Storage regimes to allow softening in a processing apple treated with 1-methylcyclopropene
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to investigate the effects of storage regime and postharvest 1-methylcyclopropene (1-MCP) treatment timing on softening of ‘Northern Spy’ apples, to determine if ideal firmness for processing could be achieved after storage while at the same time maintaining fruit quality and extending storage life. Over 4 yr of study, ‘Northern Spy’ apples with or without 1-MCP (1 μL L−1) were held for up to 12.5 mo at 0 °C–1 °C in the following regimes: (1) controlled atmosphere (CA) with or without 2 wk post-storage ambient air; (2) ambient air or CA; (3) CA with up to 6 mo delayed 1-MCP treatment; (4) delayed CA establishment for up to 4 mo; (5) delayed 1-MCP treatment in combination with delayed CA establishment for 1 or 2 mo. 1-MCP treatment at harvest consistently enhanced firmness retention, which remained too high for processing. Delayed 1-MCP treatment allowed more firmness loss but fruit remained firmer than those not treated, and these apples would be acceptable for subsequent processing (∼67–72 N). 1-MCP-treated fruit developed higher incidence of core browning than those not treated, especially after 6 mo of storage. However, this is not a major problem for processing because core tissue is removed. Delayed CA within any regime did not result in apples with firmness values acceptable for processing, while additional air storage for 2 wk at 0 °C after CA had no significant effect. Overall, delayed 1-MCP treatment with no delay in CA provided the most acceptable apple firmness for processing.
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) | 0.002 | 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".