Abstract
The acceptance of kiwifruit by consumers is significantly affected by its slow ripening and susceptibility to deterioration. Ready-to-eat “Guichang” kiwifruit and its preparation technology were studied by the regulation of ethylene and 1-MCP. Harvested kiwifruits were treated with 100–2000 μl L −1 ethylene for 36 h (20°C) and then treatment with 0–0.5 μl L −1 1-MCP. The results showed that the preservation effect of 0.5 μl L −1 1-MCP is inefficient when the soluble solid content of kiwifruit exceeded 15%. The ethylene-treated fruits reached an “edible window” after 24 h, but a higher concentration of ethylene would not further improve ripening efficiency, while the optimal ethylene concentration was 250 μl L −1 . Moreover, after 250 μl L −1 ethylene treatment, 0.5 μl L −1 1-MCP would effectively prolong the “edible window” of fruits by approximately 19 days. The volatile component variety and ester content of 0.5 μl L −1 1-MCP-treated fruits were not different from those of the CK group. Principal component analysis and hierarchical cluster analysis indicated that the eating quality of fruits treated with 0.5 μl L −1 1-MCP was similar to that of fruits treated with ethylene. Consequently, ready-to-eat “Guichang” kiwifruit preparation includes ripening with 250 μl L −1 (20°C, 36 h) ethylene without exceeding the 1-MCP threshold and then treated with 0.5 μl L −1 1-MCP (20°C, 24 h). This study highlights the first development of a facile and low-cost preparation technology for ready-to-eat “Guichang” kiwifruit, which could reduce the time for harvested kiwifruit to reach the “edible window” and prolong the “edible window” of edible kiwifruit.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 7
Claim · model-written summary
0.5 μl L −1 1-MCP preserved fruit inefficiently above 15% soluble solids.
- Taxon
- kiwifruit
Actinidia deliciosae0 - Treatment
- 0.5 μl L −1 1-MCPe0
- Outcome
- preservation effecte0
- Direction
- inefficiente0
- Qualifier
- soluble solid content of kiwifruit exceeded 15%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the preservation effect of 0.5 μl L −1 1-MCP is inefficient when the soluble solid content of kiwifruit exceeded 15%”
Claim · model-written summary
Ethylene-treated fruit entered the edible window after 24 hours.
- Taxon
- kiwifruitActinidia deliciosat0
- Treatment
- ethylenee0
- Outcome
- reached an “edible window”e0
- Value
- 24 he0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The ethylene-treated fruits reached an “edible window” after 24 h”
t0“Kiwifruit”
Claim · model-written summary
Higher ethylene concentration did not further improve ripening efficiency.
- Taxon
- kiwifruitActinidia deliciosat0
- Treatment
- higher concentration of ethylenee0
- Outcome
- ripening efficiencye0
- Direction
- would not further improvee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“a higher concentration of ethylene would not further improve ripening efficiency”
t0“Kiwifruit”
Claim · model-written summary
The optimum ethylene concentration was 250 μl L −1.
- Taxon
- kiwifruitActinidia deliciosat0
- Outcome
- optimal ethylene concentratione0
- Value
- 250 μl L −1e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the optimal ethylene concentration was 250 μl L −1”
t0“Kiwifruit”
Claim · model-written summary
Following ethylene, 1-MCP extended the edible window approximately 19 days.
- Taxon
- kiwifruitActinidia deliciosat0
- Treatment
- 0.5 μl L −1 1-MCPe0
- Outcome
- “edible window”e0
- Direction
- prolonge0
- Value
- approximately 19 dayse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“after 250 μl L −1 ethylene treatment, 0.5 μl L −1 1-MCP would effectively prolong the “edible window” of fruits by approximately 19 days”
t0“Kiwifruit”
Claim · model-written summary
1-MCP did not alter volatile diversity or ester content relative to CK.
- Taxon
- kiwifruitActinidia deliciosat0
- Treatment
- 0.5 μl L −1 1-MCPe0
- Outcome
- volatile component variety and ester contente0
- Direction
- not differente0
- Comparator
- CK groupe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The volatile component variety and ester content of 0.5 μl L −1 1-MCP-treated fruits were not different from those of the CK group”
t0“Kiwifruit”
Claim · model-written summary
Eating quality after 1-MCP was similar to that after ethylene.
- Taxon
- kiwifruitActinidia deliciosat0
- Treatment
- 0.5 μl L −1 1-MCPe0
- Outcome
- eating qualitye0
- Direction
- similare0
- Comparator
- ethylenee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the eating quality of fruits treated with 0.5 μl L −1 1-MCP was similar to that of fruits treated with ethylene”
t0“Kiwifruit”
The same questions in other papers
1-methylcyclopropene · molecular: metabolites · Actinidia deliciosa (kiwifruit)Results differ
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 13 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
12 papers more in this group
See all 16 papers →1-methylcyclopropene · quality: general · Actinidia deliciosa (kiwifruit)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 4 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 papers →ethene · quality: postharvest · Actinidia deliciosa (kiwifruit)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 9 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
8 papers more in this group
See all 12 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.