Abstract
Pre-storage UV treatment has potential to control diseases in post-harvest crops. The objective of this work was to evaluate the quality of UV-treated tomato. Mature green tomato fruit (cv. Trust) were treated with a hormic dose of UV and stored at 13°C for 21 days. Sensory quality parameters such as sugar content, total soluble solids, titratable acidity and pH were assessed at regular intervals. At the end of the storage period, on day 21, a random sample of fruit was kept at 20°C for 72 hours simulating domestic handling. The latter fruit were used for sensory evaluation performed by a panel of graduate students and research assistants. Fruit of the same cultivar from a local market were used as reference. Over the storage period at 13°C no significant difference was observed between UV-treated fruit compared with the control for total soluble solids. A similar trend was observed for sugar content except on day 21 where UV-treated fruit displayed a significant decrease. The titratable acidity, expressed as citric acid, of UV-treated fruit tended to be lower than the control fruit, with a significant difference observed only on day 7 after treatment; whereas there was a significant increase in pH of UV treated fruit from day 4 until the end of the storage period. Sensory evaluation indicated that the UV-treated fruit had a moderately better texture and taste than control fruit, although the general appearance and color were rated significantly poorer than those of the control fruit.
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
Claim · model-written summary
UV treatment did not significantly change total soluble solids during storage at 13°C.
- Taxon
- tomato
Solanum lycopersicumt0 - Treatment
- UV-treatede0
- Outcome
- total soluble solidse0
- Direction
- no significant differencee0
- Comparator
- the controle0
- Setting
- 13°Ce0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Over the storage period at 13°C no significant difference was observed between UV-treated fruit compared with the control for total soluble solids”
t0“TOMATO”
Claim · model-written summary
UV treatment significantly decreased tomato sugar content on day 21.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- UV-treatede0
- Outcome
- sugar contente0
- Direction
- decreasee0
- Qualifier
- day 21e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“sugar content except on day 21 where UV-treated fruit displayed a significant decrease”
t0“TOMATO”
Claim · model-written summary
UV treatment lowered titratable acidity relative to controls, significantly only on day 7.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- UV-treatede0
- Outcome
- titratable aciditye0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Qualifier
- only on day 7 after treatmente0
- Comparator
- the control fruite0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The titratable acidity, expressed as citric acid, of UV-treated fruit tended to be lower than the control fruit, with a significant difference observed only on day 7 after treatment”
t0“TOMATO”
Claim · model-written summary
UV treatment increased fruit pH significantly from day 4 through storage end.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- UV treatede0
- Outcome
- pHe0
- Direction
- increasee0
- Qualifier
- from day 4 until the end of the storage periode0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“there was a significant increase in pH of UV treated fruit from day 4 until the end of the storage period”
t0“TOMATO”
Claim · model-written summary
UV-treated fruit had moderately better texture and taste than controls.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- UV-treatede0
- Outcome
- texture and tastee0
- Direction
- bettere0
- Comparator
- control fruite0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the UV-treated fruit had a moderately better texture and taste than control fruit”
t0“TOMATO”
Claim · model-written summary
UV-treated fruit had poorer appearance and color than controls.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- UV-treatedt0
- Outcome
- general appearance and colore0
- Direction
- poorere0
- Comparator
- control fruite0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the general appearance and color were rated significantly poorer than those of the control fruit”
t0“UV-TREATED TOMATO FRUIT”
The same questions in other papers
uv · quality: postharvest · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Results differ
11 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- no effect
10 papers more in this group
See all 14 papers →uv · quality: sugar starch · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- no effect
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.