Abstract
Abstract Field-grown spinach ( Spinacea oleraceae L.) sprayed with ethylenebisdi-thiocarbamate fungicides was washed to reduce the carbamate residue ethylenethiourea (ETU) in canned spinach. The spinach was washed with water, water + sodium hypochlorite, detergents, or detergents + sodium hypochlorite. After washing, the spinach was canned and evaluated for ETU residue and quality. ETU residue was 63 ppm in non-washed carbamate field-treated spinach, 6.9 ppm in water-washed samples, and only 0.1 ppm in washing treatments containing detergents. Washing treatments had little effect on the quality of the canned spinach; only titratable acidity was reduced significantly.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-nd. 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
Claim · model-written summary
Water washing reduced ETU residue in canned spinach to 6.9 ppm, compared with 63 ppm in non-washed carbamate field-treated spinach.
- Taxon
- spinach
Spinacia oleraceae0 - Treatment
- water-washede0
- Outcome
- ETU residuee0
- Direction
- decreaseinferrede0
- Value
- 6.9 ppme0
- Qualifier
- 63 ppme0
- Comparator
- non-washede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“ETU residue was 63 ppm in non-washed carbamate field-treated spinach, 6.9 ppm in water-washed samples, and only 0.1 ppm in washing treatments containing detergents”
Claim · model-written summary
Washing treatments containing detergents reduced ETU residue in canned spinach to 0.1 ppm, compared with 63 ppm in non-washed spinach.
- Taxon
- spinachSpinacia oleraceae0
- Treatment
- washing treatments containing detergentse0
- Outcome
- ETU residuee0
- Direction
- decreaseinferrede0
- Value
- 0.1 ppme0
- Qualifier
- 63 ppme0
- Comparator
- non-washede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“ETU residue was 63 ppm in non-washed carbamate field-treated spinach, 6.9 ppm in water-washed samples, and only 0.1 ppm in washing treatments containing detergents”
Claim · model-written summary
Washing treatments had little effect on the quality of the canned spinach.
- Taxon
- spinachSpinacia oleraceae0
- Treatment
- Washing treatmentse0
- Outcome
- quality of the canned spinache0
- Direction
- little effecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Washing treatments had little effect on the quality of the canned spinach”
Claim · model-written summary
Among quality measures of canned spinach, only titratable acidity was reduced significantly by the washing treatments.
- Taxon
- spinachSpinacia oleraceae0
- Treatment
- Washing treatmentse0
- Outcome
- titratable aciditye0
- Direction
- reducede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Washing treatments had little effect on the quality of the canned spinach; only titratable acidity was reduced significantly”
The same questions in other papers
detergent · molecular: metabolites · Spinacia oleracea (spinach)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
processing · quality: general · Spinacia oleracea (spinach)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- negative
processing · molecular: metabolites · Spinacia oleracea (spinach)Positive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- negative
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.