Paper · 1996 · Journal of Food Quality

QUALITY OF PINK TOMATOES (cv. BUFFALO) AFTER STORAGE UNDER CONTROLLED ATMOSPHERE AT CHILLING AND NONCHILLING TEMPERATURES

M. C. N. NUNES; A. M. M. B. MORAIS; J. K. BRECHT; et al.

10
claims
19
verbatim quotes
17
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · other-oa

Abstract

ABSTRACT Greenhouse‐grown pink tomatoes (cv. Buffalo) were stored in air or in a controlled atmosphere (CA) of 4% O 2 plus 2% CO 2 , to study the effect of CA at chilling and nonchilling temperatures on fruit quality characteristics. Tomatoes could be stored in CA at 12C for three weeks with no major changes in fruit appearance. CA was effective in delaying color development and ripening at this temperature. The soluble solids content was lower after CA storage, but no significant differences in firmness, pH or titratable acidity were observed between storage in air or CA. Storage in CA at 12C was also effective in reducing decay. However, at 6C, fruit showed high incidence of decay after both air and CA storage. CA did not alleviate chilling injury symptoms relative to air‐stored samples and may have caused CO 2 injury. Water loss was greater under CA at both temperatures.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed other-oa. 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 10

Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pink tomatoes retained appearance for three weeks under controlled atmosphere at 12C.

Outcome
fruit appearancee0
Value
three weekse0
Qualifier
CA at 12Ce0

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

Solanum lycopersicum
Solanum lycopersicum · TaxonKod B · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Tomatoes could be stored in CA at 12C for three weeks with no major changes in fruit appearance”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 234–329 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Controlled atmosphere delayed tomato color development at 12C.

Taxon
TOMATOESt0
Treatment
CAe0
Outcome
color developmente0
Direction
delayinge0
Qualifier
this temperaturee0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“CA was effective in delaying color development and ripening at this temperature”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 331–410 · show in text ↑
t0

“TOMATOES”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 16–24 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Controlled atmosphere delayed tomato ripening at 12C.

Taxon
TOMATOESt0
Treatment
CAe0
Outcome
ripeninge0
Direction
delayinge0
Qualifier
this temperaturee0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“CA was effective in delaying color development and ripening at this temperature”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 331–410 · show in text ↑
t0

“TOMATOES”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 16–24 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Soluble solids content was lower after controlled-atmosphere storage.

Taxon
TOMATOESt0
Treatment
CA storagee0
Outcome
soluble solids contente0
Direction
lowere0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“The soluble solids content was lower after CA storage”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 412–465 · show in text ↑
t0

“TOMATOES”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 16–24 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Firmness, pH and titratable acidity did not differ significantly between air and controlled atmosphere.

Taxon
TOMATOESt0
Treatment
CAe0
Outcome
firmness, pH or titratable aciditye0
Direction
no significant differencese0
Comparator
storage in aire0

Verbatim

e0

“no significant differences in firmness, pH or titratable acidity were observed between storage in air or CA”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 471–578 · show in text ↑
t0

“TOMATOES”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 16–24 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Controlled-atmosphere storage at 12C reduced tomato decay.

Taxon
TOMATOESt0
Treatment
CA at 12Ce0
Outcome
decaye0
Direction
reducinge0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“Storage in CA at 12C was also effective in reducing decay”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 580–637 · show in text ↑
t0

“TOMATOES”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 16–24 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Tomatoes had high decay incidence at 6C under both air and controlled-atmosphere storage.

Taxon
TOMATOESt0
Outcome
incidence of decaye0
Direction
highe0
Qualifier
both air and CA storagee0

Verbatim

e0

“at 6C, fruit showed high incidence of decay after both air and CA storage”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 648–721 · show in text ↑
t0

“TOMATOES”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 16–24 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Controlled atmosphere did not alleviate tomato chilling injury relative to air storage.

Taxon
TOMATOESt0
Treatment
CAe0
Outcome
chilling injury symptomse0
Direction
did not alleviatee0
Comparator
air‐stored samplese0

Verbatim

e0

“CA did not alleviate chilling injury symptoms relative to air‐stored samples”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 723–799 · show in text ↑
t0

“TOMATOES”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 16–24 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectauthor interpretationoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Controlled atmosphere may have caused carbon dioxide injury in tomatoes.

Taxon
TOMATOESt0
Treatment
CAe0
Outcome
CO 2 injurye0
Qualifier
may have causede0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

Verbatim

e0

“CA did not alleviate chilling injury symptoms relative to air‐stored samples and may have caused CO 2 injury”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 723–831 · show in text ↑
t0

“TOMATOES”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 16–24 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Tomato water loss was greater under controlled atmosphere at both temperatures.

Taxon
TOMATOESt0
Treatment
CAe0
Outcome
Water losse0
Direction
greatere0
Qualifier
both temperaturese0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“Water loss was greater under CA at both temperatures”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 833–885 · show in text ↑
t0

“TOMATOES”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 16–24 · show in text ↑

storage · physiology: water · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results

5 papers: 4 positive, 1 negative or no effect

4 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

1 paper more in this group

See all 5 papers →

storage · crop injury · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results

8 papers: 5 positive, 3 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

4 papers more in this group

See all 8 papers →

storage · quality: sugar starch · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results

39 papers: 31 positive, 8 negative or no effect

7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 31 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

35 papers more in this group

See all 39 papers →

storage · disease · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results

40 papers: 30 positive, 10 negative or no effect

29 papers in the same direction as this paper · 9 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. negative

36 papers more in this group

See all 40 papers →

storage · quality: postharvest · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results

158 papers: 141 positive, 17 negative or no effect

140 papers in the same direction as this paper · 16 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. no effect

154 papers more in this group

See all 158 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.