Paper · 1977 · PubMed

Influence of some processing methods on the quality of apple slices: II-Cultivar Melrose.

J N Noguerira

6
claims
11
verbatim quotes
1
citations
1
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

The influence of three browning treatments (blanching, SO2 and ascorbic acid) and three processing methods (canning, freezing and freeze-drying) on the quality of apple slices of the cultivar Melrose was studied. Immediately upon arrival at the pilot plant, half of the fruits was processed and the remainder was held in storage for six weeks at 4.4 degrees C to be processed later. The results showed that the best treatment was the blanching-freezing combination for all attributes of quality, except for color, in which the SO2-freezing combination was superior. Storage appeared to have some influence on the quality of apple slices, so that the zero week storage samples were judged superior for all attributes of quality. Blanching was the best browning treatment for freezing, but for freeze-drying the samples treated with SO2 was superior to the blanched ones.

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

The blanching-freezing combination was the best treatment for all quality attributes except colour.

Material
Melrosee0
Treatment
blanching-freezing combinatione1
Outcome
all attributes of qualitye1
Direction
beste1
Qualifier
except for colore1

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Malus domestica
Malus domestica · TaxonW.carter · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“quality of apple slices of the cultivar Melrose”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 152–199 · show in text ↑
e1

“The results showed that the best treatment was the blanching-freezing combination for all attributes of quality, except for color”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 383–512 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The SO2-freezing combination was superior for apple slice colour.

Treatment
SO2-freezing combinatione2
Outcome
colore2
Direction
superiore2

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Malus domestica
Malus domestica · TaxonW.carter · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“quality of apple slices of the cultivar Melrose”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 152–199 · show in text ↑
e2

“except for color, in which the SO2-freezing combination was superior”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 496–564 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Blanching was the best browning treatment for freezing apple slices.

Treatment
Blanchinge3
Outcome
browning treatment for freezinge3
Direction
beste3

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Malus domestica
Malus domestica · TaxonW.carter · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“quality of apple slices of the cultivar Melrose”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 152–199 · show in text ↑
e3

“Blanching was the best browning treatment for freezing”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 728–782 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Apple slices treated with SO2 were superior to blanched slices for freeze-drying.

Treatment
samples treated with SO2e4
Outcome
for freeze-dryinge4
Direction
superiore4
Comparator
the blanched onese4

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Malus domestica
Malus domestica · TaxonW.carter · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“quality of apple slices of the cultivar Melrose”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 152–199 · show in text ↑
e4

“for freeze-drying the samples treated with SO2 was superior to the blanched ones”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 788–868 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Zero-week storage samples were judged superior for all quality attributes.

Treatment
zero week storage samplese5
Outcome
all attributes of qualitye5
Direction
superiore5

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Malus domestica
Malus domestica · TaxonW.carter · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“quality of apple slices of the cultivar Melrose”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 152–199 · show in text ↑
e5

“the zero week storage samples were judged superior for all attributes of quality”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 646–726 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Storage had some influence on the quality of apple slices.

Treatment
Storagee6
Outcome
quality of apple slicese6

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Malus domestica
Malus domestica · TaxonW.carter · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e6

“Storage appeared to have some influence on the quality of apple slices”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 566–636 · show in text ↑

processing · quality: general · Malus domestica (apple)Positive and negative results

11 papers: 6 positive, 5 negative or no effect

5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

7 papers more in this group

See all 11 papers →

processing · disease · Malus domestica (apple)Positive and negative results

14 papers: 12 positive, 2 negative or no effect

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

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. positive

10 papers more in this group

See all 14 papers →

storage · quality: general · Malus domestica (apple)Positive and negative results

46 papers: 36 positive, 10 negative or no effect

35 papers in the same direction as this paper · 10 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. negative

42 papers more in this group

See all 46 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.