Paper · 2019 · Journal of Food Science and Agricultural Technology (JFAT)

Effect of ultraviolet-C (UV-C) irradiation on physicochemical changes of fresh-cut baby corn during storage

Nan Theint Ngu Lwin; Piyatida Yotap; Kiaothip Phimmaha; et al.

6
claims
8
verbatim quotes
0
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Baby corn (Zea mays L.) is an important vegetable crop of Thailand. The demand for fresh-cut baby corn in the market has increased substantially as containing high nutritional values including fibers, minerals, beta-carotene and ascorbic acid. The postharvest problem of this product is weight loss during storage and wholesale which lead to quantitative and nutritional quality losses. This research investigated the effect of ultraviolet-C (UV-C) irradiation on physiochemical changes of fresh-cut baby corn during storage. The fresh-cut baby corns were irradiated with 2.2, 4.4, and 6.6 KJ.m-2 UV-C, respectively, and the untreated baby corn was assumed as control. The fresh-cut baby corns were then kept in plastic tray wrapped with PVC film and stored at 5°c for 7 days. The results showed that treatment of 4.4 KJ.m-2 UV-C gave the best results on retaining fresh weight, electrolyte leakage, firmness and delaying the decreased of antioxidant capacity (DPPH) in fresh-cut baby corn. However, UV-C irradiation had no effect on the changes in color values (L* a* b*) and ascorbic acid content throughout storage time.

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 6

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

UV-C at 4.4 KJ.m-2 best retained fresh weight in baby corn.

Taxon
baby corne0
Treatment
4.4 KJ.m-2 UV-Ce0
Outcome
fresh weighte0
Direction
retaininge0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“The results showed that treatment of 4.4 KJ.m-2 UV-C gave the best results on retaining fresh weight, electrolyte leakage, firmness and delaying the decreased of antioxidant capacity (DPPH) in fresh-cut baby corn.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 777–990 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

UV-C at 4.4 KJ.m-2 best retained electrolyte leakage in baby corn.

Taxon
baby corne0
Treatment
4.4 KJ.m-2 UV-Ce0
Outcome
electrolyte leakagee0
Direction
retaininge0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“The results showed that treatment of 4.4 KJ.m-2 UV-C gave the best results on retaining fresh weight, electrolyte leakage, firmness and delaying the decreased of antioxidant capacity (DPPH) in fresh-cut baby corn.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 777–990 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

UV-C at 4.4 KJ.m-2 best retained firmness in baby corn.

Taxon
baby corne0
Treatment
4.4 KJ.m-2 UV-Ce0
Outcome
firmnesse0
Direction
retaininge0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“The results showed that treatment of 4.4 KJ.m-2 UV-C gave the best results on retaining fresh weight, electrolyte leakage, firmness and delaying the decreased of antioxidant capacity (DPPH) in fresh-cut baby corn.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 777–990 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

UV-C at 4.4 KJ.m-2 best retained antioxidant capacity (DPPH) in baby corn.

Taxon
baby corne0
Treatment
4.4 KJ.m-2 UV-Ce0
Outcome
antioxidant capacity (DPPH)e0
Direction
delaying the decreasede0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“The results showed that treatment of 4.4 KJ.m-2 UV-C gave the best results on retaining fresh weight, electrolyte leakage, firmness and delaying the decreased of antioxidant capacity (DPPH) in fresh-cut baby corn.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 777–990 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

UV-C irradiation had no reported effect on color values (L* a* b*) during storage.

Taxon
baby cornt0
Treatment
UV-C irradiatione0
Outcome
color values (L* a* b*)e0
Direction
no effecte0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“However, UV-C irradiation had no effect on the changes in color values (L* a* b*) and ascorbic acid content throughout storage time.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 991–1123 · show in text ↑
t0

“baby corn”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 83–92 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

UV-C irradiation had no reported effect on ascorbic acid content during storage.

Taxon
baby cornt0
Treatment
UV-C irradiatione0
Outcome
ascorbic acid contente0
Direction
no effecte0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“However, UV-C irradiation had no effect on the changes in color values (L* a* b*) and ascorbic acid content throughout storage time.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 991–1123 · show in text ↑
t0

“baby corn”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 83–92 · show in text ↑

radiation · quality: postharvest · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect

1 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
See all 2 papers →

uv · physiology: oxidative · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

4 papers: 3 positive, 1 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive
See all 4 papers →

radiation · quality: phytochemicals · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

5 papers: 2 positive, 3 negative or no effect

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

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. negative

1 paper more in this group

See all 5 papers →

uv · quality: phytochemicals · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

7 papers: 5 positive, 2 negative or no effect

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

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. positive

3 papers more in this group

See all 7 papers →

uv · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

24 papers: 9 positive, 15 negative or no effect

8 papers in the same direction as this paper · 15 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. negative

20 papers more in this group

See all 24 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.