MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281649878 · doi:10.3389/fpls.2022.914441

Timing of Ethylene Inhibition Affects Internal Browning and Quality of ‘Gala’ Apples in Long-Term Low Oxygen Storage

2022· article· en· W4281649878 on OpenAlexafffund
Jennifer R. DeEll, Geoffrey B. Lum, Younes Mostofi, Sky K. Lesage

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Plant Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPostharvest Quality and Shelf Life Management
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
KeywordsPreharvestBrowningPostharvestOrchardHorticulture1-MethylcyclopropeneCold storageChemistryMalusControlled atmosphereRespirationRipeningBotanyEthyleneBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this study was to evaluate the timing of ethylene inhibition with preharvest and postharvest 1-methylcyclopropene (1-MCP) treatments on internal browning and quality of ‘Gala’ apples in long-term low O 2 storage. ‘Gala’ apples were obtained from the same commercial orchard during their harvesting period for 2 years of study. Preharvest 1-MCP orchard spray (3.8% a.i) was applied at the label rate of 60 g 1-MCP per acre in the first year. Postharvest 1-MCP (1 μl L −1 ) treatments were made for 24 h at 0.5°C either at harvest time (1 day after harvest) or after storage in controlled atmosphere (CA) in both years. Apples were stored in 1.5 kPa O 2 + 0.5 kPa CO 2 or 0.6 kPa O 2 + <0.5 kPa CO 2 for 9 months in the first year and 1.5, 1.0, or 0.5 kPa O 2 + 0.5 kPa CO 2 for 8 months in the second year. Storage regimes with O 2 concentrations less than 1 kPa were based on fruit respiration using SafePod™ technology. After removal from storage, all apples were then evaluated for internal browning and other quality attributes after 1, 7, and 14 days at room temperature (RT, 21–22°C). Internal browning developed in ‘Gala’ apples during both years of study, with up to 16% incidence across treatments in the first year and up to 84% in the second year. Apples stored in 0.5–0.6 kPa O 2 had significantly less internal browning during both years of study, compared to apples stored in higher O 2 . The effect of 1-MCP on internal browning was negligible in 0.5–0.6 kPa O 2 storage. ‘Gala’ stored in 1.5 kPa O 2 and treated with postharvest 1-MCP after storage had significantly less internal browning with preharvest 1-MCP than those without preharvest treatment. Apples treated with postharvest 1-MCP at harvest time, instead of after storage, did not exhibit this same effect. Preharvest 1-MCP-treated fruit maintained greater firmness retention than those without preharvest 1-MCP, and this effect was further enhanced when 1-MCP was applied after storage. Postharvest 1-MCP had no effect on firmness retention in fruit without preharvest 1-MCP, but lower O 2 maintained greater firmness in those apples. Preharvest 1-MCP had no significant effect on internal ethylene concentration, whereas it was reduced by postharvest 1-MCP at harvest time in the first year of study, regardless of storage regimes. However, internal ethylene was only affected by storage regime in the second year, with lower concentration in fruit from 0.5 kPa O 2 than in those from higher O 2 . Greasiness developed only in the second year and postharvest 1-MCP consistently reduced it, regardless of treatment timing and storage regime. There was no greasiness in apples treated with postharvest 1-MCP at harvest and then held in 0.5 kPa O 2 for 8 months plus 14 days at room temperature. Soluble solids concentration and malic acid content were slightly higher in ‘Gala’ apples with preharvest 1-MCP compared to those without, whereas there was little and inconsistent effect of postharvest 1-MCP on these attributes. Overall, storage regimes with less than 1 kPa O 2 provided the least amount of internal browning and best quality attributes. Ethylene inhibition provided further benefits, but this was dependent on the timing of 1-MCP treatment.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.235
Threshold uncertainty score0.177

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.220 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Plant ScienceSame topicPostharvest Quality and Shelf Life ManagementFrench-language works237,207