Next Article in Journal
A Classifier Model Using Fine-Tuned Convolutional Neural Network and Transfer Learning Approaches for Prostate Cancer Detection
Previous Article in Journal
A Conversational Agent for Empowering People with Parkinson’s Disease in Exercising Through Motivation and Support
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Applied Sciences
Volume 15
Issue 1
10.3390/app15010224
applsci-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Communication

Effect of Gaseous Ozone and Hydrogen Peroxide Treatment on the Polyphenolic Profile of Tomato Fruits Grown Under Cover

by
Miłosz Zardzewiały
1,*,
Natalia Matłok
1,
Ireneusz Kapusta
2,
Tomasz Piechowiak
3,
Józef Gorzelany
1 and
Maciej Balawejder
3
1
Department of Food and Agriculture Production Engineering, University of Rzeszow, St. Zelwerowicza 4, 35-601 Rzeszów, Poland
2
Department of Food Technology and Human Nutrition, University of Rzeszow, St. Zelwerowicza 4, 35-601 Rzeszow, Poland
3
Department of Chemistry and Food Toxicology, University of Rzeszow, 1a Ćwiklińskiej Street, 35-601 Rzeszów, Poland
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Appl. Sci. 2025, 15(1), 224; https://doi.org/10.3390/app15010224
Submission received: 4 December 2024 / Revised: 26 December 2024 / Accepted: 27 December 2024 / Published: 30 December 2024
Browse Figure
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The aim of the study was to determine the effect of gaseous ozone, hydrogen peroxide and both factors used alternately on the profile of phenolic compounds of tomato fruits grown under cover. Phenolic compounds are natural substances, and their biosynthesis in plant tissues is affected by stress factors such as gaseous ozone and hydrogen peroxide. The experiment showed that the use of gaseous ozone at a dose of 2 ppm for 1.5 and 3 min significantly increased the total amount of phenolic compounds in tomato fruits compared to the control. In turn, in fruits obtained from plants to which hydrogen peroxide was applied at a concentration of 1 and 3% during vegetation, a lower amount of phenolic compounds was found compared to the control. In addition, the combined use of ozone and hydrogen peroxide in the case of four variants—2 ppm for 1.5 min + 1% H2O2; 2 ppm for 3 min + 1% H2O2; 2 ppm 1 min + 3% H2O2; 2 ppm 3 min + 3% H2O2—significantly increased the amount of phenolic compounds compared to the control.

Graphical Abstract

1. Introduction

Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) is a horticultural crop widely cultivated in both developed and developing countries due to the versatility of its fruits and their high nutritional and health-promoting value [1,2,3]. Tomato fruits contain significant amounts of fiber, minerals (potassium), glycoalkaloids and vitamins C and E [4,5,6,7]. In addition, they are a rich source of 30 phytochemicals, such as phenols, carotenoids and tocopherols. The main phenolic compounds found in tomato fruits are flavanones (naringenin glycosylated derivatives), flavonols (quercetin, kaempferol and their glycosylated derivatives), hydroxycinnamic acids (ferulic acid, chlorogenic acid, caffeic acid) and hydroxybenzoic acids (gallic acid, protocatechuic acid) [8,9]. These compounds provide numerous health benefits due to antioxidant, anticancer, antimicrobial, antimutagenic and anti-inflammatory properties, which is why tomato consumption is high in the world [10]. According to the World Tomato Processing Council (WTPC) report, more than 130 million tons of tomatoes are processed worldwide each year, which classifies them as one of the most popular and widely consumed vegetables in the world [11]. The largest tomato producers are China, India, Türkiye, the United States and Egypt [12].
The industrial production of tomatoes is strongly dependent on the cultivation methods and technologies used, which directly affect not only the size of the fruit yield but also their quality, mainly the content of bioactive compounds [13]. However, modern agriculture and the challenges of the EU Commission related to the introduction of the European Green Deal pose additional challenges for producers of these fruits related to the introduction of new, more ecological cultivation methods [14] which take into account the reduction of the use of fertilizers, and especially plant protection agents, which is an undoubted challenge in light of the high susceptibility of these plants to fungal diseases such as potato blight, alternariosis or gray mold [15,16,17]. One of the fungicidal and bactericidal agents used to support the protection of tomato plants against diseases may be gaseous ozone (O3). This gas is characterized by strong disinfecting and antibacterial properties [18,19]. So far, ozone has only been used for disinfecting the surfaces of food raw materials and for the surface disinfection of equipment [20,21,22]. However, as Matłok et al. [23] showed, the fumigation of raspberry plants with gaseous ozone can contribute to a reduction in the use of fungicides in the cultivation of these plants while maintaining the health of plants and the size of the fruit yield. Moreover, the authors proved that the ozonation process resulted in a modification of the content of bioactive compounds in the produced fruits by increasing the content of low-molecular-weight antioxidants and vitamin C in their composition. The effect of gaseous ozone on the improvement of the biological quality of the produced plant raw materials was also confirmed in the case of other fruits [24,25,26], herbal plants [27] and tomatoes [28].
The authors showed that cyclic ozonation during the growing season, while maintaining appropriate O3 concentrations and the time of exposure of plants to this gas in tomato plants, contributes to an increase in the total content of polyphenols in their composition, the biological activity of which has been well known in recent years [28]. However, in this context, the effect of the applied ozonation process is very interesting, not only on the total content of polyphenols but above all on the potential modification of their qualitative composition.
Hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) is defined as a reactive oxygen species (ROS) produced from molecular oxygen (O2) with relatively high stability and long half-life. Almeida et al. [29] reported that H2O2 is one of the ROS produced in plants under both biotic and abiotic conditions. Hydrogen peroxide acts as a messenger molecule involved in adaptive signaling, triggering tolerance to various abiotic stresses at low concentrations, but at high concentrations, it organizes programmed cell death [30]. Usually, abiotic stresses increase the production of ROS in the plant. Orabi et al. [31] reported that a low concentration of hydrogen peroxide could have positive effects on the plant growth, growth regulators, antioxidant enzyme activity, fruit yield and quality of tomato plants. The study by Khandaker et al. [32] reported that the exogenous application of H2O2 increased the plant growth, physiological activity and biochemical properties of apple fruits.
The aim of the study was to determine the effect of the cyclic process of ozonation and hydrogen peroxide spraying of Solanum lycopersicum L. plants using different O3 doses on the qualitative and quantitative composition of phenolic compounds in fruits.

2. Results and Discussion

Ozone is a known abiotic elicitor. As shown by previous studies [33], ozone has a significant effect, which varies depending on the applied dose, on fruits of various types, which retain the characteristics of living organisms at the time of the application of the ozonation process [34].
In most cases, ozone penetrating plant tissues causes an increased content of reactive oxygen species (ROS). This activates defense mechanisms thanks to which excess reactive oxygen species are removed in cellular systems. Depending on the applied dose, changes in the content of low-molecular-weight antioxidants, which include phenolic compounds, are observed. Fruits can be ozonated after harvesting or during their growth and ripening. The strategy of ozonation of whole plants allows for the activation of enzymatic systems of the whole plant, which can have a significant impact on the composition of bioactive compounds in the harvested fruit. The studies conducted have shown that the total content of phenolic compounds significantly depends on the ozone dose (Table 1). An increase in the total content of this group of compounds was noted after the application of a dose of 2 ppm and an ozonation time of 1.5 and 3 min. This increase was on average about ~10%.
The biosynthesis pathways of individual phenolic compounds are diverse, but the precursor is L-phenyl alanine [35], which, under the influence of Phenylalanine Ammonia-Lyase (PAL), undergoes a series of transformations towards specific phenolic compounds and then their glycosides.
The analysis of the available literature indicates that some authors observe changes in the total content of phenolic compounds without observing a significant change in the qualitative composition of the mixture of these compounds [36]. In the case of the ozonation of tomato plants, it was observed that the ozonation process intensified the biosynthesis of caffeic acid derivatives, especially Caffeic acid O-glucoside I, p-Coumaric acid O-glucoside I. This is an interesting observation in light of the content of caffeic acid, which is a precursor of these derivatives. It should be noted that the increased biosynthesis of caffeic acid derivatives affected the metabolic pathways of other compounds, especially Quercetin 3-O-rutinoside-7-O-pentoside. These changes may be a response to the ability of individual phenolic compounds to remove selected forms of oxygen generated by gaseous ozone. This fact is confirmed by the analysis of the composition of phenolic compounds in fruits exposed to hydrogen peroxide solution (Table 2). Hydrogen peroxide solution penetrating plant tissues caused a significant decrease in the total content of phenolic compounds. The intensity of the biosynthesis of selected phenolic compounds was also modified. In the case of caffeic acid derivatives, the most significant changes were noted. In the case of Caffeic acid O-glucoside, the largest decreases were noted. This clearly indicates that hydrogen peroxide affects plant defense mechanisms in a different way than gaseous ozone. This is understandable because hydrogen peroxide occurs naturally in plant tissues as a response to the occurrence of agrophages [37], and its transformation is particularly intensive in peroxisomes [38].
Interesting results were obtained by using hydrogen peroxide and gaseous ozone fumigation together (Table 3). It was observed that the use of 1% hydrogen peroxide in combination with gaseous ozone at a concentration of 2 ppm for 1.5 min caused the greatest increase in the content of phenolic compounds, which amounted to ~20%. This indicates a certain synergy of these two factors, however, occurring in a narrow range of concentrations of these factors. Increasing the ozonation time or hydrogen peroxide concentration caused this increase to be smaller (Table 3). Selected phenolic compound biosynthesis pathways were also modified, similarly to the use of only ozonation or hydrogen peroxide. Large differences were observed for caffeic acid derivatives, but in the case of other compounds, the results were also diversified, especially for p-Coumaric acid O-glucoside.
The synergistic interaction between gaseous ozone (O3) and hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) solution plays a significant role in promoting the biosynthesis of phenolic compounds in tomato fruits. Phenolic compounds are crucial secondary metabolites with antioxidant properties, beneficial for plant defense. Combined treatment with O3 and H2O2 leads to a marked enhancement in phenolic content, surpassing the effects observed when either is applied alone. This phenomenon can be explained by the activation of key enzymes involved in the plant’s metabolic and defensive responses, specifically phenylalanine ammonia-lyase (PAL), catalase (CAT) and superoxide dismutase (SOD). Additionally, ozone dissolved in cellular fluids can be scavenged by phenolic compounds rich in unsaturated structures, which are susceptible to direct attack by this reactive oxygen species (ROS). This further influences the differences in the profile of this group of compounds [39].
It should be noted that the use of these factors can significantly increase the value of consumed fruit resulting from the increased content of phenolic compounds; however, after conducting additional studies, it can also affect the use of these methods to protect tomato plants from fungal pathogens. This is due to the fact that ozone and hydrogen peroxide have strong disinfecting effects, which can be used to protect tomato plants during growth.
Scientists conducted a study on the effect of hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) on the quality of wax apple fruit (Syzygium samarangense (Blume) Merr. & Perry), a widely cultivated fruit tree in Southeast Asia. Based on the results of the study, they found that once a week, spraying with hydrogen peroxide at a concentration of 20 mM increased the content of organic chemical compounds from the polyphenol group in the analyzed fruits compared to the control variant [32]. In addition, gaseous ozone applied during the vegetation period increased the concentration of polyphenols in tomato fruits [40], kiwi [41] red peppers, cucumbers or zucchini [42].

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Research Material

The research material consisted of tomato plants Solanum lycopersicum variety ‘Remiz’ grown in a foil tunnel according to the methodology described in the work of Za-rdzewiały et al. [28]. During growth and development, the plants were subjected to the action of elicitors: ozone (O3) and hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) in order to modify the biological properties of the produced fruit.

3.2. Ozone Treatment of Tomato Plants

Tomato plants during growth, i.e., from the beginning of May to the end of October, were fumigated with ozone gas once a week at a dose of:
  • ▪ 0 ppm 0 min (control);
  • ▪ 2 ppm 1 min;
  • ▪ 2 ppm 1.5 min;
  • ▪ 2 ppm 3 min.
The plant ozonation and dose selection process was carried out using Korona L5 ozone generator (Korona Science and Implementation Laboratory, Piotrków Trybunalski) according to the methodology described in the work by Zardzewiały et al. [28].

3.3. Spraying Plants with a Solution of Hydrogen Peroxide

During the experiment, tomato plants were subjected to cyclic (once a week from the beginning of May to the end of October) foliar spraying with H2O2 solutions of the following concentrations:
  • ▪ control,
  • ▪ 1%;
  • ▪ 3%,
The procedure for foliar application and the selection of concentrations of H2O2 solutions is presented in the work by Zardzewiały et al. [28].

3.4. Combined Method: Fumigation of Plants with Ozone Gas and Spraying with Hydrogen Peroxide Solution

In order to determine the potential synergism of both tested elicitor factors, tomato plants were subjected to cyclic treatments during growth and development, i.e., fumigation with gaseous ozone and spraying with hydrogen peroxide solution. Each time after the ozonation process in the case of the “ozonation + hydrogen peroxide” variant, after ventilating the foil tunnel and obtaining an ozone concentration close to zero, tomato plants were sprayed with 1% and 3% hydrogen peroxide solution. The variable factors used for the “ozonation + hydrogen peroxide” variant were used once a week from the beginning of May to the end of October. The following variants were tested:
  • ▪ Control
  • ▪ O3 (2ppm 1 min) +1%H2O2
  • ▪ O3 (2ppm 1.5 min) +1%H2O2
  • ▪ O3 (2ppm 3 min) +1%H2O2
  • ▪ O3 (2ppm 1 min) +3%H2O2
  • ▪ O3 (2ppm 1.5 min) +3%H2O2
  • ▪ O3 (2ppm 3 min) +3%H2O2.
Treatments combining the O3 fumigation process and H2O2 solution spraying were performed according to the procedure described in the work by Zardzewiały et al. [28].

3.5. Total Phenolic and Profile of Phenolic Compounds

-
Total phenolic content analysis
The tomato extract (5 μL) was mixed on the plate well with 95 μL of distilled water, 10 μL of Folin–Ciocalteu reagent and 20 μL of 20% Na2CO3. After 30 min of incubation, the absorbance was measured at 700 nm, and the obtained results were expressed as gallic acid equivalent per 100 g of fruit tissue.
Tomato fruits collected at harvest maturity from the tested experimental variants were analyzed to determine the effect of the tested factors on the phenolic compound profile. The phenolic compound profile in tomato fruits was determined using the UPLC-PDA-MS/MS method.
-
Profile of phenolic compounds
The determination of polyphenolic compounds was carried out using the ultra-performance liquid chromatography (UPLC) Waters ACQUITY system (Waters, Milford, MA, USA). The UPLC system was equipped with a binary pump manager, column manager, sample manager, photodiode array (PDA) detector and tandem quadrupole mass spectrometer (TQD) with an electrospray ionization (ESI) source. The separation of polyphenols was performed using a 1.7 µm, 100 mm × 2.1 mm UPLC BEH RP C18 column (Waters, Milford, MA, USA). For the investigation, the mobile phase consisted of 0.1% formic acid in water, v/v (solvent A) and 0.1% formic acid in 40% acetonitrile, v/v (solvent were used). The flow rate was kept constant at 0.35 mL/min for a total run time of 8 min. The system was run with the following gradient program: from 0 min 5% B, from 0 to 8 min linear to 100% B and from 8 to 9.5 min for washing and back to initial conditions. The injection volume of the samples was 5 µL, and the column was supported at 50 °C. The following TQD parameters were used: cone voltage of 30 V, capillary voltage of 3500 V, source and desolvation temperature 120 °C and 350 °C, respectively, and desolvation gas flow rate of 800 L/h. The characterization of the individual polyphenolic compounds was performed on the basis of the retention time, mass-to-charge ratio, fragment ions and the comparison of data obtained with commercial standards and literature findings. Obtained data were processed in the Waters MassLynx v.4.1 software (Waters, Milford, MA, USA) [43]. See Supplementary Materials S1.
The following chemicals were used to determine the polyphenol profile of tomato fruit:
-
Folin–Ciocalteu reagent, (Pol-Aura, Zabrze, Poland)
-
sodium carbonate, purity 99,5% (Sigma–Aldrich, Saint Louis, MO, USA)
-
gallic acid, purity 99,85% (Sigma–Aldrich, Saint Louis, MO, USA)
-
0.1% formic acid, pure about 85% (Sigma–Aldrich, Saint Louis, MO, USA)
-
40% acetonitrile, purity ≥ 99.5% (Pol-Aura, Zabrze, Poland)

3.6. Statistical Analysis

The obtained results were analyzed using the STATISTICA 13.1 software (StatSoft, Palo Alto, CA, USA). One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey’s post hoc test (α = 0.05) were used to show the differences between the effects of the applied variable factors on the analyzed chemical properties.

4. Conclusions

The presented paper describes the influence of factors such as fumigation with gaseous ozone in different doses and spraying with hydrogen peroxide in different concentrations on the quality of tomato fruit grown under cover by determining the profile of phenolic compounds for different combinations of applied factors. In the case of gaseous ozone, it was found that the total content of phenolic compounds increased significantly after the application of an ozonation dose of 2 ppm 1.5 min and 2 ppm 3 min. In turn, spraying tomato plants with hydrogen peroxide in concentrations of 1 and 3% during their vegetation did not significantly affect the total content of phenolic compounds. Moreover, using hydrogen peroxide spray at a concentration of 1% and fumigation with gaseous ozone in a dose of 2 ppm 1.5 min on plants during vegetation alternately achieved the best results in the form of an increase in the total amount of phenolic compounds compared to other variants.
The results of the study indicate that the selected doses of the analyzed variable factors effectively influence the improvement of parameters that determine the quality of the analyzed fruit. It should be noted that in addition to changes in the total content of phenolic compounds, significant changes in the proportions of individual substances, especially caffeic acid derivatives, were observed. This indicates a selective modification of the biosynthesis paths of selected phenolic compounds by the applied factors and their combination. In future studies, a detailed analysis of this process is planned in order to explain which paths are modified, how they are modified and what are the relationships between individual phenols and the variable factors used.
The conducted experiments are a valuable source of knowledge on ozone doses and hydrogen peroxide concentrations that improve the quality of plant raw material. Further research will focus on the use of the tested variable factors in agricultural practice, in particular in organic tomato cultivation under cover.

Supplementary Materials

Please add: The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/app15010224/s1, S1: Chromatogram of tomato fruit extract.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, M.Z. and M.B., methodology, M.Z., M.B. and I.K.; validation, M.B. and I.K.; formal analysis, M.Z. and J.G.; investigation, M.Z., T.P. and J.G.; resources, M.Z.; data curation, M.Z. and I.K.; writing—original draft preparation, M.Z. and M.B.; writing—review and editing, M.B. and N.M.; visualization, N.M. and T.P.; supervision, M.B. and J.G. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available in this article.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Bhandari, R.; Neupane, N.; Adhikari, D.P. Climatic change and its impact on tomato (Lycopersicum esculentum L.) production in plain area of Nepal. Environ. Chall. 2021, 4, 100129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Ali, M.Y.; Sina, A.A.I.; Khandker, S.S.; Neesa, L.; Tanvir, E.M.; Kabir, A.; Khalil, M.I.; Gan, S.H. Nutritional Composition and Bioactive Compounds in Tomatoes and Their Impact on Human Health and Disease: A Review. Foods 2020, 10, 45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Saini, R.K.; Rengasamy, K.R.R.; Mahomoodally, F.M.; Keum, Y.S. Protective effects of lycopene in cancer, cardiovascular, and neurodegenerative diseases: An update on epidemiological and mechanistic perspectives. Pharmacol. Res. 2020, 155, 104730. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Helmja, K.; Vaher, M.; Püssa, T.; Raudsepp, P.; Kaljurand, M. Evaluation of antioxidative capability of the tomato (Solanumlycopersicum) skin constituents by capillary electrophoresisand high-performance liquid chromatography. Electrophoresis 2008, 29, 3980–3988. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Barros, L.; Dueñas, M.; Pinela, J.; Carvalho, A.M.; Buelga, C.S.; Ferreira, I.C.F.R. Characterization and quantification of phenolic compounds infour tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum L.) farmers’ varietiesin northeastern Portugal homegardens. Plant Foods Hum. Nutr. 2012, 67, 229–234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Capanoglu, E.; Beekwilder, J.; Boyacioglu, D.; Hall, R.; de Vos, R. Changes in antioxidant and metabolite profiles during production of tomato paste. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2008, 56, 964–973. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Vallverdú-Queralt, A.; Medina-Remón, A.; Casals-Ribes, I.; Andres-Lacueva, C.; Waterhouse, A.; Lamuela-Raventos, R. Effect of tomato industrial processing on phenolic profile and hydrophilic antioxidant capacity. LWT-Food Sci. Technol 2012, 47, 154–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Lenucci, M.S.; Cadinu, D.; Taurino, M.; Piro, G.; Dalessandro, G. Antioxidant composition in cherry and high-pigment tomato cultivars. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2006, 54, 2606–2613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Slimestad, R.; Verheul, M. Review of flavonoids and other phenolics from fruits of different tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) cultivars. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2009, 89, 1255–1270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Ba, W.; Xu, W.; Deng, Z.; Zhang, B.; Zheng, L.; Li, H. The Antioxidant and Anti-Inflammatory Effects of the Main Carotenoids from Tomatoes via Nrf2 and NF-κB Signaling Pathways. Nutrients 2023, 15, 4652. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Jiménez Bolaño, D.C.; Insuasty, D.; Rodríguez Macías, J.D.; Grande-Tovar, C.D. Potential Use of Tomato Peel, a Rich Source of Lycopene, for Cancer Treatment. Molecules 2024, 29, 3079. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Guan, Z.; Biswas, T.; Wu, F. The U.S. Tomato Industry: An Overview of Production and Trade. EDIS, 2018; 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Collins, E.J.; Bowyer, C.; Tsouza, A.; Chopra, M. Tomatoes: An Extensive Review of the Associated Health Impacts of Tomatoes and Factors That Can Affect Their Cultivation. Biology 2022, 11, 239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Bell, J.; Paula, L.; Dodd, T.; Németh, S.; Nanou, C.; Mega, V.; Campos, P. EU ambition to build the world’s leading bioeconomy—Uncertain times demand innovative and sustainable solutions. New Biotechnol. 2018, 40, 25–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Dziągwa-Becker, M.; Oleszek, M.; Zielińska, S.; Oleszek, W. Chalcones—Features, Identification Techniques, Attributes, and Application in Agriculture. Molecules 2024, 29, 2247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Montenegro, I.; Madrid, A.; Cuellar, M.; Seeger, M.; Alfaro, J.F.; Besoain, X.; Martínez, J.P.; Ramirez, I.; Olguín, Y.; Valenzuela, M. Biopesticide Activity from Drimanic Compounds to Control Tomato Pathogens. Molecules 2018, 23, 2053. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Carletti, L.; Botondi, R.; Moscetti, R.; Stella, E.; Monacra, D.; Cecchini, M.; Massantini, R. Use of ozone in sanitation and storage of fresh fruits and vegetables. J. Food Agric. Environ. 2013, 11, 585–589. [Google Scholar]
  18. Zhang, X.; Zhang, Z.; Wang, L.; Zhang, Z.; Li, J.; Zhao, C. Impact of ozone on quality of strawberry during cold storage. Front. Agric. China 2011, 5, 356–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Selma, M.V.; Ibáñez, A.M.; Cantwell, M.; Suslow, T. Reduction by gaseous ozone of Salmonella and microbial flora associated with fresh-cut cantaloupe. Food Microbiol. 2008, 25, 558–565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Pandiselvam, R.; Subhashini, S.; Priya, E.B.; Kothakota, A.; Ramesh, S.; Shahir, S. Ozone based food preservation: A promising green technology for enhanced food safety. Ozone Sci. Eng. 2018, 41, 17–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Dubey, P.; Singh, A.; Yousuf, O. Ozonation: An Evolving Disinfectant Technology for the Food Industry. Food Bioproc Tech. 2022, 15, 2102–2113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Sarron, E.; Gadonna-Widehem, P.; Aussenac, T. Ozone Treatments for Preserving Fresh Vegetables Quality: A Critical Review. Foods 2021, 10, 605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Matłok, N.; Piechowiak, T.; Szostek, M.; Kuboń, M.; Neuberger, P.; Kapusta, I.; Balawejder, M. Modification of Fungicide Treatment Needs and Antioxidant Content as a Result of Real-Time Ozonation of Raspberry Plants. Molecules 2024, 29, 3949. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Ullrich, L.; Gillich, E.; André, A.; Panarese, S.; Imhaus, A.F.; Fieseler, L.; Chetschik, I. Influence of Ozone Treatment during Storage on Odour-Active Compounds, Total Titratable Acidity, and Ascorbic Acid in Oranges and Bananas. Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 10885. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Miller, F.A.; Fundo, J.F.; Garcia, E.; Silva, C.L.M.; Brandão, T.R.S. Effect of Gaseous Ozone Process on Cantaloupe Melon Peel: Assessment of Quality and Antilisterial Indicators. Foods 2021, 10, 727. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Sachadyn-Król, M.; Agriopoulou, S. Ozonation as a Method of Abiotic Elicitation Improving the Health-Promoting Properties of Plant Products—A Review. Molecules 2020, 25, 2416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Madheshiya, P.; Gupta, G.S.; Sahoo, A.; Tiwari, S. Role of Elevated Ozone on Development and Metabolite Contents of Lemongrass [Cymbopogon flexuosus (Steud.) (Wats.)]. Metabolites 2023, 13, 597. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Zardzewiały, M.; Matłok, N.; Piechowiak, T.; Saletnik, B.; Balawejder, M.; Gorzelany, J. Preliminary Tests of Tomato Plant Protection Method with Ozone Gas Fumigation Supported with Hydrogen Peroxide Solution and Its Effect on Some Fruit Parameters. Sustainability 2024, 16, 3481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Almeida, J.M.; Fidalgo, F.; Confraria, A.; Santos, A.; Pires, H.; Santos, I. Effect of hydrogen peroxide on catalase gene expression, isoform activities and levels in leaves of potato sprayed with homobrassinolide and ultrastructural changes in mesophyll cells. Funct. Plant Biol. 2005, 32, 707–720. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Cakmak, I.; Marschner, H. Effect of zinc nutritional-status on activities of superoxide radical and hydrogen-peroxide scavenging enzymes in bean-leaves. Plant Soil. 1993, 155, 127–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Orabi, S.A.; Dawood, M.G.; Salman, S.R. Comparative study between the physiological role of hydrogen peroxide and salicylic acid in alleviating the harmful effect of low temperature on tomato plants grown under sand-ponic culture. Sci. Agric. 2015, 9, 49–59. [Google Scholar]
  32. Khandaker, M.M.; Boyce, A.N.; Osman, N. The influence of hydrogen peroxide on the growth, development and quality of wax apple (Syzygium samarangense, [Blume] Merrill & L. M. Perry var. jambu madu) fruits. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 2012, 53, 101–110. [Google Scholar]
  33. Lee, J.-H.; Goto, E. Ozone control as a novel method to improve health-promoting bioactive compounds in red leaf lettuce (Lactuca sativa L.). Front. Plant Sci. 2022, 13, 1045239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Nath, A.; Mukhim, K.; Swer, T.; Dutta, D.; Verma, N.; Deka, B.; Gangwar, B. A Review on Application of Ozone in the Food Processing and Packaging. J. Food Prod. Dev. Packag. 2014, 1, 7–21. [Google Scholar]
  35. Marchica, A.; Cotrozzi, L.; Detti, R.; Lorenzini, G.; Pellegrini, E.; Petersen, M.; Nali, C. The Biosynthesis of Phenolic Compounds Is an Integrated Defence Mechanism to Prevent Ozone Injury in Salvia officinalis. Antioxidants 2020, 9, 1274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Zhao, J.-C.; Miao, A.O.; He, X.-Q.; Li, W.-Z.; Deng, L.-L.; Zeng, K.-F.; Ming, J. Changes in phenolic content, composition and antioxidant activity of blood oranges during cold and on-tree storage. J. Integr. Agric. 2022, 21, 3669–3683. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Petrov, V.D.; Van Breusegem, F. Hydrogen peroxide-a central hub for information flow in plant cells. AoB Plants 2012, 2012, pls014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Wu, P.C.; Chen, Y.K.; Yago, J.I.; Chung, K.R. Peroxisomes Implicated in the Biosynthesis of Siderophores and Biotin, Cell Wall Integrity, Autophagy, and Response to Hydrogen Peroxide in the Citrus Pathogenic Fungus Alternaria alternata. Front. Microbiol. 2021, 12, 645792. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Tentscher, P.R.; Bourgin, M.; von Gunten, U. Ozonation of Para-Substituted Phenolic Compounds Yields p-Benzoquinones, Other Cyclic α,β-Unsaturated Ketones, and Substituted Catechols. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2018, 52, 4763–4773. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Rodoni, L.; Casadei, N.; Concellón, A.; Chaves, A.; Vicente, A.R. Effect of short-term ozone treatments on tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) fruit quality and cell wall degradation. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2010, 58, 594–599. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  41. Minas, I.S.; Karaoglanidis, G.S.; Manganaris, G.A.; Vasilakakis, M. Effect of ozone application during cold storage of kiwifruit on the development of stem-end rot caused by Botrytis cinerea. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 2010, 58, 203–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Glowacz, M.; Colgan, R.; Rees, D. Influence of continuous exposure to gaseous ozone on the quality of red bell peppers, cucumbers and zucchini. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 2015, 99, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Kapusta, I.; Cebulak, T.; Oszmiański, J. The anthocyanins profile of red grape cultivars growing in south-east Poland (Subcarpathia region). J. Food Meas. Charact. 2017, 11, 1863–1873. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Table 1. Individual phenolic compounds identified by UPLC-PDA-MS/MS in tomato fruits cultivated under cover after the ozone treatment (mg.100 g−1 d.w.).
Table 1. Individual phenolic compounds identified by UPLC-PDA-MS/MS in tomato fruits cultivated under cover after the ozone treatment (mg.100 g−1 d.w.).
CompoundRtλmax[M-H] m/zVariant
minnmMSMS/MSControl2 ppm
1 min		2 ppm
1.5 min		2 ppm
3 min
1Caffeic acid O-glucoside I2.293273411794.123.484.623.65
2p-Coumaric acid O-glucoside I2.393023251632272.763.002.35
3Caffeic acid O-glucoside II2.513243411792612.082.422.33
4Caffeic acid O-glucoside III2.663293411790.890.630.870.86
5Ferulic acid O-glucoside2.733143551930.640.370.791.13
6Caffeic acid O-glucoside IV2.853243411790.720.700.831.18
73-O-caffeoylquinic acid2.953273531913.184.673.784.32
85-O-caffeoylquinic acid3.093273531911.741.632.091.96
9p-Coumaric acid O-glucoside II3.163203251630.800.970.830.73
10Caffeic acid3.273271791190.530.560.560.61
11Quercetin 3-O-rutinoside-7-O-pentoside4.19255.354741609.3011.551.511.391.34
12Quercetin 3-O-rutinoside4.56255.3556093011.431.211.691.63
Total20.50 ± 0.37 a20.57 ± 0.29 a22.86 ± 0.30 b22.07 ± 0.02 b
NOTE: mean values marked with different lowercase letters are significantly different at p < 0.05.
Table 2. Individual phenolic compounds identified by UPLC-PDA-MS/MS in tomato fruits cultivated under cover after the H2O2 treatment (mg.100 g−1 d.w.).
Table 2. Individual phenolic compounds identified by UPLC-PDA-MS/MS in tomato fruits cultivated under cover after the H2O2 treatment (mg.100 g−1 d.w.).
CompoundRtλmax[M-H] m/zVariant
minnmMSMS/MSControl1% H2O23% H2O2
1Caffeic acid O-glucoside I2.293273411794.123.663.34
2p-Coumaric acid O-glucoside I2.393023251632.272.192.35
3Caffeic acid O-glucoside II2.513243411792.612.222.67
4Caffeic acid O-glucoside III2.663293411790.890.730.83
5Ferulic acid O-glucoside2.733143551930.640.411.01
6Caffeic acid O-glucoside IV2.853243411790.720.710.74
73-O-caffeoylquinic acid2.953273531913.183.222.65
85-O-caffeoylquinic acid3.093273531911.741.751.67
9p-Coumaric acid O-glucoside II3.163203251630.800.670.64
10Caffeic acid3.273271791190.530.510.51
11Quercetin 3-O-rutinoside-7-O-pentoside4.19255.354741609.3011.551.281.35
12Quercetin 3-O-rutinoside4.56255.3556093011.431.411.69
Total20.50 ± 0.37 a18.79 ± 0.24 a19.45 ± 0.27 a
NOTE: mean values marked with different lowercase letters are significantly different at p < 0.05.
Table 3. Individual phenolic compounds identified by UPLC-PDA-MS/MS in tomato fruits cultivated under cover after combined ozone and H2O2 treatment (mg.100 g−1 d.w.).
Table 3. Individual phenolic compounds identified by UPLC-PDA-MS/MS in tomato fruits cultivated under cover after combined ozone and H2O2 treatment (mg.100 g−1 d.w.).
CompoundRtλmax[M-H] m/zVariant
minNmMSMS/MSControl2 ppm 1 min
1% H2O2		2 ppm 1.5 min 1 % H2O2 2 ppm 3 min
1% H2O2		2 ppm 1 min
3% H2O2		2 ppm 1.5 min 3 % H2O22 ppm 3 min
3% H2O2
1Caffeic acid O-glucoside I2.293273411794.123.983.563.883.843.854.00
2p-Coumaric acid O-glucoside I2.393023251632.272.903.802.953.142.412.61
3Caffeic acid O-glucoside II2.513243411792.611.891.811.361.543.082.27
4Caffeic acid O-glucoside III2.663293411790.890.811.040.890.910.781.06
5Ferulic acid O-glucoside2.733143551930.640.601.050.530.440.920.94
6Caffeic acid O-glucoside IV2.853243411790.720.860.880.770.790.920.91
73-O-caffeoylquinic acid2.953273531913.182.815.635.464.502.874.29
85-O-caffeoylquinic acid3.093273531911.741.712.022.211.861.741.85
9p-Coumaric acid O-glucoside II3.163203251630.800.860.950.771.110.650.80
10Caffeic acid3.273271791190.530.600.570.640.810.590.67
11Quercetin 3-O-rutinoside-7-O-pentoside4.19255.354741609.3011.551.311.981.652.171.271.42
12Quercetin 3-O-rutinoside4.56255.3556093011.431.402.152.702.381.491.86
Total20.50 ± 0.37 a19.73 ± 0.43 a25.42 ± 0.35 b23.81 ± 0.20 b23.49 ± 0.20 b20.57 ± 0.17 a22.69 ± 0.39 b
NOTE: mean values marked with different lowercase letters are significantly different at p < 0.05.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Zardzewiały, M.; Matłok, N.; Kapusta, I.; Piechowiak, T.; Gorzelany, J.; Balawejder, M. Effect of Gaseous Ozone and Hydrogen Peroxide Treatment on the Polyphenolic Profile of Tomato Fruits Grown Under Cover. Appl. Sci. 2025, 15, 224. https://doi.org/10.3390/app15010224

AMA Style

Zardzewiały M, Matłok N, Kapusta I, Piechowiak T, Gorzelany J, Balawejder M. Effect of Gaseous Ozone and Hydrogen Peroxide Treatment on the Polyphenolic Profile of Tomato Fruits Grown Under Cover. Applied Sciences. 2025; 15(1):224. https://doi.org/10.3390/app15010224

Chicago/Turabian Style

Zardzewiały, Miłosz, Natalia Matłok, Ireneusz Kapusta, Tomasz Piechowiak, Józef Gorzelany, and Maciej Balawejder. 2025. "Effect of Gaseous Ozone and Hydrogen Peroxide Treatment on the Polyphenolic Profile of Tomato Fruits Grown Under Cover" Applied Sciences 15, no. 1: 224. https://doi.org/10.3390/app15010224

APA Style

Zardzewiały, M., Matłok, N., Kapusta, I., Piechowiak, T., Gorzelany, J., & Balawejder, M. (2025). Effect of Gaseous Ozone and Hydrogen Peroxide Treatment on the Polyphenolic Profile of Tomato Fruits Grown Under Cover. Applied Sciences, 15(1), 224. https://doi.org/10.3390/app15010224

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop