Abstract
In order to obtain a better preservation effect on okra fruit, this study examined chitosan (CS)–nanocrystal cellulose (NCC) composite coating as a preservative agent. Four treatments, including CS, NCC, CS–cellulose composite (CS-CC), and ratio of CS:CC: 2:1 (2CS-CC), were implemented to create three different okra fruits (Shuiguo, Naiyou, and Hibiscus coccineus). Rate of weight loss, decay rate, and texture profiles (e.g., hardness, springiness, cohesiveness, gumminess, chewiness, and resilience) of the fruits were determined regularly during storage. Our results showed that a CS-NCC composite coating could not reduce rate of weight loss of the fruits. Only 2CS-CC treatment inhibited the fruit decay rate in Hibiscus coccineus (C). Nevertheless, NCC treatment did not result in a distinct improvement compared with CS treatment (1%). CS-CC treatment could be advantageous for maintaining the texture parameters of okra fruit during storage. Notably, change in the fruit texture parameters presents a significant cultivar-dependent pattern.
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 5
Claim · model-written summary
Composite coating did not reduce okra fruit weight-loss rate.
- Taxon
- okra
.jpg?width=60)
Abelmoschus esculentust0 - Treatment
- CS-NCC composite coatinge0
- Outcome
- rate of weight losse0
- Direction
- could not reducee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“a CS-NCC composite coating could not reduce rate of weight loss of the fruits”
t0“okra”
Claim · model-written summary
2CS-CC inhibited fruit decay in Hibiscus coccineus.
- Taxon
- Hibiscus coccineus
_Hibiscus_coccineus_flower_and_bottoms.jpg?width=60)
Muenchhusia coccineae0 - Treatment
- 2CS-CC treatmente0
- Outcome
- fruit decay ratee0
- Direction
- inhibitede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
_Hibiscus_coccineus_flower_and_bottoms.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“Only 2CS-CC treatment inhibited the fruit decay rate in Hibiscus coccineus (C).”
Claim · model-written summary
NCC treatment did not distinctly improve preservation compared with CS treatment.
- Taxon
- okraAbelmoschus esculentust0
- Treatment
- NCC treatmente0
- Outcome
- distinct improvemente0
- Direction
- did not resulte0
- Qualifier
- 1%e0
- Comparator
- CS treatmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“NCC treatment did not result in a distinct improvement compared with CS treatment (1%).”
t0“okra”
Claim · model-written summary
CS-CC treatment was judged advantageous for maintaining okra fruit texture during storage.
- Taxon
- okraAbelmoschus esculentuse0
- Treatment
- CS-CC treatmente0
- Outcome
- texture parameterse0
- Direction
- maintaininge0
- Qualifier
- during storagee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“CS-CC treatment could be advantageous for maintaining the texture parameters of okra fruit during storage.”
Claim · model-written summary
Fruit texture changes depended significantly on cultivar.
- Taxon
- okraAbelmoschus esculentust0
- Material
- cultivare0
- Outcome
- change in the fruit texture parameterse0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“change in the fruit texture parameters presents a significant cultivar-dependent pattern.”
t0“okra”
The same questions in other papers
storage · quality: postharvest · Abelmoschus esculentus (okra)Positive and negative results
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
6 papers more in this group
See all 10 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.