Abstract
Summary An investigation was undertaken to examine responses of mangoes cv. Kensington Pride to irradiation treatment. Gamma irradiation of preclimacteric fruit increased fruit respiration immediately after treatment, delayed the time to attain the climacteric respiratory peak and reduced the magnitude of this peak rate. Fruit softening was unaffected whereas skin colour development was strongly inhibited by irradiation treatment. Inhibition of skin degreening was half‐maximal at a dose of 200 Gy. Exposure to ethylene failed to reverse this inhibition. Less mature fruit were more strongly affected by irradiation treatment. Fruit which were partially ripe and in their climacteric rise at time of treatment were largely unaffected by irradiation. These results are discussed in terms of the utility of irradiation technology for commercial disinfestation.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. 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 9
Claim · model-written summary
Irradiation immediately increased preclimacteric fruit respiration.
- Taxon
- mangoes
_from_India.jpg?width=60)
Mangifera indicat0 - Organ / stage
- preclimacteric fruite0
- Treatment
- Gamma irradiatione0
- Outcome
- fruit respiratione0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
_from_India.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“Gamma irradiation of preclimacteric fruit increased fruit respiration immediately after treatment”
t0“mangoes cv. Kensington Pride”
Claim · model-written summary
Irradiation delayed the climacteric respiration peak.
- Taxon
- mangoesMangifera indicat0
- Treatment
- Gamma irradiatione0
- Outcome
- time to attain the climacteric respiratory peake0
- Direction
- delayede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Gamma irradiation of preclimacteric fruit increased fruit respiration immediately after treatment, delayed the time to attain the climacteric respiratory peak”
t0“mangoes cv. Kensington Pride”
Claim · model-written summary
Irradiation reduced magnitude of the respiration peak.
- Taxon
- mangoesMangifera indicat0
- Treatment
- Gamma irradiatione0
- Outcome
- magnitude of this peak ratee0
- Direction
- reducede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Gamma irradiation of preclimacteric fruit increased fruit respiration immediately after treatment, delayed the time to attain the climacteric respiratory peak and reduced the magnitude of this peak rate”
t0“mangoes cv. Kensington Pride”
Claim · model-written summary
Irradiation did not affect fruit softening.
- Taxon
- mangoesMangifera indicat0
- Treatment
- irradiation treatmente0
- Outcome
- Fruit softeninge0
- Direction
- unaffectede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Fruit softening was unaffected whereas skin colour development was strongly inhibited by irradiation treatment.”
t0“mangoes cv. Kensington Pride”
Claim · model-written summary
Irradiation strongly inhibited skin colour development.
- Taxon
- mangoesMangifera indicat0
- Treatment
- irradiation treatmente0
- Outcome
- skin colour developmente0
- Direction
- inhibitede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“skin colour development was strongly inhibited by irradiation treatment”
t0“mangoes cv. Kensington Pride”
Claim · model-written summary
Skin degreening inhibition was half maximal at 200 Gy.
- Taxon
- mangoesMangifera indicat0
- Outcome
- Inhibition of skin degreeninge0
- Direction
- half‐maximale0
- Value
- 200 Gye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Inhibition of skin degreening was half‐maximal at a dose of 200 Gy.”
t0“mangoes cv. Kensington Pride”
Claim · model-written summary
Ethylene failed to reverse skin degreening inhibition.
- Taxon
- mangoesMangifera indicat0
- Treatment
- Exposure to ethylenee0
- Outcome
- this inhibitione0
- Direction
- failed to reversee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Exposure to ethylene failed to reverse this inhibition.”
t0“mangoes cv. Kensington Pride”
Claim · model-written summary
Less mature fruit were more affected by irradiation.
- Taxon
- mangoesMangifera indicat0
- Organ / stage
- Less mature fruite0
- Outcome
- affected by irradiation treatmente0
- Direction
- more stronglye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Less mature fruit were more strongly affected by irradiation treatment.”
t0“mangoes cv. Kensington Pride”
Claim · model-written summary
Partially ripe climacteric fruit were largely unaffected by irradiation.
- Taxon
- mangoesMangifera indicat0
- Treatment
- irradiatione0
- Outcome
- Fruit which were partially ripe and in their climacteric risee0
- Direction
- largely unaffectede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Fruit which were partially ripe and in their climacteric rise at time of treatment were largely unaffected by irradiation.”
t0“mangoes cv. Kensington Pride”
The same questions in other papers
ethene · disease · Mangifera indica (mango)Positive and negative results
2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
radiation · physiology: respiration · Mangifera indica (mango)Results differ
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
radiation · quality: postharvest · Mangifera indica (mango)Results differ
6 papers in the same direction as this paper · 11 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
14 papers more in this group
See all 18 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.