Abstract
This study was carriec oul in two growing seasons. 1999 and 2000. to investigate the effect of foliar application of potassium (0, 200. 400 and 600 ppm) and size of package (polystyrene trays of 250 and 500 capacities. over - wrapped with transparent pliofilm sheets) on the quality of Sugar peas (cv. Toledo). during cold storage for different periods of time (At harvest. 8 and 16 days). The obtained results indicated that spraying peas plants with potassium yielded peas pods that suffered high losses in both fresh weight and moisture content during storage, compared to control. though the differences among treatments appeared insignificant. However. the detected losses were in proportion to the used concentration of potasslorn. Chlorophyll contents increased also as a result of potassium foliar application. especially at 600 ppm. Peas pods of better quality during storage. as perceived from the low percentages of culls. were obtained due to potassium-sprayings. regardless of the insignificant differences among potassium treatments. The scores of consumer preference were enhanced due to the application of potassium. Reducing sugars were the highest in peas pods as a result of spraying with potassium at 200 ppm; white 600 ppm increased significantly non - reducing and total sugars. The storage resutted in slight losses in both fresh weight and moisture content of pods. However, the magnitudes of such losses fell within the accepted range that did not seriously affect the pods' quality. a result that was supported by the obtained scores of consumer preference. along with elapsmq time of storage. In addition. losses in chlorophylls were slight. but significant in the second season after 16 days of storage. The great deal of the total losses was incident in the first period in both seasons. i.e .. 81.8% and 67.12%. respectively. Reducing and non - reducing sugars decreased with storage and most of the reductions were incident in the flrst term of storage as well. Packaging the peas pods in trays. generally. conserved both losses in fresh weight and moisture content at minimal. especially in the small-sized trays. Both types of packages did not significantly differ from one another in conserving the pods' chlorophyll contents as well as the consumer preference. The small- sized pacKage enhanced retaining the reducing and total sugars better than in the large - sized ones; but both packages did not affect pods' total sugars content.
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 15
Claim · model-written summary
Potassium spraying increased pod fresh weight and moisture losses nonsignificantly, in proportion to concentration.
- Taxon
- peas
Lathyrus oleraceuse0 - Treatment
- spraying peas plants with potassiume0
- Outcome
- losses in both fresh weight and moisture contente0
- Direction
- highe0
- Qualifier
- in proportion to the used concentration of potasslorne0
- Comparator
- controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“spraying peas plants with potassium yielded peas pods that suffered high losses in both fresh weight and moisture content during storage, compared to control. though the differences among treatments appeared insignificant. However. the detected losses were in proportion to the used concentration of potasslorn.”
Claim · model-written summary
Potassium application increased chlorophyll, especially at 600 ppm.
- Taxon
- SUGAR PEASt0
- Treatment
- potassium foliar applicatione0
- Outcome
- Chlorophyll contentse0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Qualifier
- especially at 600 ppme0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“Chlorophyll contents increased also as a result of potassium foliar application. especially at 600 ppm.”
t0“SUGAR PEAS”
Claim · model-written summary
Potassium spraying improved quality measured by low cull percentages, without significant treatment differences.
- Taxon
- PeasLathyrus oleraceuse0
- Treatment
- potassium-sprayingse0
- Outcome
- percentages of cullse0
- Direction
- lowe0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Peas pods of better quality during storage. as perceived from the low percentages of culls. were obtained due to potassium-sprayings. regardless of the insignificant differences among potassium treatments.”
Claim · model-written summary
Potassium enhanced consumer preference scores.
- Taxon
- SUGAR PEASt0
- Treatment
- application of potassiume0
- Outcome
- scores of consumer preferencee0
- Direction
- enhancede0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“The scores of consumer preference were enhanced due to the application of potassium.”
t0“SUGAR PEAS”
Claim · model-written summary
Spraying 200 ppm potassium gave the highest reducing sugars.
- Taxon
- peasLathyrus oleraceuse0
- Treatment
- spraying with potassium at 200 ppme0
- Outcome
- Reducing sugarse0
- Direction
- higheste0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Reducing sugars were the highest in peas pods as a result of spraying with potassium at 200 ppm”
Claim · model-written summary
600 ppm potassium significantly increased non-reducing and total sugars.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“white 600 ppm increased significantly non - reducing and total sugars”
t0“SUGAR PEAS”
e1“spraying with potassium at 200 ppm”
Claim · model-written summary
Storage slightly reduced pod fresh weight and moisture within acceptable quality limits.
- Taxon
- SUGAR PEASt0
- Treatment
- storagee0
- Outcome
- fresh weight and moisture contente0
- Direction
- lossese0
- Qualifier
- within the accepted rangee0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“The storage resutted in slight losses in both fresh weight and moisture content of pods. However, the magnitudes of such losses fell within the accepted range that did not seriously affect the pods' quality”
t0“SUGAR PEAS”
Claim · model-written summary
Chlorophyll losses were slight but significant after 16 days in the second season.
- Taxon
- SUGAR PEASt0
- Treatment
- 16 days of storagee0
- Outcome
- chlorophyllse0
- Direction
- lossese0
- Qualifier
- second seasone0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“losses in chlorophylls were slight. but significant in the second season after 16 days of storage”
t0“SUGAR PEAS”
Claim · model-written summary
81.8% of total losses occurred in the first period of the first season.
Not reportedDirection
Verbatim
e0“The great deal of the total losses was incident in the first period in both seasons. i.e .. 81.8% and 67.12%. respectively.”
t0“SUGAR PEAS”
Claim · model-written summary
67.12% of total losses occurred in the first period of the second season.
Not reportedDirection
Verbatim
e0“The great deal of the total losses was incident in the first period in both seasons. i.e .. 81.8% and 67.12%. respectively.”
t0“SUGAR PEAS”
Claim · model-written summary
Reducing and non-reducing sugars decreased in storage, mainly in its first term.
- Taxon
- SUGAR PEASt0
- Treatment
- storagee0
- Outcome
- Reducing and non - reducing sugarse0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Qualifier
- flrst term of storagee0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“Reducing and non - reducing sugars decreased with storage and most of the reductions were incident in the flrst term of storage as well.”
t0“SUGAR PEAS”
Claim · model-written summary
Tray packaging minimized fresh weight and moisture losses, especially small trays.
- Taxon
- peasLathyrus oleraceuse0
- Treatment
- Packaging the peas pods in trayse0
- Outcome
- losses in fresh weight and moisture contente0
- Direction
- minimale0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Packaging the peas pods in trays. generally. conserved both losses in fresh weight and moisture content at minimal. especially in the small-sized trays.”
Claim · model-written summary
Package types did not differ significantly in chlorophyll conservation or consumer preference.
Verbatim
e0“Both types of packages did not significantly differ from one another in conserving the pods' chlorophyll contents as well as the consumer preference.”
t0“SUGAR PEAS”
Claim · model-written summary
Small packages retained reducing and total sugars better than large packages.
Verbatim
e0“The small- sized pacKage enhanced retaining the reducing and total sugars better than in the large - sized ones”
t0“SUGAR PEAS”
Claim · model-written summary
The abstract also states that neither package affected total sugar content.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“both packages did not affect pods' total sugars content”
t0“SUGAR PEAS”
The same questions in other papers
application · quality: grain · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Positive and negative results
3 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
storage · quality: grain · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
potassium · quality: sugar starch · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
application · quality: sugar starch · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Results agree
4 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 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.