The Influence of Storage Technologies on the Quality and Storability of Blackcurrant (Ribes nigrum) Tihope cv.
by
, , , , , and
Anna Skorupińska
1,*
,
Krzysztof P. Rutkowski
1,
Zbigniew B. Jóźwiak
1,
Monika Mieszczakowska-Frąc
1,
Ewa Ropelewska
1,
Anna Wrzodak
1,
Justyna Szwejda-Grzybowska
1 and
Agnieszka Masny
2 1
Fruit and Vegetables Storage and Processing Department, The National Institute of Horticultural Research, Konstytucji 3 Maja 1/3, 96-100 Skierniewice, Poland
2
Department of Horticultural Crop Breeding, The National Institute of Horticultural Research, Konstytucji 3 Maja 1/3, 96-100 Skierniewice, Poland
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Agriculture 2025, 15(23), 2449; https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture15232449
Submission received: 8 October 2025
/
Revised: 17 November 2025
/
Accepted: 22 November 2025
/
Published: 26 November 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Adapting Horticultural Plant Cultivation Technology and Storage to Changing Conditions)
Abstract
The objective of this study was to evaluate the changes in the fruit quality of blackcurrant ‘Tihope’ cv. during storage in regular atmosphere (RA), controlled atmosphere (CA), and modified atmosphere packaging (MAP). Flesh firmness (elasticity), total soluble solids, titratable acidity, content of vitamin C, polyphenols, sugars, and antioxidant capacity were measured at harvest, after storage, and after shelf life (1 day at 18 °C or 2 days at 10 °C). The incidence of storage disorders and diseases was also monitored. Additionally, the sensory quality of the stored fruit was also analysed. The fruit of the ‘Tihope’ cultivar can be stored at 0 °C, in a regular atmosphere, up to 20 days without any negative effect on its quality. Storage in a controlled atmosphere or in MAP packaging allows the extension of the storage period of blackcurrants even up to 33 days, thereby delaying the occurrence of fruit damage and loss of firmness. Fruit stored 33 days in CA showed almost 2.5 times higher firmness than fruit stored in RA. After storage, vitamin C, polyphenols, sugars, and antioxidant activity remained at a high level similar to those in the harvest period.
1. Introduction
Blackcurrant (Ribes nigrum L.) is a species commonly cultivated in many temperate-climate countries. Poland is one of the leading producers of blackcurrant fruit and one of its main exporters, also in processed form. According to FAOSTAT data [1] (accessed 15 April 2024), in 2021 and 2022, the production of currants (including blackcurrants) amounted to 152,000 tonnes and 145,800 tonnes, respectively.
Most blackcurrant fruits are processed and consumed as juices, nectars, jams, or purees, but fresh fruit can also be a valuable addition to a healthy diet. Blackcurrants contain, among others, minerals and antioxidant compounds, mostly vitamin C, anthocyanins, and flavonols [2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13]. Although the amount of polyphenols and antioxidant activity decreases during processing (drying, juice production, etc.) the final content depends on the parameters of the process. It is also important that side products from the processing industry could be a good source of bioactive compounds. Michalska et al. [14,15] reported that blackcurrant pomace powders are still a valuable source of polyphenolic compounds, among which anthocyanins are the dominant group.
Fresh berry fruits are perishable and have a short postharvest life. Storage allows the extension of the fruit processing period as well as the availability of fresh fruit on the market.
For the fresh fruit market, the fruit must be uniform, appropriately coloured for the cultivar, firm, and free of decay and mechanical injury. The berries should be harvested fully mature but not overripe. Fruits intended for storage and then to the fresh market should be picked with the stem, carefully to avoid mechanical damage. Blackcurrants belong to ‘soft fruit’, which are characterized by a high metabolic rate and are perishable (the main postharvest disease is grey mould rot—Botrytis cinerea) [16]. To reduce metabolic activity and fungal development, it is advisable to quickly cool the fruit after harvesting to the storage temperature. Because blackcurrant fruits are not sensitive to low temperature, the recommended storage temperature is in the range of −0.5 to 0 °C at a relative humidity (RH) of 95% [17,18]. Batzer and Helm [19] reported that the storage duration of black currant in regular atmosphere can be 1.5 weeks while maintaining optimal storage conditions. The use of a controlled atmosphere (CA) makes it possible to extend the storage period to 3 weeks [20,21]. Modified atmosphere packaging (MAP) can be used to extend the postharvest life of fruits in a similar way to controlled atmosphere (CA) storage. The modified atmosphere packaging, using various plastic films limiting gas diffusion, which changes the composition of the atmosphere in and around fresh fruit as a result of their respiration. MAP is known to extend the storage and shelf life of various berry fruits [22,23,24,25,26]. In the literature, little information can be found on different storage methods and their impact on the quality of blackcurrant fruit.
The objective of the present study was to determine changes in the quality of ‘Tihope’ blackcurrant fruit during storage in different technologies—regular atmosphere, controlled atmosphere, and modified atmosphere packaging (RA, CA, MAP, respectively).
2. Materials and Methods
The three independent storage experiments were carried out in the years 2021, 2022, and 2023 at the Fruit and Vegetable Storage and Processing Department at the National Institute of Horticultural Research in Skierniewice, Poland.
2.1. Plant Material
The fruits of ‘Tihope’ blackcurrant cultivars were obtained from the commercial plantation located in Ostrowiec near Łowicz (central Poland, 52°09′30″ N 20°12′00″ E). The plants were grown in a production system using integrated plant protection. Blackcurrants were hand-harvested at the commercial maturity stage based on skin colour and taste. The fruit was harvested directly into individual 250 g packages. At each analysis date, three packages of each combination were removed (3 replicates, where one container constituted 1 replicate).
2.2. Experimental Conditions
After harvest, the fruits were cooled to storage temperature (0 °C) using forced air flow (for 3 h) and then stored in regular atmosphere, controlled atmosphere (15% CO2: 2.5% O2), or modified atmosphere packaging (Xtend bags intended for blueberries, placed in regular atmosphere). The mean values of oxygen and carbon dioxide concentration inside the Xtend bags are given in Table 1. Fluctuations between years in the level of oxygen and carbon dioxide inside the packaging resulted mainly from different intensities of fruit respiration (see Table 3) but could also be the effect of tightness of packaging and length of storage. The gas composition of the controlled atmosphere was established based on the ranges described in the literature [20,21]. In the first year of the study (in 2021), the fruits were stored for 8 and 14 days, based on the scarce literature data indicating that the storage period of currants may be 1.5 weeks [19]. In the experiment, the length of the storage period increased from year to year based on observations of fruit quality, i.e., for 13 and 20 days (in 2022) and for 18 and 33 days (in 2023), respectively. The research scheme including the performed fruit analyses is presented in Table 2. After removal from storage, the fruits were placed at 18 °C for 1 day or at 10 °C for 2 days to simulate shelf life.
2.3. Measurements and Analyses
At harvest, after storage, and after shelf life (SL), the following parameters were determined: flesh firmness (FF), total soluble solids (TSSs), titratable acidity (TA), content of sugars (sucrose, glucose, and fructose), total polyphenols, vitamin C (L-ascorbic acid), antioxidant activity (ABTS), and sensory quality.
The firmness of the fruits (elasticity) was assessed on fruits from the medial part of the clusters by the penetrometric method using a Zwick Roell Z010 (Zwick Roell, Ulm, Germany) instrument, equipped with a flat plunger of 12.7 mm diameter. The results are expressed in N as the force required for deforming the fruit by 10%. Measurements were made in three replicates of ten fruits each.
The percentage of TSSs was measured in the freshly prepared fruit pulp using the Atago PR-101 (Atago, Tokyo, Japan) electronic refractometer. TA was measured with the potentiometric method by titration of an aqueous solution of fruit pulp with 0.1 N NaOH to the end point pH 8.1, using Mettler Toledo DL 21 (Mettler-Toledo, Greifensee, Switzerland) automatic titrator. Acidity was expressed as an equivalent percentage of citric acid. The TSS/acid ratio was also calculated. For the determination of TSSs and TA, three replicates were used on each analysis date.
Sugar analysis: sucrose, glucose, and fructose were determined by high-performance liquid chromatography methods according to European Standard EN 12630 [27]. Separation of sugars was conducted using Aminex HPX-87C column (300 mm × 7.5 mm) (Bio-Rad Laboratories, Hercules, CA, USA) with a pre-column on the Agilent 1200 HPLC system (Agilent Technologies, Waldbronn, Germany), equipped with a differential refractometric detector. The sugars were quantified by a calibration curve for saccharose, glucose, and fructose, and the results were expressed as g·kg−1 f.m.
The content of L-ascorbic acid was determined by high-performance liquid chromatography (Agilent 1200 HPLC system, equipped with a DAD detector). Analysis was performed using a Supelco LC-18 column (250 mm × 4.6 mm; 5 µm) (Sigma-Aldrich Chemie GmbH, Darmstadt, Germany), and the detection of L-ascorbic acid was by absorbance at 244 nm. The results were expressed as mg·100 g−1 f.m. and quantified by a calibration curve for the L-ascorbic acid standard.
The total polyphenol content (TPC) was measured by a modified spectrophotometric method [28] using Folin–Ciocalteu phenol reagent (Sigma-Aldrich Chemie GmbH, Darmstadt, Germany). The absorbance was read against the prepared blank at 765 nm (UviLine 9400 spectrophotometer, SI Analytics, Hofheim am Taunus, Germany). The polyphenol content was expressed as mg of gallic acid equivalents in mg·100 g−1 f.m. of the analysed sample.
The antioxidant activity was determined using the method described by Re et al. [29], using the ABTS●+ radical cation. The detailed measurement procedure was according to Oszmiański and Wojdyło [30]. The absorbance of the reaction mixture was measured at 734 nm using a Cary 3E UV–Visible spectrophotometer (Varian, Australia). The linear regression method was used to calculate the concentration of extract, leading to a 50% decrease in the absorbance of the ABTS●+ solution, which was recalculated to mg of Trolox equivalents per gram of fruit sample.
For the respiration rate (carbon dioxide released by fruit) and ethylene production, the samples of fruits (approximately 50 g) were enclosed in gas-tight containers for 1 h. After the incubation period at 18 °C, gas samples of 1 mL each were taken from the upper space of the containers (headspace). The amount of ethylene was measured using a gas chromatograph HP 5890 II (Hewlett Packard, Palo Alto, CA, USA). The carbon dioxide was determined using the CheckMate II device (Ametek mocon (Dansensor), Ringsted, Denmark).
Analyses of sensory quality were performed using the scaling-profiling method. The fruits were evaluated by 7–10 trained people recruited from the staff of the National Institute of Horticulture Research. The sensory panel team undergoes regular training and competence assessment to ensure the reliability and repeatability of sensory evaluation results. Twice a year, training sessions are conducted, including basic taste recognition tests, odour recognition tests, and sensitivity threshold training. Fruit samples were served in individual plastic containers covered with a lid, and the following features were evaluated: appearance (colour, shine, size), aroma (currant, off), hardness, taste (currant, sweet, sour, astringent, bitter), and in the end, the overall quality, which was defined as the sensory impression of the balance and harmony of all attributes and their interactions. The results are presented on a scale from 0 to 10 units, where ‘0’ indicates low quality, and ‘10’ denotes high quality of the fruit.
2.4. Data Processing and Statistical Methods
Data were statistically analysed using STATISTICA 13.1 software package [31]. Data are presented as a means ± standard deviation (SD) or compared using one-factor ANOVA by post hoc Tukey test.
3. Results and Discussion
Berries, including blackcurrants, are delicate and perishable fruits. The main problems during storage and commodity turnover are rotting and loss of fruit quality (mainly softening) [16,32]. The durability of berries after harvest and the possibility of storing them depend on many factors, and one of the most important is the proper choice of the storage technology. Storage experiments with the use of three different technologies (RA, CA, MAP) were carried out on the ‘Tihope’ fruits due to their good storability and suitability as a dessert variety. Results presented by Pluta et al. [33] and Pluta and Żurawicz [34] indicate that the fruits of ‘Tihope’ cultivars, in addition to processing, are also recommended for fresh consumption.
The rate of respiration (CO2 production) and ethylene production of blackcurrant fruits of ‘Tihope’ cv. at harvest are influenced by the season and vary from 27 µLCO2/g·h to above 49 µLCO2/g·h and from 0.2 µLC2H4/kg·h to 0.5 µLC2H4/kg·h, respectively (Table 3). However, ethylene production was not detectable very often. This corresponds well with the data presented by Gross et al. [17]. There was no clear effect of storage conditions on respiration rate and ethylene production.
Changes in the quality of blackcurrant fruit during storage in RA, CA, and MAP in relation to the quality of fruit at harvest are presented in Figure 1. In addition, the results of the firmness, total soluble solid content (TSS), titratable acidity (TA) measurements, and a calculated ratio of TSS/TA in the fruits from seasons 2021, 2022, and 2023 are presented in the Supplementary Materials. All those parameters were seasonally dependent.
The fruit firmness at harvest period varied from 1.43 N (in 2021) to 1.87 N (in 2022), TSS from 13.47% in 2022 to 16.43% in 2021, and TA from 3.65% in 2022 to 4.09% in 2023. Regardless of the season, storage of fruits in CA and MAP bags allowed for maintaining higher fruit firmness compared with that in regular atmosphere. Firmness of currants decreased after transferring them to the higher temperature (18 °C, 10 °C) or after extending the storage time. The fruits stored in CA were characterized by higher firmness than the fruits stored in RA. This difference was clearly evident with increasing storage time, which resulted in a significant loss of firmness in fruit stored in RA, while maintaining a high level of firmness in fruit stored in CA (Figure 1). The difference between RA and CA after 33 days of storage in 2023 was almost 2.5 times. Also, fruits stored in MAP usually had higher firmness than fruits stored in RA, but it was not always statistically significant. The different effect of using MAP packaging than CA was probably due to a different concentration of carbon dioxide inside the packaging. In our experiments, we used MAP packaging intended for blueberry storage, in which the CO2 concentration remained at the level of 8–10% (depending on storage time and season) (Table 1), while, in CA, 15% of CO2 was kept. As described by the authors in the experiments of Gudkovskii at al. [32], the concentration of CO2 was 3–7%. Differences in the composition of the atmosphere inside the packages may result from the different permeability of packages to gases and/or the different intensities of respiration of packed fruit. The key element of fruit storage in MAP packaging is the appropriate selection of the type of packaging and the amount of fruit to obtain the optimal CO2 concentration inside the bags. In the research on blackcurrant storage, Gudkovskii et al. [32] have noticed the beneficial effect of CA application on the preservation of fruit firmness; however, unlike in our research, they found the negative effect of MAP packaging on this quality parameter. The differences could have resulted from the use of a different type of bag (unspecified Xtend packaging type), as well as from the different cultivars used in Gudkovskii’s experiment (‘Tamerlan’ and ‘Shalunya’). Perhaps the different permeability of MAP packaging and the different intensities of fruit respiration (not posted by Gudkovskii) resulted in a lower concentration of carbon dioxide inside the packaging than in our experiments. This indicates the need to select appropriate packaging and amount of fruit to obtain the appropriate atmosphere composition inside packaging and the effects similar to CA.
As shown in Figure 1 and Supplementary Materials (Tables S1–S3), the effect of the storage technology on the soluble solids content and the titratable acidity of ‘Tihope’ blackcurrants was ambiguous.
Black currants are rich sources of health-promoting compounds, among others, vitamin C and polyphenols [5,6,10,12,13,32,33,34,35,36,37,38]. Our results confirmed these findings. The content of vitamin C, polyphenols, and antioxidant activity of ‘Tihope’ fruits freshly harvested and stored in RA, CA, or MAP are presented in Table 4.
Depending on the season, blackcurrants of ‘Tihope’ cultivar contained from 287.3 to 336.5 mg/100 g FW of polyphenols, from 116.7 to 175.0 mg/100 g FW of vitamin C, and from 5.7 to 9.1 mg Trolox/g of antioxidant activity during the harvest period. The seasonal fluctuation of these compounds has also been described by Rachtan-Janicka et al. [12], Tian et al. [13], and Pott et al. [39].
The content of sugars (sucrose, glucose, and fructose) in ‘Tihope’ blackcurrant fruits after 8 days of storage (in 2021), 13 days of storage (in 2022), and 33 days of storage (in 2023) in RA, CA, and MAP are presented in Table 5.
Similar to other quality parameters, the sugar content (sucrose, glucose, and fructose) was also seasonally dependent. The sucrose content (at harvest) varied from 11.2 g/kg (in 2021) to 15.0 g/kg (in 2022), glucose from 22.2 g/kg (in 2021) to 23.5 g/kg (in 2022), and fructose from 34.8 g/kg (in 2021) to 37.1 g/kg (in 2022). In 2021, the content of sucrose in fruits stored for 8 days in MAP (without SL) and after SL at 18 °C for fruits stored in NA and CA was significantly higher than that in the harvest sample. However, extending the storage time to 13 days (in 2022) and 33 days (in 2023) resulted in a statistically significant decrease in sucrose content compared with the harvest period. The content of glucose and fructose increased after 8 days of storage (in 2021), especially in fruit stored in MAP (without SL). However, after 13 days of storage (in 2022), lower glucose content than that at harvest was recorded for fruits stored in MAP (both without SL and with SL1d_18 °C and SL2d_10 °C), RA (with SL2d_10 °C), and CA (with SL2d_10 °C). Lower fructose content than at harvest was recorded for fruits stored for 13 days in CA (SL1d_18 °C).
There was no clear effect of any of the applied storage technologies on the content of polyphenols, vitamin C, sugars, and antioxidant activity. According to the literature, storage temperature is the main factor influencing the content of some antioxidants. Generally, high temperature promotes their losses (mainly ascorbic acid), and high CO2 storage decreases polyphenol content and antioxidant capacity [8,40,41]. However, as Manganaris et al. [8] reports, total anthocyanins increase during ripening in all berries, and there are significant fluctuations in antioxidant capacity during storage and even an increase after several days at room temperature, which is mainly associated with the continuous biosynthesis of anthocyanins.
The content of phenolic compounds in samples stored at 0 °C without shelf life in RA, CA, and MAP was not statistically different from the content of these compounds in the raw material immediately after harvest, regardless of the season (Table 4). The application of shelf life SL1d_18 °C did not show a clear effect. In most treatments, no significant differences were found compared with the harvested sample, but a 5% decrease in phenolic compounds (RA in 2021) or an 8% increase (MAP in 2021, RA in 2022) were observed. However, in 2021 and 2022, fruit stored for two days at 10 °C in CA and MAP showed significantly higher TPC levels than fruit on the day of harvest.
In 2021, no significant changes in vitamin C content were observed for the fruit, regardless of the storage technology used (Table 4). However, extending the storage time to 13 days (in 2022) resulted in a statistically significant increase in vitamin C content in samples stored in RA (both without SL and with SL1d and SL2d), as well as in the CA SL2d_10 °C sample. When storage was further extended to 33 days (in 2023), vitamin C was stable regardless of the storage conditions, and no loss of this health-promoting nutrient was observed.
In our experiments, storage in RA, CA, or MAP even up to 33 days at 0 °C (as well as during shelf life at 10 and 18 °C) does not reduce the blackcurrant’s health-promoting value, which was confirmed by analysis of antioxidant activity (ABTS) (Table 4). Fruit stored under planned conditions (RA, CA, and MAP) in all years covered by the study were characterized by higher activity than fruit on the day of harvest, except for MAP no SL in 2021.
The sensory analyses of stored fruits were carried out after 8 days of storage (0 days SL, 1 day SL at 18 °C, and 2 days SL at 10 °C) and after 13 days of storage (0 days SL, 1 day SL at 18 °C, and 2 days SL at 10 °C) in the years 2021 and 2022, respectively. In 2023, the sensory analyses were performed after 18 and 33 days of storage (0 days SL, 1 day SL at 18 °C, and 2 days SL at 10 °C). Data from the sensory analyses are presented in Figure 2a–d.
Regardless of the season, there was no negative effect of CA and MAP technologies on the sensory quality of currants. The fruits after 8 days of storage and after shelf life at 18 °C or 10 °C in 2021 were scored from 5.2 to 7.1 points at overall sensory quality (Figure 2a). However the fruits stored in MAP were rated the highest, with statistically significant differences found only in the case of currants after an additional 2 days of shelf life at 10 °C. Similar relationships were recorded in 2022 for fruits stored for 13 days (Figure 2b). In 2023, after 18 days of storage plus 2 days at 10 °C, fruits from all storage technologies obtained high scores (close to 7 on a 10-point scale) (Figure 2c). After 33 days of storage, the overall quality of fruits stored under CA or in MAP bags still scored above 6 on a 10-point scale (Figure 2d).
High sensory quality scores for fruit from all storage technologies result from small differences in total soluble solid and acidity presented in Figure 1.
Up to 13 days of storage, as well as after the shelf life, no rotting of the fruits was observed in any of the combinations used. Single damaged fruits appeared only after 20 days (in 2022) and after 18 days (in 2023) storage in RA. In fruits stored in CA or MAP, no damaged fruits were noted. These results confirm the effect of high CO2 concentrations on the inhibition of microorganisms’ development [20,21,30,42]. Inhibition of the development of grey mould in blackcurrants stored in CA and MA compared with that on storage in regular atmosphere was also observed by Gudkovskii et al. [32].
4. Conclusions
The obtained results indicate good storability of fruits of the ‘Tihope’ cultivar. No negative impact of storage on the health-promoting value of the fruit was observed. After storage, currants still remain a rich source of vitamin C, and polyphenols and retain high antioxidant activity. The fruit of the ‘Tihope’ cultivar can be stored in a regular atmosphere for 20 days without any negative effect on its quality. Storage in a controlled atmosphere or in MAP packaging allows the extension of the storage period of blackcurrants up to 33 days, thereby delaying the occurrence of fruit damage and loss of firmness. Particularly noteworthy is the possibility of using MAP packaging for fruit storage. It is a more reliable method for storing relatively small amounts of fruits, as it is much cheaper than a controlled atmosphere (especially considering the investment cost). However, for the results of MAP storage to be satisfactory (and comparable to controlled atmosphere storage), the fruit inside the packages must be provided with an optimal atmosphere composition. This requires selecting the appropriate packaging type, quantity of fruit, and possibly cultivar (which may differ in respiration intensity). It is therefore advisable to conduct further research to optimize this method for currant fruit.
Supplementary Materials
The following supporting information can be downloaded at https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/agriculture15232449/s1. Table S1: The effect of storage conditions on fruit quality of ‘Tihope’ cultivar. Season 2021. Table S2: The effect of storage conditions on fruit quality of ‘Tihope’ cultivar. Season 2022. Table S3: The effect of storage conditions on fruit quality of ‘Tihope’ cultivar. Season 2023.
Author Contributions
Conceptualization, A.S. and K.P.R.; methodology, A.S. and K.P.R.; validation, A.S., K.P.R. and M.M.-F.; formal analysis, A.S. and K.P.R.; investigation, A.S., E.R., A.W. and J.S.-G.; resources, Z.B.J.; data curation, A.S.; writing—original draft preparation, A.S.; writing—review and editing, K.P.R., M.M.-F. and Z.B.J.; visualization, A.S.; supervision, A.S. and K.P.R.; project administration, A.M. and A.S.; funding acquisition, A.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding
This work was carried out in the frame of the project ‘Improving plant quality and economy for a more sustainable and efficient berry production’ (NOR/POLNOR/QualityBerry/0014/2019-00) and supported by the Norwegian Financial Mechanism 2014–2021 (EEA and Norway Grants).
Data Availability Statement
Data supporting the results presented in this publication are available upon request from the corresponding author.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Abbreviations
The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:
| RA | Regular atmosphere |
| CA | Controlled atmosphere |
| MAP | Modified atmosphere packaging |
| DS | Day of storage at 0 °C |
| SL | Shelf life |
| FF | Flesh firmness |
| TSSs | Total soluble solids |
| TA | Titratable acidity |
| TPCs | Total phenolic compounds |
References
- FAOSTAT. Available online: https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/TP (accessed on 15 April 2024).
- Gheribi, E. Związki polifenolowe w owocach i warzywach. Med. Rodz. 2011, 4, 111–115. [Google Scholar]
- Gopalan, A.; Reuben, S.C.; Ahmad, S.; Darvesh, A.S.; Hohmann, J.; Bishayee, A. The health benefits of blackcurrants. Food Funct. 2012, 3, 795–809. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Gryszczyńska, B.; Iskra, M.; Gryszczyńska, A.; Budzyń, M. Aktywność przeciwutleniająca wybranych owoców jagodowych. Postępy Fitoter. 2011, 4, 265–274. [Google Scholar]
- Jurgiel-Malecka, G.; Buchwał, A. Charakterystyka składu chemicznego owoców porzeczki uprawianej w regionie Pomorza Zachodniego. Żywność. Nauka. Technologia. Jakość 2016, 6, 90–101. [Google Scholar]
- Kowalski, R.; Gonzalez de Mejia, E. Phenolic composition, antioxidant capacity and physical characterization of ten blackcurrant (Ribes nigrum) cultivars, their juices, and the inhibition of type 2 diabetes and inflammation biochemical markers. Food Chem. 2021, 359, 129889. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lister, C.E.; Wilson, P.E.; Sutton, K.H.; Morrison, S.C. Understanding the health benefits of blackcurrants. Acta Hortic. 2002, 585, 443–449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Manganaris, G.A.; Goulas, V.; Vicente, A.R.; Terry, L.A. Berry antioxidants: Small fruits providing large benefits. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2013, 94, 825–833. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nile, S.H.; Park, S.W. Edible berries: Bioactive components and their effect on human health. Nutrition 2014, 30, 134–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nour, V.; Trandafir, I.; Ionica, M.E. Ascorbic acid, anthocianins, organic acids and mineral content of some black and red currant cultivars. Fruits 2011, 66, 353–362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Okatan, V. Antioxidant properties and phenolic profile of the most widely appreciated cultivated berry species: A comparative study. Folia Hort. 2020, 32, 79–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rachtan-Janicka, J.; Ponder, A.; Hallmann, E. The effect of organic and conventional cultivations on antioxidants content in blackcurrant (Ribes nigrum L.) species. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 5113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tian, Y.; Laaksonen, O.; Haikonen, H.; Vanag, A.; Ejaz, H.; Linderborg, K.; Karhu, S.; Yang, B. Compositional diversity among blackcurrant (Ribes nigrum) cultivars originating from European countries. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2019, 67, 5621–5633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Michalska, A.; Wojdyło, A.; Lech, K.; Łysiak, G.P.; Figiel, A. Effect of different drying techniques on physical properties, total polyphenols and antioxidant capacity of blackcurrant pomace powders. LWT—Food Sci. Technol. 2017, 78, 114–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Michalska, A.; Wojdyło, A.; Łysiak, G.P.; Lech, K.; Figiel, A. Functional relationships between phytochemicals and drying conditions during the processing of blackcurrant pomace into powders. Adv. Powder Technol. 2017, 28, 1340–1348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vicente, A.R.; Sozzi, G.O. Ripening and postharvest storage of ‘soft fruits’. Fruit Veg. Cereal Sci. Biotechnol. 2007, 1, 95–103. [Google Scholar]
- Gross, K.C.; Wang, C.Y.; Saltveit, M. The Commercial Storage of Fruits, Vegetables, and Florist and Nursery Stocks; Agriculture Handbook Number 66; United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service: Washington, DC, USA, 2016.
- Story, A.; Simons, D.H. Handling and Storage Practices for Fresh Fruit and Vegetables; Australian United Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Association Ltd.: Victoria, Australia, 1989. [Google Scholar]
- Batzer, U.; Helm, H.-U. Lagerung von Beerenobst (Storage of small fruits). Erwerbsobstbau 1999, 41, 51–55. [Google Scholar]
- Prange, R.K. Currant, Gooseberry, and Eldelberry. In The Commercial Storage of Fruits, Vegetables, and Florist and Nursery Stocks; Gross, K.C., Wang, C.Y., Saltveit, M., Eds.; Agriculture Handbook 66; USDA, Agricultural Research Service: Washington, DC, USA, 2004; pp. 306–309. [Google Scholar]
- Thompson, A.K.; Prange, R.K.; Bancroft, R.; Putttongsiri, T. Recommended storage conditions for selected crops. In Controlled Atmosphere Storage of Fruits and Vegetables; CABI: Wallingford, UK, 2018; pp. 116–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Adobati, A.; Uboldi, E.; Franzetti, L.; Limbo, S. Shelf life extension of raspberry: Passive and active modified atmosphere inside master bag solutions. Chem. Eng. Trans. 2015, 44, 337–342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Briano, R.; Giuggioli, N.R.; Girgenti, V.; Peano, C. Biodegradable and compostable film and modified atmosphere packaging in postharvest supply chain of raspberry fruits (cv. Grandeur). J. Food Process. Preserv. 2015, 39, 2061–2073. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huynh, N.K.; Wilson, M.D.; Eyles, A.; Stanley, R.A. Recent advances in postharvest technologies to extend the shelf life of blueberries (Vaccinium sp.), raspberries (Rubus idaeus L.) and blackberries (Rubus sp.). J. Berry Res. 2019, 9, 687–707. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pinto, L.; Palma, A.; Cefola, M.; Pace, B.; D’Aquino, S.; Carboni, C.; Baruzzi, F. Effect of modified atmosphere packaging (MAP) and gaseous ozone pre-packaging treatment on the physico-chemical, microbiological and sensory quality of small berry fruit. Food Packag. Shelf Life 2020, 26, 100573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stewart, D.; Oparka, J.; Johnstone, C.; Iannetta, P.P.M.; Davies, H.V. Effect of modified atmosphere packaging (MAP) on soft fruit quality. In Annual Report of the Scottish Crop Research Institute for 1999; Scottish Crop Research Institute: Dundee, Scotland, 1999; pp. 119–124. [Google Scholar]
- EN 12630:1999; Fruit and Vegetable Juices. Determination of Glucose, Fructose, Sorbitol and Sucrose Contents. Method Using High-Performance Liquid Chromatography. British Standards Institution: London, UK, 1999.
- Tsao, R.; Yang, R. Optimization of a new mobile phase to know the complex and real polyphenolic composition: Towards a total phenolic index using high-performance liquid chromatography. J. Chromatogr. A 2003, 1018, 29–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Re, R.; Pellegrini, N.; Proteggente, A.; Pannala, A.; Yang, M.; Rice-Evans, C. Antioxidant activity applying an improved ABTS radical cation decolorization assay. Free Radic. Biol. Med. 1999, 26, 1231–1237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Oszmiański, J.; Wojdyło, A. Effects of various clarification treatments on phenolic compounds and color of apple juice. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 2007, 224, 755–762. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dell Inc. Dell Statistica (Data Analysis Software System), Version 13.1; Dell Inc.: Tulsa, OK, USA; Statsoft Polska: Kraków, Poland, 2016.
- Gudkovskii, V.A.; Kozhina, L.V.; Akimov, M.Y.; Zhidekhina, T.V. Innovative storage technology of modern commercial black currant cultivars. Acta Hortic. 2020, 1277, 487–493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pluta, S.; Żurawicz, E.; Pruski, K. Suitability of fruits of selected blackcurrant (Ribes nigrum L.) cultivars for fresh market. J. Berry Res. 2012, 2, 23–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pluta, S.; Żurawicz, E. ‘Tihope’ blackcurrant. HortScience 2015, 50, 1096–1098. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rubinskiene, M.; Viskelis, P.; Jasutiene, I.; Duchovskis, P.; Bobinas, C. Changes in biologically active constituents during ripening in black currants. J. Fruit Ornam. Plant Res. 2006, 14 (Suppl. 2), 237–246. [Google Scholar]
- Siksnianas, T.; Stanys, V.; Sasnauskas, A.; Viskelis, P.; Rubinskiene, M. Fruit quality and processing potential in five new blackcurrant cultivars. J. Fruit Ornam. Plant Res. 2006, 14 (Suppl. 2), 265–271. [Google Scholar]
- Sasnauskas, A.; Trajkovski, V.; Strautina, S.; Tikhonova, O.; Siksnianas, T.; Rubinskiene, M.; Viskelis, P.; Lanauskas, J.; Valiuskaite, A.; Rugienius, R.; et al. Evaluation of blackcurrant cultivars and perspective hybrids in Lithuania. Agron. Res. 2009, 7, 737–743. [Google Scholar]
- Viskelis, P.; Anisimoviene, N.; Rubinskiene, M.; Jankovska, E.; Sasnauskas, A. Physical properties, antocianins and antioxidant activity of blackcurrant berries of different maturities. J. Food Agric. Environ. 2010, 8, 159–162. [Google Scholar]
- Pott, D.M.; Duran-Soria, S.; Allwood, J.W.; Pont, S.; Gordon, S.L.; Jennings, N.; Austin, C.; Stewart, D.; Brennan, R.M.; Masny, A.; et al. Dissecting the impact of environment, season and genotype on blackcurrant fruit quality traits. Food Chem. 2023, 402, 134360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Gil, M.I.; Holcroft, D.M.; Kader, A.A. Changes in strawberry anthocyanins and other polyphenols in response to carbon dioxide treatments. J. Agric. Food Chem. 1997, 45, 1662–1667. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kevers, C.; Falkowski, M.J.; Tabart, J.; Defraigne, J.O.; Dommes, J.; Pincemail, J. Evolution of antioxidant capacity during storage of selected fruits and vegetables. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2007, 55, 8596–8603. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Van der Steen, C.; Jacxsens, L.; Devlieghere, F.; Debevere, J. Combining high oxygen atmospheres with low oxygen modified atmosphere packaging to improve the keeping quality of strawberries and raspberries. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 2002, 26, 49–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1.
The effect of storage conditions on fruit quality changes (firmness, TSS, and TA) of ‘Tihope’ cultivar in season 2021 (solid line), 2022 (dashed line) and 2023 (dashed-point line). Note: points in X-axis—in 2021: 8—8 DS noSL, 9—8 DS SL1d_18 °C, 10—8 DS SL2d_10 °C, 14—14 DS noSL, 15—14 DS SL1d_18 °C, 16—14 DS SL2d_10 °C; in 2022: 13—13 DS noSL, 14—13 DS SL1d_18 °C, 15—13 DS SL2d_10 °C, 20—20 DS noSL, 21—20 DS SL1d_18 °C, 22—20 DS SL2d_10 °C; in 2023: 18—18 DS noSL, 19—18 DS SL1d_18 °C, 20—18 DS SL2d_10 °C, 33—33 DS noSL, 34—33 DS SL1d_18 °C, 35—33 DS SL2d_10 °C.
Figure 1.
The effect of storage conditions on fruit quality changes (firmness, TSS, and TA) of ‘Tihope’ cultivar in season 2021 (solid line), 2022 (dashed line) and 2023 (dashed-point line). Note: points in X-axis—in 2021: 8—8 DS noSL, 9—8 DS SL1d_18 °C, 10—8 DS SL2d_10 °C, 14—14 DS noSL, 15—14 DS SL1d_18 °C, 16—14 DS SL2d_10 °C; in 2022: 13—13 DS noSL, 14—13 DS SL1d_18 °C, 15—13 DS SL2d_10 °C, 20—20 DS noSL, 21—20 DS SL1d_18 °C, 22—20 DS SL2d_10 °C; in 2023: 18—18 DS noSL, 19—18 DS SL1d_18 °C, 20—18 DS SL2d_10 °C, 33—33 DS noSL, 34—33 DS SL1d_18 °C, 35—33 DS SL2d_10 °C.
Figure 2.
(a) Sensory quality ‘Tihope’ blackcurrants after 8 days of storage in RA, CA, and MAP. Season 2021. (Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different at p = 0.05 according to Tukey’s test (separately for each analysed term). Vertical bars denote ± SD.) (b) Sensory quality ‘Tihope’ blackcurrants after 13 days of storage at RA, CA, and MAP. Season 2022. (Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different at p = 0.05 according to Tukey’s test (separately for each analysed term). Vertical bars denote ± SD.) (c) Sensory quality ‘Tihope’ blackcurrants after 18 days of storage at RA, CA, and MAP. Season 2023. (Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different at p = 0.05 according to Tukey’s test (separately for each analysed term). Vertical bars denote ± SD.) (d) Sensory quality ‘Tihope’ blackcurrants after 33 days of storage at RA, CA, and MAP. Season 2023. (Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different at p = 0.05 according to Tukey’s test (separately for each analysed term). Vertical bars denote ± SD.).
Figure 2.
(a) Sensory quality ‘Tihope’ blackcurrants after 8 days of storage in RA, CA, and MAP. Season 2021. (Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different at p = 0.05 according to Tukey’s test (separately for each analysed term). Vertical bars denote ± SD.) (b) Sensory quality ‘Tihope’ blackcurrants after 13 days of storage at RA, CA, and MAP. Season 2022. (Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different at p = 0.05 according to Tukey’s test (separately for each analysed term). Vertical bars denote ± SD.) (c) Sensory quality ‘Tihope’ blackcurrants after 18 days of storage at RA, CA, and MAP. Season 2023. (Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different at p = 0.05 according to Tukey’s test (separately for each analysed term). Vertical bars denote ± SD.) (d) Sensory quality ‘Tihope’ blackcurrants after 33 days of storage at RA, CA, and MAP. Season 2023. (Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different at p = 0.05 according to Tukey’s test (separately for each analysed term). Vertical bars denote ± SD.).
Table 1.
The concentration of oxygen, carbon dioxide, and ethylene in modified atmosphere packaging during storage of blackcurrant fruit of ‘Tihope’ cv.
Table 1.
The concentration of oxygen, carbon dioxide, and ethylene in modified atmosphere packaging during storage of blackcurrant fruit of ‘Tihope’ cv.
| Length of Fruit Storage in MAP | O2 (%) | CO2 (%) | Ethylene (ppm) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | |||
| 8 days of storage | - | 8.17 ± 0.670 | 0.144 ± 0.0101 |
| 2022 | |||
| 13 days of storage | 12.9 ± 1.15 | 9.70 ± 1.054 | 0.065 ± 0.0070 |
| 20 days of storage | 13.4 ± 0.35 | 9.50 ± 0.495 | 0.049 ± 0.0070 |
| 2023 | |||
| 18 days of storage | 14.4 ± 0.01 | 7.9 ± 1.280 | 0.038 ± 0.0035 |
| 33 days of storage | 14.4 ± 0.01 | 8.6 ± 0.490 | 0.028 ± 0.0007 |
Table 2.
Experimental design for storing blackcurrant fruit in each year: 2021, 2022, and 2023.
| Length of Storage at 0 °C | Storage Conditions | Shelf Life (SL) Conditions | Evaluated Parameters |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 year | |||
| 8 days | RA CA MAP | 0 days—no SL 1 day at 18 °C 2 days at 10 °C | Respiration parameters Physicochemical parameters Content of sugars and bioactive compounds Sensory quality |
| 14 days | RA CA MAP | 0 days—no SL 1 day at 18 °C 2 days at 10 °C | Physicochemical parameters |
| 2022 year | |||
| 13 days | RA CA MAP | 0 days—no SL 1 day at 18 °C 2 days at 10 °C | Respiration parameters Physicochemical parameters Content of sugars and bioactive compounds Sensory quality |
| 20 days | RA CA MAP | 0 days—no SL 1 day at 18 °C 2 days at 10 °C | Respiration parameters Physicochemical parameters |
| 2023 year | |||
| 18 days | RA CA MAP | 0 days—no SL 1 day at 18 °C 2 days at 10 °C | Respiration parameters Physicochemical parameters Sensory quality |
| 33 days | RA CA MAP | 0 days—no SL 1 day at 18 °C 2 days at 10 °C | Respiration parameters Physicochemical parameters Content of sugars and bioactive compounds Sensory quality |
Abbreviations: RA—regular atmosphere; CA—controlled atmosphere; MAP—modified atmosphere packaging; SL—shelf life.
Table 3.
The effect of storage conditions on CO2 and ethylene production by ‘Tihope’ fruits.
| Storage Technology | 2021 Year | 2022 Year | 2023 Year | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 8 DS | 13 DS | 20 DS | 18 DS | 33 DS | ||
| CO2 Concentration (µL/g h) | ||||||
| Harvest | - | 27.01 ± 0.26 | 49.37 ± 1.80 | 42.31 ± 0.81 | ||
| No SL | RA | 26.96 ± 0.47 | 37.80 ± 1.08 | 34.25 ± 0.67 | 38.53 ± 0.57 | 34.67 ± 0.30 |
| CA | 30.13 ± 4.77 | 33.27 ± 4.85 | 26.63 ± 0.81 | 39.37 ± 3.25 | 43.24 ± 0.62 | |
| MAP | 34.81 ± 0.52 | 34.51 ± 0.60 | 33.37 ± 4.36 | 46.28 ± 1.92 | 43.93 ± 0.49 | |
| SL1d_18 °C | RA | 27.58 ± 0.55 | 29.51 ± 4.41 | 25.69 ± 0.51 | 28.90 ± 0.43 | 28.90 ± 5.01 |
| CA | 28.59 ± 0.75 | 32.49 ± 4.46 | 26.63 ± 0.81 | 30.24 ± 3.64 | 31.75 ± 5.40 | |
| MAP | 25.98 ± 5.60 | 37.44 ± 1.75 | 27.02 ± 2.32 | 39.97 ± 3.64 | 35.14 ± 0.39 | |
| SL2d_10 °C | RA | 32.73 ± 4.23 | 27.76 ± 0.26 | 31.71 ± 5.11 | 41.80 ± 5.13 | - |
| CA | 36.18 ± 0.90 | 37.67 ± 5.00 | 28.45 ± 0.86 | 35.80 ± 0.90 | 35.75 ± 1.08 | |
| MAP | 27.86 ± 1.64 | 26.15 ± 0.74 | 37.62 ± 6.71 | 39.30 ± 5.44 | 41.93 ± 6.21 | |
| Ethylene Concentration (µL/kg h) | ||||||
| Harvest | 0.02 ± 0.001 | 0.05 ± 0.022 | 0.04 ± 0.010 | |||
| No SL | RA | Not detectable | 0.04 ± 0.017 | 0.10 ± 0.048 | Not detectable | 0.06 ± 0.018 |
| CA | Not detectable | 0.02 ± 0.005 | 0.04 ± 0.013 | Not detectable | 0.02 ± 0.008 | |
| MAP | Not detectable | 0.05 ± 0.010 | 0.08 ± 0.020 | Not detectable | 0.03 ± 0.001 | |
| SL1d_18 °C | RA | Not detectable | 0.04 ± 0.018 | 0.11 ± 0.054 | 0.06 ± 0.036 | 0.10 ± 0.009 |
| CA | Not detectable | 0.05 ± 0.022 | 0.11 ± 0.029 | 0.03 ± 0.026 | 0.09 ± 0.014 | |
| MAP | Not detectable | 0.07 ± 0.035 | 0.07 ± 0.057 | 0.04 ± 0.022 | 0.16 ± 0.039 | |
| SL2d_10 °C | RA | 0.07 ± 0.012 | 0.05 ± 0.029 | 0.13 ± 0.046 | 0.04 ± 0.010 | - |
| CA | 0.03 ± 0.033 | 0.06 ± 0.019 | 0.07 ± 0.038 | 0.01 ± 0.015 | 0.04 ± 0.013 | |
| MAP | 0.03 ± 0.018 | 0.04 ± 0.004 | 0.11 ± 0.015 | 0.09 ± 0.051 | 0.14 ± 0.022 | |
Note: The data are expressed as mean ± SD. Abbreviations: DS—day of storage, SL—shelf life, 1d/2d—1 day/2 days.
Table 4.
The effect of storage conditions on the content of phenolic compounds (mg/100 g), vitamin C (mg/100g), and antioxidant capacity (mg Trolox/g) in ‘Tihope’ blackcurrant fruits after storage at RA, CA, and MAP.
Table 4.
The effect of storage conditions on the content of phenolic compounds (mg/100 g), vitamin C (mg/100g), and antioxidant capacity (mg Trolox/g) in ‘Tihope’ blackcurrant fruits after storage at RA, CA, and MAP.
| Storage Conditions | ABTS | TPC | Vitamin C | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | ||
| 8 DS | 13 DS | 33 DS | 8 DS | 13 DS | 33 DS | 8 DS | 13 DS | 33 DS | ||
| Harvest | 7.2 b * | 9.1 b | 5.7 a | 330.4 bc | 336.5 bc | 287.3 ab | 146.2 abc | 175.0 bc | 116.7 abc | |
| No SL | RA | 8.4 de | 9.4 c | 6.4 bc | 320.4 ab | 350.5 cd | 299.0 b | 159.1 c | 181.6 d | 114.2 abc |
| CA | 8.0 c | 9.4 c | 6.7 d | 333.8 bc | 330.4 b | 300.2 b | 158.1 bc | 178.7 cd | 135.2 d | |
| MAP | 5.2 a | 8.8 b | 7.4 f | 349.7 de | 329.5 b | 331.1 c | 143.9 abc | 171.0 b | 131.3 d | |
| SL1d_18 °C | RA | 8.6 ef | 11.0 f | 7.0 e | 314.4 a | 364.6 de | 295.9 ab | 134.6 a | 187.5 e | 119.8 bc |
| CA | 8.9 g | 7.4 a | 6.3 b | 335.7 cd | 300.1 a | 283.2 a | 142.9 ab | 151.0 a | 108.8 a | |
| MAP | 9.8 g | 9.7 d | 7.0 e | 357.2 ef | 334.3 bc | 298.2 b | 140.5 a | 175.8 c | 122.5 c | |
| SL2d_10 °C | RA | 8.2 cd | 9.7 cd | - ** | 339.0 cd | 359.6 de | - | 134.9 a | 181.8 d | - |
| CA | 8.7 fg | 10.2 e | 6.5 c | 374.8 g | 368.9 e | 283.4 a | 147.3 abc | 187.8 e | 111.1 ab | |
| MAP | 8.1 c | 9.9 de | 7.1 e | 369.8 fg | 361.0 de | 294.5 ab | 138.0 a | 178.6 cd | 114.3 abc | |
* Means, in the column, followed by the same letter are not significantly different at p = 0.05 according to Tukey’s test. ** No fruits.
Table 5.
The effect of storage conditions on the content of sucrose, glucose, and fructose (g/kg) in ‘Tihope’ blackcurrant fruits after storage at RA, CA, and MAP.
Table 5.
The effect of storage conditions on the content of sucrose, glucose, and fructose (g/kg) in ‘Tihope’ blackcurrant fruits after storage at RA, CA, and MAP.
| Storage Conditions | Sucrose | Glucose | Fructose | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | ||
| 8 DS | 13 DS | 33 DS | 8 DS | 13 DS | 33 DS | 8 DS | 13 DS | 33 DS | ||
| Harvest | 11.2 ab * | 15.0 f | 12.5 g | 22.2 a | 23.5 cd | 22.6 ab | 34.8 a | 37.1 bc | 36.0 a | |
| No SL | RA | 10.3 a | 11.3 cd | 7.5 c | 25.7 c | 25.0 e | 22.0 a | 40.0 c | 41.4 f | 37.1 ab |
| CA | 11.4 bc | 11.5 d | 10.0 e | 25.8 c | 22.7 bc | 25.6 cd | 40.5 c | 36.4 b | 37.9 b | |
| MAP | 15.0 e | 10.8 bcd | 11.9 f | 27.7 d | 21.8 b | 26.1 cd | 42.7 d | 36.3 b | 42.8 de | |
| SL1d_18 °C | RA | 12.3 cd | 11.1 bcd | 6.5 b | 23.6 b | 24.3 de | 24.4 bc | 38.0 b | 41.3 f | 43.9 e |
| CA | 12.4 d | 7.7 a | 8.8 d | 25.3 c | 18.3 a | 22.7 ab | 39.3 bc | 29.4 a | 36.0 a | |
| MAP | 11.2 ab | 10.7 bc | 8.6 d | 25.4 c | 21.7 b | 27.1 d | 39.9 c | 38.0 d | 43.0 de | |
| SL2d_10 °C | RA | 10.3 a | 10.6 b | - ** | 25.9 c | 21.8 b | - | 40.5 c | 38.0 cd | - |
| CA | 11.6 bcd | 13.0 e | 8.7 d | 25.9 c | 23.9 cde | 26.1 cd | 40.5 c | 39.1 e | 40.1 c | |
| MAP | 11.5 bcd | 10.4 b | 6.2 a | 24.9 c | 22.0 b | 25.1 c | 39.1 bc | 37.5 cd | d | |
* Means, in the column, followed by the same letter are not significantly different at p = 0.05 according to Tukey’s test. ** No fruits.
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. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
MDPI and ACS Style
Skorupińska, A.; Rutkowski, K.P.; Jóźwiak, Z.B.; Mieszczakowska-Frąc, M.; Ropelewska, E.; Wrzodak, A.; Szwejda-Grzybowska, J.; Masny, A. The Influence of Storage Technologies on the Quality and Storability of Blackcurrant (Ribes nigrum) Tihope cv. Agriculture 2025, 15, 2449. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture15232449
AMA Style
Skorupińska A, Rutkowski KP, Jóźwiak ZB, Mieszczakowska-Frąc M, Ropelewska E, Wrzodak A, Szwejda-Grzybowska J, Masny A. The Influence of Storage Technologies on the Quality and Storability of Blackcurrant (Ribes nigrum) Tihope cv. Agriculture. 2025; 15(23):2449. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture15232449
Chicago/Turabian StyleSkorupińska, Anna, Krzysztof P. Rutkowski, Zbigniew B. Jóźwiak, Monika Mieszczakowska-Frąc, Ewa Ropelewska, Anna Wrzodak, Justyna Szwejda-Grzybowska, and Agnieszka Masny. 2025. "The Influence of Storage Technologies on the Quality and Storability of Blackcurrant (Ribes nigrum) Tihope cv." Agriculture 15, no. 23: 2449. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture15232449
APA StyleSkorupińska, A., Rutkowski, K. P., Jóźwiak, Z. B., Mieszczakowska-Frąc, M., Ropelewska, E., Wrzodak, A., Szwejda-Grzybowska, J., & Masny, A. (2025). The Influence of Storage Technologies on the Quality and Storability of Blackcurrant (Ribes nigrum) Tihope cv. Agriculture, 15(23), 2449. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture15232449
Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.
