.1 and 38.1 mg/g DW. Pelargonium × hortorum red (38.1 mg/g DW), pink (24.5 mg/g DW), lilac (27.7 mg/g DW), and Pelargonium domesticum lilac (18.6 mg/g DW) were the samples with the highest contents. The content of p-Hydroxybenzoic acid ranged from 0.1 to 21.1 mg/g DW. The highest values were found in Plumbago auriculata white (21.1 mg/g DW), Chlorophytum comosum white ( 8.4 mg/g DW ), Dahlia coccinea yellow (6.9 mg/g DW), and Vitex agnus castus lilac ( 6.5 mg/g DW ). The m-coumaric acid values showed ranges between 0.04 and 19.5 mg/g DW. Verbena × hybrid pink (19.5 mg/g DW), Dianthus caryophyllus red (15.5 mg/g DW), Vitex agnus-castus lilac (15.5 mg/g DW), and Hydrangea petiolaris pink (12.3 mg/g DW) exhibited the most significant m-coumaric acid concentrations. The p-coumaric acid values oscillated between 0.1 and 17.6 mg/g DW. Catharanthus roseus red (17.6 mg/g DW) and Punica granatum orange (10.1 mg/g DW) were the samples surveyed with the highest values of p-coumaric acid. The levels of vanillic acid fell in an interval of 0.1–1.6 mg/g DW. This compound was detected only in a few species, such as Dianthus caryophyllus red (1.6 mg/g DW), Vitex agnus castus lilac (0.6 mg/g DW), Nerium oleander pink (0.5 mg/g DW), Celosia argentea red ( 0.1 mg/g DW ), and Aglaonema commutatum yellow (0.1 mg/g DW). The Syringic acid totals Foods 2021,10, 2625 20 of 23 ranged from 0.1 to 3.0 mg/g DW. Lagerstroemia indica pink (3.0 mg/g DW) and Pelargonium domesticum lilac (2.4 mg/g DW) were the flowers with the highest concentrations. 4.3.2. Hydroxycinnamic Acids The concentrations of caffeic acid ranged from 0.1 to 34.2 mg/g DW. Hydrangea petiolaris pink (34.2 mg/g DW), Salvia splendens red (4.3 mg/g DW), and Convolvus althaeoides blue (4.2 mg/g DW) were the richest sources of this compound. The chlorogenic acid content ranged between 0.1 and 8.4 mg/g DW. Its main sources were Punica granatum orange (8.4 mg/g DW), Nerium oleander pink (7.9 mg/g DW) and red (7.3 mg/g DW), Anthemis tinctoria yellow (6.8 mg/g DW), and Hydrangea petiolaris pink (6.6 mg/g DW). The ferulic acid levels oscillated between 0.1 and 3.3 mg/g DW. Convolvulus althaeoides blue (3.3 mg/g DW), Nerium oleander pink (1.2 mg/g DW), Petunia hybrida lilac (0.9 mg/g DW), and Dahlia pinnata yellow (0.9 mg/g DW) were its main sources. 4.3.3. Flavonols The quercitrin concentrations ranged from 0.1 to 39.5 mg/g DW. The main sources of this flavanol were Punica granatum orange (39.5 mg/g DW), Fragaria × ananassa white ( 24.2 mg/g DW ), Plantago major yellow (21.2 mg/g DW), Hibiscus syriacus lilac ( 19.9 mg/g DW ), and Gypsophila paniculata white (19.4 mg/g DW). The quercetin levels oscillated between 0.1 and 23.8 mg/g DW. Its major sources were Plumbago auriculata white (23.8 mg/g DW), Punica granatum orange (23.1 mg/g DW), and Fragaria × ananassa white ( 19.3 mg/g DW ). Myricetin was present in the set of samples at concentrations in the range 0.4–8.2 mg/g DW and was only detected in Pelargonium × hortorum pink (8.2 mg/g DW) and red ( 3.8 mg/g DW ), Dianthus caryophyllus pink ( 1.5 mg/g DW ), Pelargonium domesticum lilac ( 1.0 mg/g DW ),and Fallopia aubertii lilac ( 0.8 mg/g DW ) and yellow ( 0.4 mg/g DW ). The levels of kaempferol in the set of flowers were in an interval of 0.6–16.1 mg/g DW. Catharanthus roseus lilac ( 16.1 mg/g DW ), Saintpaulia ionantha blue (11.4 mg/g DW), and Rosa hybrid red ( 6.6 mg/g DW ) were the best sources. 4.3.4. Flavones Crisin was detected only in a few samples, at concentrations between 0.1 and 21.2 mg/g DW . Saintpauli ionantha blue (21.2 mg/g DW), Cuphea hyssopifolia pink (11.3 mg/g DW), and Lantana camara (Verbenaceae family) white (3.4 mg/g DW) displayed the highest values. 4.3.5. Flavanones The naringin values were between 0.2 and 20.1 mg/g DW and Pelargonium × hortorum pink (20.1 mg/g DW) and red (18.6 mg/g DW) and Pelargonium peltatum red ( 8.4 mg/g DW ) exhibited the highest values. 4.3.6. Total Phenolic Compounds TPC demonstrated ranges between 0.2 (Ocimum basilicum white) and 146.7 mg/g DW (Punica granatum orange) (Figure 3, section C). The TPC in Punica granatum was noteworthy as it was 15 times higher than the mean of TPC in the entire set of flowers. Punica granatum orange (147.0 mg/g DW), Pelargonium × hortorum red (65.5 mg/g DW) and pink ( 59.7 mg/g DW ), Hydrangea petiolaris pink (62.6 mg/g DW), and Plumbago auriculata white ( 62.5 mg/g DW ) showed the highest values of TPC in the flowers under study. Other authors found similar values of TPC in Pelargonium × hortorum (i.e., 50.4 mg GAE/g DW using the same humidity as this study) [ 42 ]. Anthemis tinctoria with chlorogenic acid ( 6.8 mg/g DW ) as the major compound and 11.5 mg/g DW of TPC, Mirabilis jalapa with p-hydroxybenzoic acid (4.5 mg/g) and 9.5 mg/g of TPC, Limonium sinuatum with kaempferol ( 1.0 mg/g DW ) and 1.8 mg/g DW of TPC, Euonymus japonicus with quercitrin ( 0.8 mg/g DW ) and 1.9 mg/g DW of TPC, and Gardenia jasminoides with ferulic acid and naringin (0.6 mg/g DW both) and 1.9 mg/g DW of TPC are used as food additives and natural colorants [ 43 – 45 ]. Other authors have reported values of 9.06 mg/100 g DW , Foods 2021,10, 2625 21 of 23 19.06 mg/100g DW , and 190.8 mg GAE/100 g DW for gallic acid, quercetin, and total phenolic, respectively, in Gardenia jasminoides [ 46 ]. Furthermore, other authors reported that Mirabilis jalapa is a good source of flavonoids and phenolic acids (ferulic acid and caffeic acid as major compounds) [ 47 ]. The aforementioned flowers, despite being used as coloring agents, did not stand out for their TPC in the present study. 5. Conclusions In this study, the carotenoids and phenolic compounds of 125 flowers were evaluated. Flowers with high TCC levels (assessed by liquid chromatography) were pinpointed, such as Renealmia alpinia orange (whose TCC levels was 23 times higher than the media), Senna papillosa yellow, Lantana camara yellow, and Portulaca oleracea yellow. The petals of the edible flowers Renealmia alpinia and Lantana camara stood out for their high content of provitamin A carotenoid. The main sources of the different carotenoids detected were Guzmania hybrid (phytoene), Senna papillosa (lutein), Renealmia alpinia ( β -carotene), Lantana camara yellow (lutein epoxide), Brownea macrophylla red (luteoxanthin), Capsicum annuum white (antheraxanthin), Portulaca oleracea yellow and pink petals (9-cis-antheraxanthin), Drymonia brochidodroma orange (violaxanthin), Senna papillosa yellow (zeinoxanthin), Brownea macrophylla red (β-cryptoxanthin), and Renealmia alpinia orange (α-carotene). Some petals are indeed highly concentrated sources of carotenoids, including provitamin A carotenoids. As an example, it has been estimated that 10 g fresh weight of the petals of Renealmia alpinia can provide 381.2 ER, which is approximately half the daily recommendation of vitamin A for adults (750 ER/day). The samples with the highest TPC (assessed by liquid chromatography) were Punica granatum orange, Pelargonium × hortorum red and pink, and Hydrangea petiolaris pink and Plumbago auriculata white). The TPC in Punica granatum was approximately 15 times higher than the mean. The main sources of the different phenolics detected were Pelargonium × hortorum red, pink, and lilac (gallic acid), Plumbago auriculata white (p-hydroxybenzoic acid), Verbena × hybrid pink (m-coumaric acid), Catharanthus roseus red (p-coumaric acid), Dianthus caryophyllus red and lilac (vanillic acid), Lagerstroemia indica pink (syringic acid), Hydrangea petiolaris pink (caffeic acid), Punica granatum orange (chlorogenic acid), Convolvulus althaeoides blue (ferulic acid), Punica granatum orange (quercitrin), Plumbago auriculata white (quercetin), Pelargonium × hortorum pink and red (myricetin), Catharanthus roseus lilac (kaempferol), Saintpauli ionantha blue (crisin), and Pelargonium × hortorum pink and red (naringin). In summary, several petal matrices with interesting carotenoid or phenolic profiles (either by their total content or their levels of specific carotenoids or phenolics) were pinpointed. The information provided can help to design breeding programs aimed at producing flowers with increased carotenoid and/or phenolic levels and can be useful for the provision of natural colors for the agro-food or textile industries, as well as for the provision of beneficial compounds for the functional foods, nutricosmetics, and pharmaceutical industries. Author Contributions: Conceptualization, M.C.; methodology, C.S.; software, A.B.; validation, P.M.- B.; formal analisis and writing-review and editing, E.C.-C.; investigation, D.H.; resources, supervision and project administration A.J.M.-M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript. Funding: This research was funded by SENESCYT-Ecuador; the Corporación Ecuatoriana para el Desarrollo de la Investigación y Academia (CEDIA); the Spanish State Secretariat of Research, Development and Innovation (Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness, project ref. AGL2012- 37610, co-funded by FEDER), E.C.-C., D.H., A.B., C.S.; the Ibero-American Programme for Science, Technology and Development (CYTED, http://www.cyted.org) for the funding of the IBERCAROT network (http://carotenoides.us.es/ref.112RT445); the Carotenoid Network: from microbial and plants to food and health (BIO2015-71703-REDT); and CaRed: Red española de carotenoides (BIO2017- 90877-REDT), funded by the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness. Foods 2021,10, 2625 22 of 23 Data Availability Statement: The datasets generated for this study are available on request to the corresponding author. Acknowledgments: The authors thank the Secretaría de Educación Superior, Ciencia, Tecnología e Inovación (SENESCYT) and the Corporación Ecuatoriana para el Desarrollo de la Investigación y Academia (CEDIA), Ecuador, for its financial support; Real Botanic Garden from Córdoba-Spain for the provision of flowers; and the technical staff of the Biology Service (SGI, Universidad de Sevilla) for the services offered. A.J.M.-M. acknowledges funding from the Spanish State Secretariat of Research, Development and Innovation (Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness, project ref. AGL2012-37610, co-funded by FEDER). E.C.-C., D.H., A.B., C.S., and A.J.M.-M. thank the Ibero- American Programme for Science, Technology and Development (CYTED, http://www.cyted.org) for the funding of the IBERCAROT network (http://carotenoides.us.es/ref.112RT445). A.J.M.-M. acknowledges funding from the Carotenoid Network: from microbial and plants to food and health (BIO2015-71703-REDT) and CaRed: Red española de carotenoides (BIO2017-90877-REDT), funded by the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness. Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest. References 1. Wongwattanasathien, O.; Kangsadalampai, K.; Tongyonk, L. Antimutagenicity of some flowers grown in Thailand. Food Chem. Toxicol. 2010,48, 1045–1051. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 2. Wang, C.; Wang, J.; Lin, W.; Chu, C.; Chou, F.; Tseng, T. Protective effect of Hibiscus anthocyanins against tert -butyl hydroperoxideinduced hepatic toxicity in rats. Food Chem. Toxicol. 2000,38, 411–416. [CrossRef] 3. Leonti, M.; Verpoorte, R. Traditional mediterranean and european herbal medicines. J. Ethnopharmacol. 2017 ,199, 161–167. [CrossRef] 4. Fernandes, L.; Casal, S.; Pereira, J.A.; Saraiva, J.A.; Ramalhosa, E. Edible flowers: A review of the nutritional, antioxidant, antimicrobial properties and effects on human health. J. Food Compos. Anal. 2017,60, 38–50. [CrossRef] 5. Ahrazem, O.; Diretto, G.; Argandoña Picazo, J.; Fiore, A.; Rubio-Moraga, Á.; Rial, C.; Varela, R.M.; Macías, F.A.; Castillo, R.; Romano, E.; et al. The specialized roles in carotenogenesis and apocarotenogenesis of the phytoene synthase gene Family in Saffron. Front. Plant. Sci. 2019,10, 249. [CrossRef] 6. Ohmiya, A. Review: Diversity of carotenoid composition in flower petals. Jpn. Agric. Res. Q. 2011,45, 163–171. [CrossRef] 7. Pires, T.; Dias, M.; Barros, L.; Ricardo, C.; Alves, M.; Oliveira, M.; Ferreira, I. Edible flowers as sources of phenolic compounds with bioactive potential. Food Res. Int. 2017. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 8. Onofrei, V.; Teliban, G.C.; Burducea, M.; Lobiuc, A.; Sandu, C.B.; Tocai, M.; Robu, T. Organic foliar fertilization increases polyphenol content of Calendula officinalis L. Ind. Crops Prod. 2017,109, 509–513. [CrossRef] 9. Fu, X.Q.; Ma, N.; Sun, W.P.; Dang, Y.Y. Microwave and enzyme co-assisted aqueous two-phase extraction of polyphenol and lutein from marigold (Tagetes erecta L.) flower. Ind. Crops Prod. 2018,123, 296–302. [CrossRef] 10. Meléndez-Martínez, A. Carotenoides en Agroalimentación y Salud; CYTED: Cambridge, UK, 2017; ISBN 978-84-15413-35-6. 11. Esteban, R.; Moran, J.; Becerril, J.; García-Plazaola, J. Versatility of carotenoids: An integrated view on diversity, evolution, functional roles and environmental interactions. Environ. Exp. Bot. 2015,119, 63–75. [CrossRef] 12. Schaefer, H.M.; Schaefer, V.; Levey, D. How plant-animal interactions signal new insights in communication. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2004,19, 577–584. [CrossRef] 13. Meléndez-Martínez, A. An overview of carotenoids, apocarotenoids and vitamin A in agro-food, nutrition, health and disease. Mol. Nutr. Food Res. 2019,63, 1–43. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 14. Meléndez-Martínez, A.; Stinco, C.; Mapelli-Brahm, P. Skin carotenoids in public health and nutricosmetics. The emerging roles and applications of the UV light-absorbing colourless carotenoids phytoene and phytofluene. Nutrients 2019 ,11, 1093. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 15. Breithaupt, D.E. Modern application of xanthophylls in animal feeding—A review. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2007 ,18, 501–506. [CrossRef] 16. Goralczyk, R.; Wertz, K. Skin photoprotection by carotenoids. In Carotenoids. Volume 5. Nutrition and Health; Britton, G., Liaaen-Jensen, S., Pfander, H., Eds.; Birkhäuser: Basel, Switzerland, 2009; pp. 335–362. ISBN 978-3-7643-7501-0. 17. Baaka, N.; El Ksibi, I.; Mhenni, M.F. Optimisation of the recovery of carotenoids from tomato processing wastes: Application on textile dyeing and assessment of its antioxidant activity. Nat. Prod. Res. 2017,31, 196–203. [CrossRef] 18. Shahidi, F.; Ambigaipalan, P. Phenolics and polyphenolics in foods, beverages and spices: Antioxidant activity and health effects—A review. J. Funct. Foods 2015,18, 820–897. [CrossRef] 19. Granado-Loreiro, F.; Hernández-Alvarez, E. Functional foods and health effects: A nutritional biochemistry perspective. Curr. Med. Chem. 2016,23, 2929–2957. [CrossRef] 20. Lu, B.; Li, M.; Yin, R. Phytochemical content, health benefits, and toxicology of common edible flowers: A review (2000-2015). Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2015,56, S130–S148. [CrossRef] Foods 2021,10, 2625 23 of 23 21. Fan, J.; Zhu, W.; Kang, H.; Ma, H.; Tao, G. Flavonoid constituents and antioxidant capacity in flowers of different Zhongyuan tree penoy cultivars. J. Funct. Foods 2012,4, 147–157. [CrossRef] 22. Kaisoon, O.; Siriamornpun, S. Phenolic compounds and antioxidant activities of edible flowers from Thailand. J. Funct. 2011 ,3, 88–99. [CrossRef] 23. Meléndez-Martínez, A.; Britton, G.; Vicario, I.M.; Heredia, F.J. The complex carotenoid pattern of orange juices from concentrate. Food Chem. 2008,109, 546–553. [CrossRef] 24. Meléndez-Martínez, A.; Paulino, M.; Stinco, C.; Mapelli-Brahm, P.; Wang, X.-D. Study of the time-course of cis/trans (Z/E) isomerization of lycopene, phytoene, and phytofluene from tomato. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2014,62, 12399–12406. [CrossRef] 25. Meléndez-Martínez, A.; Britton, G.; Vicario, I.; Heredia, F. Identification of isolutein (lutein epoxide) as cis-antheraxanthin in orange juice. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2005,53, 9369–9373. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 26. Meléndez-Martínez, A.; Vicario, I.; Heredia, F. Geometrical isomers of violaxanthin in orange juice. Food Chem. 2007 ,104, 169–175. [CrossRef] 27. Meléndez-Martínez, A.; Britton, G.; Vicario, I.; Heredia, F. Identification of zeinoxanthin in orange juices. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2005,53, 6362–6367. [CrossRef] 28. Bakó, E.; Deli, J.; Tóth, G. HPLC study on the carotenoid composition of Calendula products. J. Biochem. Biophys. Methods 2002 , 53, 241–250. [CrossRef] 29. Kimura, M.; Rodriguez-amaya, D.B. A scheme for obtaining standards and HPLC quantification of leafy vegetable carotenoids. Food Chem. 2002,78, 389–398. [CrossRef] 30. Stinco, C.; Benítez-González, A.; Hernanz, D.; Vicario, I.; Meléndez-Martínez, A. Development and validation of a rapid resolution liquid chromatography method for the screening of dietary plant isoprenoids: Carotenoids, tocopherols and chlorophylls. J. Chromatogr. A 2014,1370, 162–170. [CrossRef] 31. Jara-Palacios, M.J.; Hernanz, D.; González-Manzano, S.; Santos-Buelga, C.; Escudero-Gilete, M.L.; Heredia, F.J. Detailed phenolic composition of white grape by-products by RRLC/MS and measurement of the antioxidant activity. Talanta 2014 ,125, 51–57. [CrossRef] 32. Coyago-Cruz, E.; Corell, M.; Meléndez-Martínez, A. Estudio Sobre el Contenido en Carotenoides y Compuestos Fenólicos de Tomates y Flores en el Contexto de la Alimentación Funcional; Rojo, P., Ed.; Universida. Punto Rojo Libros, S.L.: Sevilla, Spain, 2017; ISBN 9788417148096. 33. The-Plant-List. A Working List of All Plant Species. 2017. Available online: http://www.theplantlist.org/ (accessed on 12 December 2017). 34. Zhu, C.; Bai, C.; Sanahuja, G.; Yuan, D.; Farré, G.; Naqvi, S.; Shi, L.; Capell, T.; Christou, P. The regulation of carotenoid pigmentation in flowers. Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 2010,504, 132–141. [CrossRef] 35. Pan, Q.; Dai, Y.; Nuringtyas, R.; Mustafa, R. Investigation of the chemomarkers correlated with flower colour in different organs of Catharanthus roseus using NMR-based metabolomics. Phytochem. Anal. 2014,25, 66–74. [CrossRef] 36. Dias, M.; Borge, G.; Kljak, K.; Mandi´c, A.; Mapelli-Brahm, P.; Olmedilla-Alonso, B.; Pintea, A.; Ravasco, F.; Saponjac, V.; Sereikaité, J.; et al. European database of carotenoid levels in foods. Factors affecting carotenoid content. Foods 2021,912, 1–31. 37. Poiroux-Gonord, F.; Bidel, L.P.R.; Fanciullino, A.L.; Gautier, H.; Lauri-Lopez, F.; Urban, L. Health benefits of vitamins and secondary metabolites of fruits and vegetables and prospects to increase their concentrations by agronomic approaches. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2010,58, 12065–12082. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 38. Coyago-Cruz, E.; Corell, M.; Moriana, A.; Hernanz, D.; Benítez-González, A.; Stinco, C.; Meléndez-Martínez, A. Antioxidants (carotenoids and phenolics) profile of cherry tomatoes as influenced by deficit irrigation, ripening and cluster. Food Chem. 2018 , 240, 870–884. [CrossRef] 39. National-Academies-Press. Dietary Reference Intakes for Vitamin A, Vitamin K, Arsenic, Boron, Chromium, Copper, Iodine, Iron, Manganese, Molybdenum, Nickel, Silicon, Vanadium, and Zinc; National Academies Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2001; ISBN 0-309-07279-4. 40. Latham, M. Vitaminas; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2002. 41. Naczk, M.; Shahidi, F. Extraction and analysis of phenolics in food. J. Chromatogr. A 2004,1054, 95–111. [CrossRef] 42. Li, A.N.; Li, S.; Li, H.B.; Xu, D.P.; Xu, X.R.; Chen, F. Total phenolic contents and antioxidant capacities of 51 edible and wild flowers. J. Funct. Foods 2014,6, 319–330. [CrossRef] 43. Xu, D.P.; Li, Y.; Meng, X.; Zhou, T.; Zhou, Y.; Zheng, J.; Zhang, J.J.; Li, H.B. Natural antioxidants in foods and medicinal plants: Extraction, assessment and resources. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2017,18, 96. [CrossRef] 44. Eser, F.; Yaglioglu, A.S.; Dolarslan, M.; Aktas, E.; Onal, A. Dyeing, fastness, and cytotoxic properties, and phenolic constituents of Anthemis tinctoria var. tinctoria (Asteraceae). J. Text. Inst. 2016,5000. [CrossRef] 45. Uddin, R.; Saha, M.R.; Subhan, N.; Hossain, H.; Jahan, I.A.; Akter, R. HPLC-Analysis of polyphenolic compounds in Gardenia jasminoides and determination of antioxidant activity by using free radical scavenging assays. Adv. Pharm. Bull. 2014 ,4, 273–281. 46. Chen, F.; Yao, Q.; Tian, J. Review of ecological restoration technology. Eng. Rev. 2016,36, 115–121. 47. Singh, M.; Kumar, V.; Singh, I.; Gauttam, V.; Nath, A. Anti-inflammatory activity of aqueous extract of Mirabilis jalapa Linn. leaves. Pharmacogn. Res. 2011,2, 364. [CrossRef] [PubMed]