Abstract
Organic farming is rapidly growing due to its perceived potential for producing higher nutritional quality. However, studies of organically- and conventionally-grown crops have not always shown differences between the systems. The objective of this research was to compare the antioxidant activities of organically-grown tomato to those from a conventional production system during postharvest cold storage. “Tub Tim Dang” tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) fruit were harvested at the breaker stage of maturity from both organic and conventional farms. Fruit were cold-stored at 10 °C for 20 days, and samples were collected at intervals to measure the activities of superoxide dismutase (SOD), catalase (CAT) and ascorbate peroxidase (APX) activities, and total antioxidant activity by the 2,2′-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH) and ferric reducing antioxidant power (FRAP) assays. The activities of SOD, CAT and APX of organic tomato fruit did not differ from those of conventional fruit during cold storage. In addition, there was no effect of production system on FRAP activity. In contrast, DPPH activity of organic tomato fruit was lower than conventional fruit through 10 days of cold storage, but it was higher at 15 and 20 days. These results indicated that organic production did not have a significant effects on these antioxidant traits of tomato.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 4
Claim · model-written summary
Organic and conventional tomato fruit had similar SOD, CAT and APX activities during cold storage.
- Taxon
- tomato
Solanum lycopersicume0 - Treatment
- organice0
- Outcome
- activities of SOD, CAT and APXe0
- Direction
- did not differe0
- Comparator
- conventional fruite0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The activities of SOD, CAT and APX of organic tomato fruit did not differ from those of conventional fruit during cold storage.”
Claim · model-written summary
Production system did not affect FRAP activity.
- Taxon
- TomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- production systeme0
- Outcome
- FRAP activitye0
- Direction
- no effecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“there was no effect of production system on FRAP activity”
t0“Tomato Fruit”
Claim · model-written summary
Organic tomato fruit had lower DPPH activity than conventional fruit through 10 days of cold storage.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume0
- Treatment
- organice0
- Outcome
- DPPH activitye0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Qualifier
- through 10 days of cold storagee0
- Comparator
- conventional fruite0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“DPPH activity of organic tomato fruit was lower than conventional fruit through 10 days of cold storage”
Claim · model-written summary
Organic tomato fruit had higher DPPH activity at 15 and 20 days.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume0
- Treatment
- organice0
- Outcome
- DPPH activitye0
- Direction
- highere0
- Qualifier
- at 15 and 20 dayse0
- Comparator
- conventional fruite0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“DPPH activity of organic tomato fruit was lower than conventional fruit through 10 days of cold storage, but it was higher at 15 and 20 days”
The same questions in other papers
cultivation system · quality: phytochemicals · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
14 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction · 4 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
16 papers more in this group
See all 20 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.