Effects of Storage Conditions, Storage Duration and Post-Harvest Treatments on Nutritional and Sensory Quality of Orange ( <i>Citrus sinensis</i> (L) Osbeck) Fruits
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The fruits of Msasa and Jaffa orange varieties were harvested and subjected to post-harvest treatments namely; dipping in hexanal, dipping in calcium chloride and compared with untreated control; and they were stored at ambient (28 ± 2°C) and reduced temperatures (18 ± 2°C) conditions. Data were collected on the 0, 4th, 8th, and 12th days from the date of fruit harvest. Chemical analyses were conducted to determine vitamin C content, total sugars, reducing sugars and total flavonoids. Post-harvest treatments had a significant effect on vitamin C and total flavonoids of Jaffa orange fruit. Hexanal treated fruit had higher values of total flavonoids, vitamin C, and total sugars compared to calcium chloride treated and control fruit. The storage durations showed significant effects on the vitamin C content of Jaffa, total flavonoids, the total and reducing sugars of both fruit varieties. Vitamin C and total flavonoids decreased with increasing storage duration of fruit. The significant interactions of factors were observed on total sugar which was increasing with increasing storage duration, but higher in hexanal treated and ambient stored fruit. Based on consumer acceptance test, the hexanal treated fruits were the most liked followed by calcium chloride treated and untreated fruits based on the appearance, taste, texture and overall acceptability.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".