Paper · 2021 · Sains Malaysiana

Hydro-cooling as Means to Retain Fresh Sweet Corn Ears Quality

Phebe Ding; Raja Norhidayu Raja Mat

6
claims
12
verbatim quotes
6
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

Sweet corn ear is a highly perishable produce with short postharvest life due to its high respiration rate which depletes sugar concentration in kernel. As a result, ear loses its sweetness and quality within 1 to 2 days under room temperature. Hydro-cooling after harvest is a good practice as it can reduce the metabolism and respiration rate of the produce. Thus, the objective of this study was to determine the effectiveness of hydro-cooling in retaining quality of sweet corn ears. Freshly harvested sweet corn ears were immersed in hydro-cooler to achieve its half and seven-eighth cooling time. Pre-cooled and non-pre-cooled ears were then stored at 12±2 and 25±2 °C for 8 days and quality index, weight loss, pH, soluble solids concentration, titratable acidity and ascorbic acid of ears were evaluated at 2 days interval. The experiment was arranged in randomized complete block design with factorial arrangement (three cooling times × two storage temperatures × five storage days) and then repeated thrice. Differences between cooling time × storage temperature, cooling time × storage day, storage temperature × storage day and cooling time × storage temperature × storage day were significant on quality index of ears. Storage temperature × storage day was also significant on ears weight loss, soluble solids concentration and pH. Seven-eight cooling time and storage at 12±2 °C provide the best quality index of ears; retain higher soluble solids concentration and pH with significantly lower weight loss compared to other cooling time treatment and 25±2 °C storage temperature. In short, temperature management is crucial in manipulating sweet corn ears quality.

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

Associationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Cooling time, storage temperature and day interactions significantly affected ear quality index.

Taxon
Sweet Cornt0
Treatment
cooling timee0
Outcome
quality index of earse0

Not reportedDirection

Verbatim

e0

“Differences between cooling time × storage temperature, cooling time × storage day, storage temperature × storage day and cooling time × storage temperature × storage day were significant on quality index of ears.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1018–1231 · show in text ↑
t0

“Sweet Corn”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 39–49 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Storage temperature and day interacted significantly for ear weight loss, soluble solids and pH.

Taxon
Sweet Cornt0
Treatment
Storage temperature × storage daye0
Outcome
ears weight loss, soluble solids concentration and pHe0

Not reportedDirection

Verbatim

e0

“Storage temperature × storage day was also significant on ears weight loss, soluble solids concentration and pH.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1232–1344 · show in text ↑
t0

“Sweet Corn”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 39–49 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Seven-eight cooling and 12±2 °C storage yielded best quality index of ears than other cooling times and 25±2 °C storage.

Taxon
Sweet Cornt0
Treatment
Seven-eight cooling time and storage at 12±2 °Ce0
Outcome
quality index of earse0
Direction
beste0
Comparator
other cooling time treatment and 25±2 °C storage temperaturee0

Verbatim

e0

“Seven-eight cooling time and storage at 12±2 °C provide the best quality index of ears; retain higher soluble solids concentration and pH with significantly lower weight loss compared to other cooling time treatment and 25±2 °C storage temperature.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1345–1593 · show in text ↑
t0

“Sweet Corn”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 39–49 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Seven-eight cooling and 12±2 °C storage yielded higher soluble solids concentration than other cooling times and 25±2 °C storage.

Taxon
Sweet Cornt0
Treatment
Seven-eight cooling time and storage at 12±2 °Ce0
Outcome
soluble solids concentratione0
Direction
highere0
Comparator
other cooling time treatment and 25±2 °C storage temperaturee0

Verbatim

e0

“Seven-eight cooling time and storage at 12±2 °C provide the best quality index of ears; retain higher soluble solids concentration and pH with significantly lower weight loss compared to other cooling time treatment and 25±2 °C storage temperature.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1345–1593 · show in text ↑
t0

“Sweet Corn”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 39–49 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Seven-eight cooling and 12±2 °C storage yielded higher pH than other cooling times and 25±2 °C storage.

Taxon
Sweet Cornt0
Treatment
Seven-eight cooling time and storage at 12±2 °Ce0
Outcome
pHe0
Direction
highere0
Comparator
other cooling time treatment and 25±2 °C storage temperaturee0

Verbatim

e0

“Seven-eight cooling time and storage at 12±2 °C provide the best quality index of ears; retain higher soluble solids concentration and pH with significantly lower weight loss compared to other cooling time treatment and 25±2 °C storage temperature.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1345–1593 · show in text ↑
t0

“Sweet Corn”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 39–49 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Seven-eight cooling and 12±2 °C storage yielded lower weight loss than other cooling times and 25±2 °C storage.

Taxon
Sweet Cornt0
Treatment
Seven-eight cooling time and storage at 12±2 °Ce0
Outcome
weight losse0
Direction
lowere0
Comparator
other cooling time treatment and 25±2 °C storage temperaturee0

Verbatim

e0

“Seven-eight cooling time and storage at 12±2 °C provide the best quality index of ears; retain higher soluble solids concentration and pH with significantly lower weight loss compared to other cooling time treatment and 25±2 °C storage temperature.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1345–1593 · show in text ↑
t0

“Sweet Corn”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 39–49 · show in text ↑

storage · quality: sugar starch · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

11 papers: 9 positive, 2 negative or no effect

8 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. positive

7 papers more in this group

See all 11 papers →

storage · quality: postharvest · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

12 papers: 9 positive, 3 negative or no effect

8 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. no effect

8 papers more in this group

See all 12 papers →

processing · soil: chemistry · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

12 papers: 10 positive, 2 negative or no effect

9 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. positive

8 papers more in this group

See all 12 papers →

processing · quality: general · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

15 papers: 11 positive, 4 negative or no effect

10 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

11 papers more in this group

See all 15 papers →

processing · quality: sugar starch · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

16 papers: 8 positive, 8 negative or no effect

7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. no effect

12 papers more in this group

See all 16 papers →

processing · quality: postharvest · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

19 papers: 16 positive, 3 negative or no effect

15 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

15 papers more in this group

See all 19 papers →

storage · quality: general · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

23 papers: 17 positive, 6 negative or no effect

16 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. negative

19 papers more in this group

See all 23 papers →

storage · soil: chemistry · Zea mays (maize)Results agree

3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
See all 3 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.