Paper · 1995 · Journal of Horticultural Science

Effect of pre-harvest application of calcium on flesh firmness and cell-wall composition of apples—influence of fruit size

S. Siddiqui; F. Bangerth

5
claims
10
verbatim quotes
63
citations
3
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

SummaryApples, cv. Golden Delicious were subjected to ten preharvest sprays of 1.2% CaCl2 at weekly intervals. At the beginning of the climacteric stage, the fruits were harvested and sorted to small (4–5 cm dia.) and average (6–7.5 cm dia.) sizes, and stored at ambient conditions (25°C). The firmness of small fruits was higher than average ones. Application of CaCl2 resulted in higher flesh firmness at the time of harvest in average fruits but showed no significant changes in small ones. However, after three weeks of storage, both average and small fruits were showing better retention of firmness by CaCl2 treatment. Thus, preharvest treatment of CaCl2 may not necessarily always lead to firmer fruits at the time of harvest but may result in better retention of firmness during storage. The results are discussed in relation to cell-wall yield, β-D-galactosidase activity, total, free, ionically associated and covalently bound pectins, and hemicellulose contents. The differences in behaviour of average and small fruits to calcium application seem to be associated with the calcium content of covalently bound pectin fraction of the walls.

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 5

Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Small apples were firmer than average-size apples.

Organ / stage
small fruitse0
Outcome
firmnesse0
Direction
highere0
Comparator
average onese0

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

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

Verbatim

t0

“apples”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 92–98 · show in text ↑
e0

“The firmness of small fruits was higher than average ones.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 290–348 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Calcium spray increased flesh firmness at harvest in average-size fruit.

Organ / stage
average fruitse0
Treatment
Application of CaCl2e0
Outcome
flesh firmnesse0
Direction
highere0

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

t0

“apples”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 92–98 · show in text ↑
e0

“Application of CaCl2 resulted in higher flesh firmness at the time of harvest in average fruits”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 349–444 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Calcium spray did not significantly change firmness at harvest in small fruit.

Organ / stage
small onese0
Treatment
Application of CaCl2e0
Outcome
flesh firmnesse0
Direction
no significant changese0

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

t0

“apples”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 92–98 · show in text ↑
e0

“Application of CaCl2 resulted in higher flesh firmness at the time of harvest in average fruits but showed no significant changes in small ones.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 349–493 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Calcium-treated average and small fruits retained firmness better after three weeks of storage.

Treatment
CaCl2 treatmente0
Outcome
retention of firmnesse0
Direction
bettere0
Qualifier
after three weeks of storagee0

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

t0

“apples”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 92–98 · show in text ↑
e0

“after three weeks of storage, both average and small fruits were showing better retention of firmness by CaCl2 treatment.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 503–624 · show in text ↑
Associationauthor interpretationoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fruit-size differences in calcium response appeared associated with calcium in covalently bound wall pectin.

Treatment
calcium applicatione0
Compound
calcium content of covalently bound pectin fractione0
Outcome
differences in behaviour of average and small fruitse0

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

t0

“apples”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 92–98 · show in text ↑
e0

“The differences in behaviour of average and small fruits to calcium application seem to be associated with the calcium content of covalently bound pectin fraction of the walls.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 974–1150 · show in text ↑

calcium chloride dihydrate · quality: postharvest · Malus domestica (apple)Results differ

47 papers: 41 positive, 6 negative or no effect

40 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

43 papers more in this group

See all 47 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.