Paper · 2014 · Advances in Applied Research

Effect of pre-harvest calcium sprays and harvesting time on quality and shelf-life of nectarines

Vishal Singh Barwal; Jayant Kumar

4
claims
8
verbatim quotes
2
citations
3
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

Nectarine (Prunus persica var. Nectarina) is a cultivar of peach that has a smooth and shiny skin. Nectarines are good source of bioflavonoids and carotenoids (antioxidants) and are highly perishable in nature. ‘Silver King’ cultivar of nectarine in Kullu Valley of Himachal Pradesh is being harvested usually during last week of May. A peak summer causes its deterioration. Therefore, marketing strategies of this fruit calls for a special attention, this involves sensitive and delicate handling practices, improvement of shelf-life and quality of the fruits, thus satisfying the consumers. In this study, we report our results from the treated fruits of the trees of ‘Silver King’ cultivar sprayed with calcium nitrate and calcium chloride at three concentrations (0.50%, 0.75% and 1.00%) individually before 20 days of tentative harvesting of fruits at Regional Horticultural Research Station, Bajaura. Fruits were harvested on three dates viz., 29-5-2011(M1), 1-6-2011(M2) and 4-6-2011(M3). Based on optimum fruit quality, the fruits of M2 and M3 maturity were stored at ambient conditions and analyzed on the 3rd, 6th and 9th day to study shelf life required for handling. Fruit firmness was observed highest on 3rd day of fruit storage which decreased significantly in both harvest maturities. Calcium chloride sprayed fruits retained higher acceptability than calcium nitrate sprayed and untreated fruits. Among calcium chloride sprays, 1.00 per cent had retained highest acceptability followed by fruits from trees sprayed with 0.75%. The condition of the fruits from M2 pool was better than M3 pool except the fruits from the trees sprayed with CaCl2 (1.00%), irrespective of storage period

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 4

Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Fruit firmness was highest on storage day three and then declined significantly at both maturities.

Organ / stage
fruite0
Outcome
Fruit firmnesse0
Direction
decreasede0
Qualifier
both harvest maturitiese0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Prunus persica var. nucipersica
Prunus persica var. nucipersica · Taxon · picture of the speciesAllagash Brewing · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Fruit firmness was observed highest on 3rd day of fruit storage which decreased significantly in both harvest maturities.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1179–1300 · show in text ↑
e1

“Nectarine (Prunus persica var. Nectarina)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–41 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Calcium chloride sprayed fruit retained greater acceptability than calcium nitrate sprayed and untreated fruit.

Treatment
Calcium chloridee0
Outcome
acceptabilitye0
Direction
highere0
Comparator
calcium nitrate sprayed and untreated fruitse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Prunus persica var. nucipersica
Prunus persica var. nucipersica · Taxon · picture of the speciesAllagash Brewing · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Calcium chloride sprayed fruits retained higher acceptability than calcium nitrate sprayed and untreated fruits.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1301–1413 · show in text ↑
e1

“Nectarine (Prunus persica var. Nectarina)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–41 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The 1.00 per cent calcium chloride spray retained the highest acceptability, followed by 0.75%.

Treatment
1.00 per cente0
Outcome
acceptabilitye0
Direction
higheste0
Comparator
0.75%e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Prunus persica var. nucipersica
Prunus persica var. nucipersica · Taxon · picture of the speciesAllagash Brewing · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Among calcium chloride sprays, 1.00 per cent had retained highest acceptability followed by fruits from trees sprayed with 0.75%.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1414–1543 · show in text ↑
e1

“Nectarine (Prunus persica var. Nectarina)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–41 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

M2 fruit condition was better than M3 fruit condition except after CaCl2 1.00% spray.

Treatment
M2 poole0
Outcome
condition of the fruitse0
Direction
bettere0
Qualifier
except the fruits from the trees sprayed with CaCl2 (1.00%), irrespective of storage periode0
Comparator
M3 poole0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Prunus persica var. nucipersica
Prunus persica var. nucipersica · Taxon · picture of the speciesAllagash Brewing · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The condition of the fruits from M2 pool was better than M3 pool except the fruits from the trees sprayed with CaCl2 (1.00%), irrespective of storage period”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1544–1700 · show in text ↑
e1

“Nectarine (Prunus persica var. Nectarina)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–41 · show in text ↑

calcium chloride dihydrate · quality: general · Prunus persica (peach)Results agree

8 papers: 8 positive, 0 negative or no effect

7 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

4 papers more in this group

See all 8 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.