2002New Zealand Journal of Crop and Horticultural ScienceOpen access

Effect of preharvest bagging on fruit quality and postharvest physiology of pears (Pyrus communis)

Cassandro Vidal Talamini do Amarante, Nigel H. Banks, Shane Max

Open full text 72 citations

Abstract

Abstract Preharvest bagging of pear fruit ( Pyrus communis L. ‘Doyenne du Comice') with micro‐perforated polyethylene bags c. 30 days after full bloom did not affect fruit size and weight, density, maturity, and flesh content of N, P, K, Ca, and Mg. Bagged fruit had a greener and lighter skin colour than non‐bagged fruit, whereas the development of blush on the sunny side was not different between treatments. Bagged fruit had less cuticle deposition, whereas the wax content of the cuticle was not different between treatments. Fruit skin permeance to water ( P ‘ H2O ) and fruit weight loss were not different between treatments. Permeance to CO 2 ( P‘ co 2 ) and O 2 ( P‘ co 2 ) were lower for bagged than for non‐bagged fruit. Accordingly, internal partial pressure of O 2 (p i o2 ) was lower and internal partial pressure of CO 2 (p i co2 ) was higher for bagged than for non‐bagged fruit. However, these differences in fruit internal atmosphere between treatments were not large enough to result in significant differences in rates of skin background colour change and respiration during shelf life after 8 weeks in cold storage. With prolonged cold storage the differences between treatments in fruit skin background colour were reduced (bagged fruit de‐greened more than non‐bagged fruit) while the differences in firmness were increased (bagged fruit had more substantial softening than non‐bagged fruit). Fruit bagging did not affect the incidence of senescent scald, senescent breakdown, and diseases after 6 months in cold storage followed by 7 days of shelf life.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Abstract Preharvest bagging of pear fruit ( Pyrus communis L. ‘Doyenne du Comice') with micro‐perforated polyethylene bags c. 30 days after full bloom did not affect fruit size and weight, density, maturity, and flesh content of N, P, K, Ca, and Mg. Bagged fruit had a greener and lighter skin colour than non‐bagged fruit, whereas the development of blush on the sunny side was not different between treatments. Bagged fruit had less cuticle deposition, whereas the wax content of the cuticle was not different between treatments. Fruit skin permeance to water ( P ‘ H2O ) and fruit weight loss were not different between treatments. Permeance to CO 2 ( P‘ co 2 ) and O 2 ( P‘ co 2 ) were lower for bagged than for non‐bagged fruit. Accordingly, internal partial pressure of O 2 (p i o2 ) was lower and internal partial pressure of CO 2 (p i co2 ) was higher for bagged than for non‐bagged fruit. However, these differences in fruit internal atmosphere between treatments were not large enough to result in significant differences in rates of skin background colour change and respiration during shelf life after 8 weeks in cold storage. With prolonged cold storage the differences between treatments in fruit skin background colour were reduced (bagged fruit de‐greened more than non‐bagged fruit) while the differences in firmness were increased (bagged fruit had more substantial softening than non‐bagged fruit). Fruit bagging did not affect the incidence of senescent scald, senescent breakdown, and diseases after 6 months in cold storage followed by 7 days of shelf life.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 72 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Abstract Preharvest bagging of pear fruit ( Pyrus communis L. ‘Doyenne du Comice') with micro‐perforated polyethylene bags c. 30 days after full bloom did not affect fruit size and weight, density, maturity, and flesh content of N, P, K, Ca, and Mg. Bagged fruit had a greener and lighter skin colour than non‐bagged fruit, whereas the development of blush on the sunny side was not different between treatments. Bagged fruit had less cuticle deposition, whereas the wax content of the cuticle was not different between treatments. Fruit skin permeance to water ( P ‘ H2O ) and fruit weight loss were not different between treatments. Permeance to CO 2 ( P‘ co 2 ) and O 2 ( P‘ co 2 ) were lower for bagged than for non‐bagged fruit. Accordingly, internal partial pressure of O 2 (p i o2 ) was lower and internal partial pressure of CO 2 (p i co2 ) was higher for bagged than for non‐bagged fruit. However, these differences in fruit internal atmosphere between treatments were not large enough to result in significant differences in rates of skin background colour change and respiration during shelf life after 8 weeks in cold storage. With prolonged cold storage the differences between treatments in fruit skin background colour were reduced (bagged fruit de‐greened more than non‐bagged fruit) while the differences in firmness were increased (bagged fruit had more substantial softening than non‐bagged fruit). Fruit bagging did not affect the incidence of senescent scald, senescent breakdown, and diseases after 6 months in cold storage followed by 7 days of shelf life.

Key concepts: Preharvest, Postharvest, Pyrus communis, Horticulture, PEAR, Biology, Botany

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Effect of preharvest bagging on fruit quality and postharvest physiology of pears (Pyrus communis) — Research Paper | ScholarLens