Artigos

Introduction
The 2030 United Nations Agenda describes ending hunger, achieving food security (FS), improved nutrition, and sustainable agriculture to support the needs of current and future generations as the second objective to achieve sustainable development1. Unsustainable agriculture and food processing result in environmental degradation and, consequently, climate change and malnutrition2–4. Another issue in the hegemonic food system involves the association of low dietary diversity with food insecurity5.
Attention is drawn to the restricted global food system today, which is incompatible with the vast diversity of the potential of edible plants that exist on our planet. It is estimated that there are over 30,000 edible plant species worldwide, yet only approximately 30 crops account for the majority of global food production and consumption4,6. This low food diversity stands in stark contrast to the immense array of available plant resources. Only approximately 400 plants have been cultivated and commercialized as food for human consumption, while a total of approximately 170 types are sold in large markets3,4,6. Of these, nine species of plants represent 66% of agricultural world production5,6.
Furthermore, the narrow focus on a few staple crops has led to a lack of dietary diversity in many regions, which can have adverse impacts on human health and nutrition4. A diet lacking in variety can result in nutritional deficiencies leading to malnutrition and increased susceptibility to various diseases7,8. It is estimated that around 20 to 30 plant species cover 90% of the population's food intake. Rice, maize and wheat make up 60% of the energy intake of humans worldwide9.
Brazil is considered one of the most diverse countries in terms of flora in the world, also home to more than 50% of exclusive angiosperm species10. Despite this exceptional biodiversity, a significant portion of the population lacks the knowledge to identify and utilize these plants as food sources. In the last decade, the term of unconventional food plants (UFP) proposed by Kinupp and Lorenzi11 has been used to designate edible plant species and non-conventional edible parts of plants that are unfamiliar to most people. The classification of a plant as unconventional varies according to cultures and regions. UFP can be native, naturalized or exotic. Also, UFP can be cultivated, spontaneous, or wild11. UFP play a crucial role in strategies to prevent hunger and support subsistence food practices by providing access to low-cost, nutritious food, thereby improving nutrition and health8,12.
Native edible plants were already part of the food consumption of the Indigenous people who lived in Brazil before the colonial period13, other edible plants were naturalized by the Afro-descendant population14. Traditional populations often possess knowledge about the safe use and consumption of a diverse range of wild, collected, and cultivated food plants, contributing to more resilient and sustainable food systems9. This knowledge, however, faces the risk of being lost and the utilization of UFP holds the potential to enhance FS and dietary diversity for populations, particularly during periods of crisis15–17. Their resilience to climate change and diverse seasonal availability further highlight their importance5,8,12.
Therefore this paper aims to address the consumption patterns of UFP in Brazil, highlighting their potential role in promoting food security, dietary diversity, and sustainability. In addition, these novel findings contribute to characterizing UFP consumption according to regional, socioeconomic, and weight-status characteristics of the Brazilian population, thereby extending the national and international literature on dietary diversity. Through the analyses of sociodemographic factors and temporal changes in UFP consumption, the study provides valuable data on how these plants can contribute to more resilient food systems, particularly for vulnerable populations.



Methods

Design and Study Population
This study included data from two National Dietary Surveys (NDS) from the Household Budget Surveys (HBS) conducted in 2008-2009 and in 2017-2018 by the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE). Details about sampling and data collection were published by IBGE18,19. The household selection in both NDS was based on a two-stage cluster sampling design. In the first stage, the probabilistic sampling was proportional to the census sectors and stratified geographically and according to the income of the heads of the families. The number of households of each sector, in both NDS, was based on the Demographic Census basis, respectively, from 2000 and 2010. In the second stage, permanent households were selected by simple random sampling without replacement in each census sector. A subsample of 24.3% of the 55,970 households (n=13,569), totaling 34,003 individuals, completed the food consumption module in the 2008-2009 NDS. In the 2017-2018 NDS, a subsample of 34.7% of 57,920 households (n=20,112) totaled 46,164 individuals. The subsample of households was composed of all individuals aged ten years or older18,19.

Unconventional food plants
The classification of food items as UFP followed the guidelines proposed by Kinupp and Lorenzi11. In Brazil, these plants are referred to by the acronym PANC (Plantas Alimentícias Não Convencionais). In this manuscript, we use the terms non-conventional food plants and wild edible plants interchangeably in alignment with the international scientific literature.
The key criteria that guided the classification of plants as UFP in this study was as follows: (i) not being widely consumed by the majority of the population; (ii) representing an unconventional edible part of a traditional plant; (iii) having limited geographic consumption; (iv) possessing edible potential that is often underestimated or neglected; (v) existing outside the dominant commercial food systems; (vi) demonstrating resilience and contributing to sustainable food systems; and (vii) having the potential to promote biodiversity, as well as food and nutritional security 11,12, 23–25.
UFP consumption was assessed using data from the NDS conducted in 2008-2009 and 2017-2018. In the 2008-2009 survey, dietary data were based on food records of the first day of two non-consecutive days. Participants were instructed to log all foods and beverages consumed throughout the day, and these records were reviewed by interviewers in collaboration with the participants. The data were then entered into a specialized computer program developed for the study. A total of 1,121 food and beverage items were recorded19.
In the 2017-2018 survey, food consumption data were collected using the first day of two non-consecutive 24-hour food recalls (R24h). These recalls were conducted through in-person interviews at participants' homes by trained research agents employing the multiple-pass method, using tablets equipped with specialized software26. The computerized data entry system included a database of 1,832 food and beverage items, with the option for interviewers to add any foods not listed in the database18.
To list and estimate the frequency of UFP consumption across the Brazilian population, a double check process was conducted using the NDS food data from both surveys. Initially, two pairs of graduate and postgraduate students independently reviewed all the foods reported in the NDS and classified them as either UFP or non-UFP. Additionally, they identified the edible plant parts, including roots (roots, tubers, rhizomes, and bulbs), stems, leaves or/and flowers, fruits, and seeds. Although terms such as tuberous root and tuber have botanical differences, in this work they were considered equivalent plant parts for the purpose of the study. The agreement between the two classifications was then checked by a fifth researcher, who made the final UFP classification. Furthermore, the UFP were categorized by origin (native, naturalized, or cultivated) using the Flora e Funga do Brasil website27. The final classification (Table 1) was subsequently reviewed by a botanist specializing in taxonomy (families, genera, and species of UFP).
To avoid misinterpretation, we opted to use the Brazilian popular names of UFP, presented in italics, followed by their botanical identification in the results section, tables, and discussion of the manuscript. Given that the popular names of the same edible plants vary across different regions of Brazil, different names were classified as belonging to the same genera or species (Table 1).

Covariables
The sociodemographic covariables considered in this study were: sex (male and female); age group defined as adolescents (10 to 19 years old), adults (20 to 59 years old), and older adults (over 60 years old); skin colour (Black, Brown, White, Indigenous and Asian); per capita household income stratified into minimum wage (< 0.5; ? 0.5 and < 1; ? 1 and < 2; ? 2); education (elementary school, high school and higher education); residential Brazilian household areas (urban and rural); and macroregions of Brazil (North, Northeast, Southeast, South and Midwest). The minimum wage values were 237 US dollars and 287 US dollars, respectively, in 2008-2009 and 2017-2018.
The anthropometric measurements, weight and height, were reported by the individuals at the time of the home interview. Based on these measurements, the Body Mass Index (BMI) status was calculated to classify individuals according to weight status categories. Adolescents' weight status was based on BMI-for-age (BMI/A) z-scores reference curve proposed by the World Health Organization28: underweight (< -2 SD), adequate weight (? -2 SD to ? +1 SD), and excess weight (> +1 SD). Adults and older adults were classified29 as having underweight (BMI <18.5 kg/m2), adequate weight (18.5 kg/m2 ? BMI <25.0 kg/m2), and excess weight (BMI ? 25.0 kg/m2).

Data analysis
To describe the dietary UFP consumption from the first days of the food record, in 2008-2009, and from R24h, in 2017-2018, it was used to estimate frequencies and 95% confidence intervals according to Brazilian macroregions, household area, age group, sex, income, education, skin colour and BMI status. Also, frequencies of the most UFP consumption among consumers were described according to Brazilian regions and residential location of Brazilian households. Estimates and were calculated using the Statistical Analysis System (SAS) software, a free online version on Demand for Academics. All estimates were calculated considering expansion factors and sample complexity. The comparison of frequencies was based on the overlapping of 95% confidence intervals, with the difference between frequencies being considered statistically significant when the 95% CI did not overlap (p-value < 0.05). Chi-square test was applied to evaluate differences in frequency distributions between surveys in Table 2.

Ethical aspects
Both NDS are considered secondary databases with free and unrestricted access in the public domain, in which the microdata is freely available on the institution's website (https:// www.ibge.gov.br/estatisticas/sociais/saude/24786-pesquisa-de-orcamentosfamilies-2.html?=&t =microdados) without the need for approval by the research ethics committee. This study was carried out with the support of the Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel – Brazil (CAPES) - Funding Code 001.

Results
A total of 30 botanic families and 68 genera/ species of the total edible plants was identified. The consumption of 56 genera/ species of UFP was mentioned in 2008-2009, and 62 genera/ species in 2017-2018 (Table 1).
No statistically significant differences in the frequencies of UFP intake were observed between both NDS (Table 2). Frequency of UFP consumption was 8.01% (95% CI: 7.26; 8.77) in 2008-2009, and the highest prevalence of UFP consumption was observed in the residents of rural areas (14.9%; 13.0; 16.9; p< 0.05), and among individuals with incomes lower than 0.5 minimum per capita wage (12.3%; 10.5; 14.1; p< 0.05). Prevalence of UFP consumption in 2017-2018 was 8.85% (95% CI= 8.35; 9.36), and the highest prevalence of UFP consumption remained among residents of rural areas (16.1%; 95% CI=14.0; 18.2; p< 0.05) and individuals with low incomes (12.7%; 95% CI=11.1; 14.2; p< 0.05). Residents of the Northeast region (21.3%; 95% CI=19.9; 22.8; p< 0.05), with low education (10.7%; 95% CI=9.97; 11.4; p< 0.05), older adults (10.9%; 95% CI=9.90; 11.8; p< 0.05) and brown skin colour (11.1%; 95% CI=10.3; 11.9; p< 0.05) presented the highest UFP consumption in 2017-2018 (Table 2).
According to BMI status, underweight older adults had a higher intake of UFP than adolescent counterparts (13.8% vs 5.47%; p< 0.05) in 2017-2018 NDS (Table 3). In addition, older adults with adequate BMI exhibited a higher UFP intake than adolescents with underweight (11.7% vs 5.47%; p< 0.05), adequate weight (11.7% vs 8.06%; p< 0.05) and excess weight (11.7% vs 7.31%; p< 0.05). Compared to adults, older adults with adequate weight presented higher consumption of UFP than adults with adequate BMI (11.7% vs 8.82%; p< 0.05) and adults with excess of weight (11.7% vs 8.82%; p< 0.05). Also, older adults with excess weight had a higher intake of UFP than their adolescent counterparts (10.2% vs 7.31%; p< 0.05) in 2017-2018 (Table 3).
The highest frequencies of UFP seed among consumers according to Brazilian regions in 2008-2009 and in 2017-2018, which were, respectively, 55.5% and 63.4% (p< 0.05) of feijão-verde (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp.) in Northeast region. The frequencies of pequi (Caryocar brasiliense Camb.) were 19.0% and 10.4% among consumers in 2008-2009 and 2017-2018 in the Midwest region (Table 4).
The intake of batata doce (Ipomoea spp.) increased in the North (1.40% vs 19.0%; p< 0.05), Northeast (13.2% vs 21.0%; p< 0.05) and Southeast (14.2% vs 35.0%; p< 0.05) regions from 2008-2009 to 2017-2018. Conversely, the intake of inhame (Colocasia esculenta (L.) Schott) decreased from 13.9% to 8.50% (p< 0.05) in the Northeast region, and the intake of tucumã (Astrocaryum sp.) increased from 3.08% to 10.7% (p< 0.05) in the North region in the same period (Table 4).
Concerning the Brazilian households in the 2008-2009 NDS, the consumption of jaca (Artocarpus heterophyllus Lam.) was higher (p-value < 0.05) in rural than in urban (3.69% vs 0.74%; p< 0.05) areas (Table 5). While the consumption of inhame (Colocasia esculenta) was higher in urban areas in 2008-2009 (14.8% vs 5.70%; p< 0.05) and in 2017-2018 (9.30% vs 5.20%; p< 0.05) than in rural areas. Regarding the residential location of Brazilian households in the 2017-2018 NDS, the consumption of feijão-verde (Vigna unguiculata) was higher in rural (58.2% vs 41.4%; p< 0.05) than in urban areas. Otherwise, the intake of batata doce (Ipomoea spp.) was higher in the urban (30.3% vs 16.9%; p< 0.05) than rural areas in 2017-2018 (Table 5).
Discussion
The findings of this study revealed a positive association between UFP consumption in Brazil and factors such as rural living in both NDS. Additionally, in the 2017-2018 survey, the highest UFP consumption was linked to older age, low income and low education levels, brown skin colour, and with residency in the Northeast region. Over the course of a decade, only a slight increase in UFP consumption was observed in the Northeast region and the highest intake remained among rural than urban residents. These results showed that UFP are underused in Brazil, and findings highlighted the persistent low frequency of UFP consumption and its strong association with vulnerable social and demographic conditions.
The information on the wild edible plants is not well investigated and documented with limited resources available on endangered, underutilized, and neglected edible plant species. Despite their resilience, natural adaptation to extreme climate conditions, and potential contributions to food security, these species have received insufficient attention15,30. While the perception of UFP's health and sustainability attributes can positively influence purchasing decisions, several factors contribute to their low consumption. These factors include a lack of familiarity with UFP as regular food, limited information regarding their safety and potential toxicity, insufficient promotion of native and naturalized species as food sources, the physical distance between farmers and consumers, the dominance of international long supply chains, and inadequate support for local food markets16,17,31,32.
Besides the national consistent low frequency of UFP, it was observed from 2008-2009 to 2017-2018 a slight increase in UFP consumption among residents in the Northeast region and a higher intake of UFP in rural than urban area in 2017-2018. These changes can be interpreted as a mainly Northeast rural strategy of food security following the economic crisis in Brazil during this period33. According to the scientific literature, the degree of urbanization and the distance from urban areas can influence the knowledge, access and consumption of UFP17,31.
Furthermore, the scientific literature has been showing sex and age as determinants of UFP intake, mainly among people living in rural areas who are more used to knowing about wild edible plants, as well as to recognising, collecting, preparing and consuming UFP17, 31,34,35. In our study, based on the 2017-2018 NDS, it was observed that the consumption of UFP was higher among rural residents than those in urban areas, and more prevalent in older adults compared to adults and adolescents.
Moreover, data revealed that older adults had a higher UFP intake compared to adolescents, across all BMI categories: underweight, adequate weight, and excess weight. Older adults with adequate weight presented higher consumption of UFP than adult counterparts. Mothupi and Shackleton36 found a significant difference between the number of wild edible plants species listed across age groups in a rural municipality in South Africa. Results indicated that older adults consumed a higher number of wild edible plants compared to adults and youths. A positive correlation between knowledge of wild edible plants and consumption rates was observed. Additionally, the association of higher intake of UFP with low education and rural residents observed in our study may be due to the fact that there is a historical context of social inequality in Brazilian rural areas and a lower concentration of income.37
Our results showed that the most consumed UFP seed was from the Fabaceae family. This group was mainly composed of feijão-verde and feijão-de-corda (Vigna unguiculata), which are types of beans, but less than 5% of the total Brazilian population consumed it. Most of the consumers were located in the Northeast region and findings showed an increased consumption in both rural and urban household areas. Even if black or brown beans are staple food in the Brazilian diet, it is important to highlight the environmental importance of the diversification of subsistence crop rotation and the cultivation of different beans in consortiums to guarantee the harvest during all of the year under variable climatic conditions to promote food security38. The consortium of plants for the subsistence to cover the off-season scan be a strategy for a sustainable food system to promote food security and a healthy diet3,8,12,38.
Other important sustainable nutrition aspects of pulses are that these seeds increase the food biodiversity and the nutrient-dense diet, and they are good options for replacing animal meat due to their high protein and iron content. All of these environmental and nutritional issues should be considered as strategic tools to achieve the objectives of the Agenda 2030 for Sustainable Development9,38.
Although most of the mentioned UFP families were fruits, all of them presented very low frequencies among the population, being lower than 1% in most of the cases. When the consumption of fruits was described among consumers by Brazilian regions, a more expressive consumption of UFP was observed in both surveys. For example, the prevalence of pequi (Caryocar brasiliense) and guariroba (Syagrus oleracea (Mart.) Becc.) in Midwest region, tucumã (Astrocaryum) and bacaba (Oenocarpus bacaba) in North region, and jabuticaba (Plinia) in Midwest, Southeast and South regions ranged from 1.0% to 19.0% between surveys. All of these fruits are native and they were included in the list of sociobiodiversity from the Interministerial Ordinance20, 21. Another important question is the relation of these fruits with the local economy of Traditional communities and with the family production16, 32, 39.
Some of the consumed UFP classified as leaves were naturalized as almeirão (Lactuca indica) in the Midwest, Southeast and South regions, and taioba (Xanthosoma spp.) in the Southeast, or native as radite (Hypochaeris spp.) in the South. UFP have the potential to enhance biodiversity and are crucial for promoting sustainable food systems, food and nutrition security, and sovereignty during food shortages15, 24, 25. They also contribute to strengthening local economies4, 32. Shelef et al.4 emphasized the ecological and local benefits of cultivating native edible plants. These wild edible plants are outside traditional markets and require incentives to generate demand among local, national, or international consumers32, 39.
Another important question is the relation between food biodiversity, nutrition and human health and the inverse relation with intake of ultra-processed food 4, 39. Extreme climate factors directly impact food crises and increase the consumption of ultra-processed foods. According to Araújo et al.39, some Amazon fruits are under-consumed and they are at risk of being replaced by industrialized foods, which implies the dependence on ultra-processed foods and additional financial cost for these populations39.
The knowledge of identifying and utilizing edible wild plants is rooted in the history of Traditional Communities, passed down through centuries of experience and learning24, 32. Therefore, it is vital to promote and support food biodiversity research in collaboration with Indigenous populations, Quilombolas, Ribeirinhos, family farmers, and other Traditional Communities to gather and study their knowledge, transforming it into scientific information. In Pará, a state in northern Brazil, farmers' awareness of soil erosion in slash-and-burn systems led them to successfully adopt agroforestry practices, enhancing food security and supporting the local economy40.
The findings of the present study illustrated the regional aspect of the consumption of UFP. Brazil can be considered a country with continental dimensions which include the unique characteristics of six biomes plus the Coastal-Marine System. Although some native or cultivated edible plant species are widespread and adapted to more than one biome25, 41, their consumption is limited by local culture, underutilized or have become neglected edible plants17, 25, 34.
Although more research on neglected non-conventional food plants is necessary, the high nutritional value of UFP has been documented in the scientific literature3, 8. Examples include native species such as caruru or bredo (Amaranthus spp.), ora-pro-nóbis (Pereskia spp.), cariru or língua de vaca (Talinum triangulare(Jacq.) Willd.), as well as naturalized species like vinagreira or cuxá (Hibiscus sabdariffa L.) and palma (Opuntia fícus-indica L.). All of these underused edible plants were consumed in the NDS with frequencies lower than 1.0% among the population. Beyond their medicinal value42, studies highlighted the high amounts of minerals and vitamins in most of the studied UFP, and the contains of protein, fibre, iron and zinc among other nutrients8, 42.
It is important to note that these NDS were not designed to estimate UFP consumption, as well as non-conventional parts of traditional foods. However, the leaves of the aipim (Manihot esculenta Crantz) were mentioned in the food record in 2008-2009, and they were considered as unconventional parts of traditional plants. All of this information on food and nutritional security strategies may be underestimated in both NDS.
Also, this study had a particular challenge which was to classify UFP from NDS based on popular names because there is no defined list, and there are differences in the criteria adopted among published studies to classify as UFP11, 25, 41. And, not all of the UFP are included in the Brazilian socio-biodiversity list published among Interministerial Ordinances from 2016 to 202120-22. According to Silva et al.25, the aforementioned Ordinance included a small number of edible plants in comparison to the biodiversity observed in Brazil.
The main strengths of this study, compared to the existing literature on UFP, lie in its use of nationally representative data from two large-scale National Dietary Surveys in Brazil, conducted in 2008-2009 and 2017-2018. This comprehensive dataset allows for a robust analysis of UFP consumption patterns across a diverse population and the broader national context, making the findings more generalizable. Additionally, the study’s rigorous double-check process for classifying UFP, based on established guidelines, ensures accuracy and consistency in identifying these plants across different surveys.
UFP consumption can be adopted to increase dietary diversity and to promote sovereignty and FS for the entire population. Today, agroforestry systems are essential for a fair and new logic of sustainable food systems. The support of public policies that promote the concept of circular economy and strategies to encourage and support producers of non-conventional edible plants through already established strategies such as National School Feeding Program and Food Acquisition Program, perhaps with the return of popular restaurants, to strengthen regional agriculture it's essential.

Conclusion
Despite a slight increase in the prevalence of UFP consumption between 2008-2009 and 2017-2018, the overall consumption of unconventional food plants remains low in Brazil. While higher consumption rates were observed in the Northeast region, rural areas, and among individuals with lower education levels and older adults, with brown skin colour and low purchasing power these findings suggest that UFP are still underutilized as a dietary resource across the country. Enhanced efforts to promote the consumption of UFP, particularly in urban areas and among younger populations, could contribute to greater dietary diversity and food security in Brazil.


References
1. United Nations (UN). The United Nations General Assembly. Resolution A/RES/70/1: transforming our world, the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. United Nations; 2015.

2. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). FAO strategy on climate change 2022–2031. Rome: FAO; 2022. p.36.

3. Ulian T, Diazgranados M, Pironon S, Padulosi S, Liu U, Davies L, et al. Unlocking plant resources to support food security and promote sustainable agriculture. Plants People Planet. 2020;2:421–445.

4. Shelef O, Weisberg PJ, Provenza FD. The value of native plants and local production in an era of global agriculture. Front Plant Sci. 2017;8:2069.

5. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). The future of food and agriculture: trends and challenges. Rome: FAO; 2017. p.163.

6. Khoury CK, Bjorkman AD, Dempewolf H, Ramirez-Villegas J, Guarino L, Jarvis A, et al. Increasing homogeneity in global food supplies and the implications for food security. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014;111(11):4001–4006.

7. Owino V, Kumwenda C, Ekesa B, Parker ME, Ewold L, Roos N, et al. The impact of climate change on food systems, diet quality, nutrition, and health outcomes: a narrative review. Front Clim. 2022;4:941842.

8. Duguma HT. Wild edible plant nutritional contribution and consumer perception in Ethiopia. Int J Food Sci. 2020; 4:2958623.

9. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). Agrifood solutions to climate change: FAO's work to tackle the climate crisis. Rome: FAO; 2023. p.64.

10. Filardi FLR, Barros F, Baumgratz JF, Bicudo CEM, Cavalcanti TB, Coelho MAN, et al. Brazilian Flora 2020: innovation and collaboration to meet Target 1 of the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation (GSPC). Rodriguésia. 2018;69(4):1513–1527.

11. Kinupp VF, Lorenzi H. Plantas alimentícias não convencionais (PANC) no Brasil: guia de identificação, aspectos nutricionais e receitas ilustradas. 1st ed. Nova Odessa: Plantarum; 2014. p.68.

12. Shumsky SA, Hickey GM, Pelletier B, Johns T. Understanding the contribution of wild edible plants to rural social-ecological resilience in semi-arid Kenya. Ecol Soc. 2014;19(4):34.

13. Tomchinsky B, Ming LC. As plantas comestíveis no Brasil dos séculos XVI e XVII Segundo relatos de época. Rodriguésia. 2019;70:e03792017.

14. Sirimarco R, Costa R. Nossa terra, nossa história: comidas dos povos e das comunidades tradicionais. In: Castro MBT, editor. Horta PANC, cultura & comida: soberania e segurança alimentar e nutricional. 1st ed. Rio de Janeiro: Ed dos Autores; 2022. p.145.

15. Talucder MSA, Ruba UB, Robi MAS. Potentiality of neglected and underutilized species (NUS) as a future resilient food: a systematic review. J Agric Res. 2024;16:101116.

16. Clemente-Villalba J, Burló F, Hernández F, Carbonell-Barrachina AA. Valorization of wild edible plants as food ingredients and their economic value. Foods. 2023;12:1012.

17. Leal ML, Alves RP, Hanazaki N. Knowledge, use, and disuse of unconventional food plants. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2018;14:6.

18. Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE). Household budget survey 2017–2018: analysis of personal food consumption in Brazil. Rio de Janeiro: IBGE; 2020. p.114.

19. Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE). Household budget survey 2008–2009: analysis of personal food consumption in Brazil. Rio de Janeiro: IBGE; 2011. p.150.

20. Brasil. Portaria Interministerial MAPA/MMA nº 10, de 21 de julho de 2021. Brasília: Diário Oficial da União; 2021.

21. Brasil. Portaria Interministerial nº 284, de 30 de maio de 2018. Brasília: Diário Oficial da União; 2018.

22. Brasil. Portaria Interministerial nº 163, de 11 de maio de 2016. Brasília: Diário Oficial da União; 2016.

23. Ranieri GR, Madeira NR, Slater B, Marchesi MT, Oliveira MAD, Badue AFB, et al. Large-scale production of non-conventional edible plants for biodiverse school meals. Front Nutr. 2024;11:1282618.

24. Ellwanger JH, Nobre CA, Chies JAB. Brazilian biodiversity as a source of power and sustainable development: a neglected opportunity. Sustainability. 2023;15:482.

25. Silva ACC, Oliveira D, Gomes LJM. What does the list of Brazilian sociobiodiversity species of food value show us? Rodriguésia. 2022;73:e00472021.

26. Moshfegh AJ, Rhodes DG, Baer DJ, Murayi T, Clemens JC, Rumpler WV, et al. The US Department of Agriculture automated multiple-pass method reduces bias in the collection of energy intakes. Am J Clin Nutr. 2008;88(2):324–332.

27. Flora e Funga do Brasil. Jardim Botânico do Rio de Janeiro. Available from: http://floradobrasil.jbrj.gov.br. Accessed on: 2 July 2024.

28. World Health Organization (WHO). WHO child growth standards: length/height-for-age, weight-for-age, weight-for-length, weight-for-height and body mass index-for-age. Methods and development. Geneva: WHO; 2006. p.312.

29. World Health Organization (WHO). Obesity: preventing and managing the global epidemic. Report of a WHO consultation. Geneva: WHO; 2000. p.253.

30. Rao NK, Shahid M, Al Shankiti A, Elouafi I. Neglected and underutilized species for food and income security in marginal environments. Acta Hortic. 2014;1051:91–103.

31. Liboredo JC, Fonseca UAC, Amaral CAA. Unconventional food plants: knowledge and consumption in a state in southeastern Brazil. MOJ Food Process Technol. 2023;11(2):133–139.

32. Ministério do Meio Ambiente (MMA). Arranjos produtivos locais: APLs de produtos da sociobiodiversidade. Brasília: MMA; 2017. p.140.

33. Sousa LRM, Segall-Corrêa AM, Ville AS, Melgar-Quiñonez H. Food security status in times of financial and political crisis in Brazil. Cad Saude Publica. 2019;35(7):e00084118.

34. Bortolotto IM, Amorozo MCM, Neto GG, Oldeland J, Damasceno-Junior GA. Knowledge and use of wild edible plants in rural communities along Paraguay River, Pantanal, Brazil. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2015;11:46.

35. Oliveira HAB, Anunciação PC, Lucia CMD, Castro LCV, Sant’Ana HMP. Habits and food crops on the consumption of non-conventional vegetables by family farmers. Rev Agr Acad. 2019;2(3):17–32.

36. Mothupi FM, Shackleton CM. Traditional knowledge and consumption of wild edible plants in rural households, Limpopo Province, South Africa. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2025 Apr 4;21(1):23. doi: 10.1186/s13002-025-00773-5. PMID: 40186211; PMCID: PMC11971914.

37. Ney MG, Hoffmann R. Educação, concentração fundiária e desigualdade de rendimentos no meio rural brasileiro. RESR 2009; 47(1)147-182. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-20032009000100006

38. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). A guide to world pulses day 2024: pulses – nourishing soils and people. Rome: FAO; 2024. p.8.

39. Araujo Y, Barros E, Guimarães C, Jacob M, Maia J, Tregidgo D. Frutas da floresta: o poder nutricional da biodiversidade amazônica. Tefé: Instituto de Desenvolvimento Sustentável Mamirauá; 2024. p.106.

40. Braga LNG, Navegantes-Alves LF, Coudel ES. Transformações na trajetória dos sistemas agroflorestais no município de Irituia – PA. Revista IDeAS. 2020;14:1–23.

41. Silva MAL, Rodrigues LB, Domene SMÁ, Louzada MLC. Household availability of foods from Brazilian biodiversity. Cad Saude Publica. 2023;39(6):e00206222.

42. Ullah A, Anjum S, Masood A, Batool H, Kakar H, Shafique MA, et al. Nutritional prospects of some wild edible medicinal plants of District Harnai, Balochistan, Pakistan. Food Sci Technol. 2023;43:e11592.

?