Non-apple fruits differ by commodity and skin characteristics, while drying and concentration can increase metal concentrations through moisture removal.
- Metals of concern: lead and cadmium are discussed across fruit types, with copper also relevant to grapes
- Main drivers: root uptake, soil history and surface deposition, with thinner skins offering less protection
- Practical framing: compare dried fruit and concentrates on a stated moisture or reconstitution basis; consult individual fruit pages such as oranges
This page draws on evidence from UK Food Standards Agency. The complete citation list is at the bottom of the page.
Overview
FSA/Fera measured this ingredient or a closely matching non-infant-specific food composite in the FS102048 survey. Exact concentrations remain in progress until Table 6 is parsed into structured ingredient rows with quantitation flags preserved. Survey of metals in commercial infant foods, infant formula and non-infant specific foods
Why this commodity accumulates heavy metals
Non-apple fruit as a category encompasses a wide range of botanically distinct commodities (pears, peaches, berries, citrus, grapes, tropical fruits, and others) that share a broadly similar pattern of low heavy metal accumulation in edible flesh tissue. Fruit tissue is physiologically specialized for seed dispersal rather than nutrient storage, and the accumulation of phytotoxic metals such as lead (Pb) and cadmium (Cd) in flesh is actively limited by plant biology. Root uptake is the primary metal-entry pathway; however, the transfer factor from root to fruit flesh is substantially lower than the transfer factor from root to root tissue or leaf tissue. The protective effect of fruit skin or rind (thicker in citrus and stone fruits, thinner in berries) adds a secondary barrier against atmospheric Pb deposition and soil splash. Among non-apple fruits, the higher-risk sub-types within this category page are those with thin or consumed skins (berries, grapes) grown in contaminated soils, and those sourced from regions with elevated soil Cd from historic phosphate fertilizer use. Dried and concentrated derivatives (sultanas, dried berries, fruit juice concentrates) merit separate consideration because moisture removal concentrates all analytes on a wet weight basis.
This is a broad category page covering non-apple fruits that cannot be attributed to a dedicated commodity page. Individual fruit pages (oranges, melon, and others) carry more specific occurrence data where available.
Heavy metal contamination profile
This table summarizes the available occurrence evidence for each metal. A data gap means the literature was reviewed for this commodity and metal but no usable occurrence data was found. Key sources link to contributing studies.
| Analyte | Coverage | Typical (ppb) | Confidence | Key sources |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lead (Pb) | n=1 | 0–13.4 | low | — |
| Cadmium (Cd) | n=1 | 0–11.3 | low | — |
| Inorganic arsenic (iAs) | Source context | Not quantified | — | — |
| Total arsenic (tAs) | data gap | — | — | — |
| Total mercury (tHg) | n=1 | 0–1.9 | low | — |
| Nickel (Ni) | data gap | — | — | — |
| Aluminum (Al) | n=1 | 0–3075 | low | — |
| Chromium (Cr) | data gap | — | — | — |
| Tin (Sn) | n=1 | 53.5–32000 | low | — |
| Uranium (U) | data gap | — | — | — |
Routing
This node is linked from Fruit Juices, Non-Apple.
Contamination Profile State
Per-analyte state — populated, in progress, or declared data gap — is carried authoritatively in the machine-readable contamination_profile frontmatter and the contamination-profile table above. Ingredient-level values belong here; finished-product values belong on the relevant product-category page.
Ranges by source, region, and variety
Variation within the non-apple fruit category is driven more by specific commodity type than by geography, because the biological differences between a berry, a stone fruit, and a citrus fruit are larger than the geographic soil differences for any single commodity. Berries (strawberries, blueberries, raspberries) have thin skins and relatively high surface-area-to-volume ratios, making them more susceptible to surface Pb deposition than thick-skinned citrus. Grapes, particularly wine grapes from regions where copper-based fungicides have been applied historically, may carry elevated Cu and occasionally elevated Cd in skin and flesh. Tropical fruits (mango, pineapple, papaya) are generally low-risk based on the sparse monitoring data available. Pears are botanically close to apples and show similar low metal profiles. The FSA FS102048 survey Survey of metals in commercial infant foods, infant formula and non-infant specific foods provides the broadest single-source occurrence dataset for this category in the current corpus, covering non-apple fruit as a composite monitoring category. Specific sub-commodity breakdown data remain limited and will be expanded as individual fruit source pages accumulate.
Processing effects
Processing effects on metal concentrations in non-apple fruit depend substantially on the specific fruit and the processing step. Skin and stone removal during production of stone-fruit purées eliminates the higher-Pb outer tissue, reducing Pb concentration in the final product relative to whole-fruit composition. Juice extraction from citrus and other fruits concentrates analytes relative to whole-fruit flesh in proportion to juice yield; the remaining pulp retains a disproportionate share of fiber-bound metals. Drying (raisins, dried apricots, dried cranberries) concentrates all analytes proportionally to moisture loss, typically producing a 4 to 8-fold increase in ppb values relative to fresh fruit on a wet weight basis. Freezing without concentration does not alter metal concentrations materially. Pasteurization of juice or purée does not affect total metal concentrations.
Ingredient-derivative risk
The derivative with the most materially different metal profile relative to fresh fruit flesh is dried fruit: the moisture removal that makes drying commercially practical simultaneously concentrates all metals in proportion to the degree of drying. Juice concentrates and fruit purée concentrates carry similar concentration artifacts. Fruit powders (freeze-dried berry powder, for example) used in supplements and functional foods may show further-elevated ppb values relative to fresh fruit. For regulatory compliance purposes, the concentration basis (wet weight as purchased versus reconstituted versus fresh-equivalent) must be specified when comparing against regulatory limits. Individual sub-commodity ingredient pages should be consulted for derivatives specific to a given fruit type.
Mitigation options
Sourcing levers
Sourcing fresh fruit from suppliers operating under national monitoring programs with documented soil-history assessment reduces the primary risk from elevated soil Cd and Pb. For dried-fruit derivatives, requesting occurrence data from the supplier on a dry-weight basis (or a fresh-equivalent basis with moisture content documented) enables like-for-like comparison against regulatory limits.
Agronomic levers
No quantified data on this lever in the current corpus; section will be expanded when relevant evidence is ingested.
Processing levers
Skin and stone removal before purée production reduces Pb contributed by surface deposition. For dried-fruit products, controlling drying temperature and duration and expressing analytical results on a consistent moisture-corrected basis prevents misinterpretation of concentration data.
Formulation levers
No quantified data on this lever in the current corpus; section will be expanded when relevant evidence is ingested.
Testing and QC levers
No quantified data on this lever in the current corpus; section will be expanded when relevant evidence is ingested.
Packaging and storage levers
No quantified data on this lever in the current corpus; section will be expanded when relevant evidence is ingested.
Regulatory limits that apply
European Union Regulation (EU) 2023/915 EU Regulation 2023/915 maximum levels for contaminants in food sets a maximum level of 0.10 mg/kg for Pb and 0.050 mg/kg for Cd in fresh fruit on a wet weight basis, applicable across the non-apple fruit category. Dried fruit carries different EU limits reflecting the concentration effect of water removal. The Codex General Standard for Contaminants and Toxins in Food and Feed (CXS 193-1995) sets Pb limits for fresh fruit. No specific inorganic arsenic (iAs) or total mercury (tHg) limit applies to fresh or dried fruit under major regulatory frameworks at the category level. See EU Regulation 2023/915 maximum levels for contaminants in food and Codex Alimentarius — Maximum Levels for Cadmium in Food for applicable regulatory reference pages.
Sources
Source records associated with this topic. Inclusion does not establish that every finding applies to this product or ingredient. References above identify works cited in the text.
| # | Citation | Year | Type | Used on this page for |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Du et al. 2025. Analysis of heavy element content in Shanxi specialty Ziziphus jujuba Mill. and health risk assessment, Journal of Food Safety & Quality 2025, 16(8): 100-106 (in Chinese with English abstract) | 2025 | Peer-reviewed | Contribution to this topic remains under review; see the source record for its reported scope. |
| 2 | Zhang et al. 2021. Occurrence and dietary exposure of heavy metals in marketed vegetables and fruits of Shandong Province, China, Food Science & Nutrition 2021;9:5166-5173 | 2021 | Peer-reviewed | Contribution to this topic remains under review; see the source record for its reported scope. |
| 3 | Oladele et al. 2020. Level of heavy metals in sliced watermelon fruits in selected markets in Akure, Nigeria, Bulletin of the National Research Centre (2020) 44:102 | 2020 | Peer-reviewed | Contribution to this topic remains under review; see the source record for its reported scope. |
| 4 | Gruszecka-Kosowska 2019. Human Health Risk Assessment and Potentially Harmful Element Contents in the Fruits Cultivated in the Southern Poland, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 2019, 16, 5096 | 2019 | Peer-reviewed | Contribution to this topic remains under review; see the source record for its reported scope. |
| 5 | Romero-Estévez et al. 2019. Distribution, Contents, and Health Risk Assessment of Cadmium, Lead, and Nickel in Bananas Produced in Ecuador, Foods 2019, 8, 330 | 2019 | Peer-reviewed | Contribution to this topic remains under review; see the source record for its reported scope. |
| 6 | Li et al. 2018. Copper and other heavy metals in grapes: a pilot study tracing influential factors and evaluating potential risks in China, Scientific Reports (2018) 8:17407 | 2018 | Peer-reviewed | Contribution to this topic remains under review; see the source record for its reported scope. |
| 7 | Rotimi et al. 2018. Evaluation of Heavy Metals Level and Proximate Analysis of Common Fruits from Selected Markets in Lagos, Nigeria, Journal of Applied Sciences and Environmental Management, Vol. 22 (5) 791-795 | 2018 | Peer-reviewed | Contribution to this topic remains under review; see the source record for its reported scope. |
| 8 | Antoine et al. 2017. Assessment of the potential health risks associated with the aluminium, arsenic, cadmium and lead content in selected fruits and vegetables grown in Jamaica, Toxicology Reports 4 (2017) 181-187 | 2017 | Peer-reviewed | Contribution to this topic remains under review; see the source record for its reported scope. |
| 9 | Ezeonyejiaku et al. 2017. A Market Basket Survey of Horticultural Fruits for Arsenic and Trace Metal Contamination in Southeast Nigeria and Potential Health Risk Implications, Journal of Health & Pollution Vol. 7, No. 15: 40-50 (September 2017) | 2017 | Peer-reviewed | Contribution to this topic remains under review; see the source record for its reported scope. |
| 10 | Nie et al. 2016. Assessing the concentration and potential health risk of heavy metals in China’s main deciduous fruits, Journal of Integrative Agriculture 2016, 15(7): 1645-1655 | 2016 | Peer-reviewed | Contribution to this topic remains under review; see the source record for its reported scope. |
| 11 | Mehari et al. 2015. Trace and Macro Elements Concentrations in Selected Fresh Fruits, Vegetables, Herbs, and Processed Foods in North Carolina, USA, Journal of Environmental Protection, 2015, 6, 573-583 | 2015 | Peer-reviewed | Contribution to this topic remains under review; see the source record for its reported scope. |
| 12 | Lee et al. 2011. Monitoring of Heavy Metals in Fruits in Korea, Korean Journal of Food Science and Technology 43(2): 230-234 (2011) | 2011 | Peer-reviewed | Contribution to this topic remains under review; see the source record for its reported scope. |
Interpretation of source evidence
Source observations and population estimates are different. A non-detect supplies a reporting-limit bound for the tested composites. It does not show that this ingredient contains zero metal. Where a previous profile lacked matching source, species or basis support, its generic concentration has been withdrawn; the available source evidence is kept below.
iAs. The former exact-zero concentration had no supported measured-zero interpretation. Source observations are retained separately; a population concentration is not quantified.
References
Works cited in this page’s text, in first-appearance order. See Sources for this page’s source inventory. Each title links to a source record with bibliographic details, reported findings, and document provenance.
Update history
No substantive edit history is available in this build. The full commit record is available in git.