Abstract
Summary The objective of this study was to determine the effect of calcium chloride and calcium lactate pretreatments at different concentrations (1, 1.5 and 2% w/v) on enzymatic browning of clingstone and freestone peaches following high‐pressure processing ( HPP ) at 200 MP a for 10 min. Proton nuclear magnetic resonance ( 1 H‐ NMR ) relaxometry indicated that following calcium pretreatment and HPP , both peach types had lower percentages of water in the vacuole compartment and a simultaneous increase in the percentage of water in the cytoplasm compartment. Calcium pretreatment of freestone peaches did not affect the development of browning, regardless of the form of calcium or the concentration, whereas calcium lactate pretreatment undesirably enhanced clingstone peach discoloration. Calcium pretreatments have the potential to reduce the loss of cell integrity that results from HPP ; however, in this study, the effect was not sufficient to inhibit the interaction between the polyphenol oxidase enzyme that catalyses browning and its substrates.
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 4
Claim · model-written summary
Calcium pretreatment followed by processing shifted water from vacuole to cytoplasm in both peach types.
- Taxon
- peach
Prunus persicae0 - Treatment
- calcium pretreatment and HPPe0
- Outcome
- water in the vacuole compartment and a simultaneous increase in the percentage of water in the cytoplasm compartmente0
- Direction
- lower percentagese0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“following calcium pretreatment and HPP , both peach types had lower percentages of water in the vacuole compartment and a simultaneous increase in the percentage of water in the cytoplasm compartment.”
Claim · model-written summary
Calcium pretreatment did not affect browning in freestone peaches.
- Taxon
- peachPrunus persicae0
- Material
- freestonee0
- Treatment
- Calcium pretreatmente0
- Outcome
- development of browninge0
- Direction
- did not affecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Calcium pretreatment of freestone peaches did not affect the development of browning, regardless of the form of calcium or the concentration”
Claim · model-written summary
Calcium lactate pretreatment increased discoloration of clingstone peaches.
- Taxon
- peachPrunus persicae0
- Material
- clingstonee0
- Treatment
- calcium lactate pretreatmente0
- Outcome
- peach discoloratione0
- Direction
- enhancede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“calcium lactate pretreatment undesirably enhanced clingstone peach discoloration.”
Claim · model-written summary
Calcium pretreatments were insufficient to inhibit interaction of polyphenol oxidase with its substrates.
- Taxon
- peachPrunus persicat0
- Gene
- polyphenol oxidase enzymee0
- Outcome
- interaction between the polyphenol oxidase enzyme that catalyses browning and its substratese0
- Qualifier
- not sufficient to inhibite0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the effect was not sufficient to inhibit the interaction between the polyphenol oxidase enzyme that catalyses browning and its substrates.”
t0“peach cell integrity”
The same questions in other papers
calcium atom · disease · Prunus persica (peach)Results differ
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 8 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
7 papers more in this group
See all 11 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.