Next Article in Journal
Evaluation of Salt Tolerance in Four Self-Rooted Almond Genotypes for Super-High-Density Orchards Under Varying Salinity Levels
Next Article in Special Issue
Effect of Kaolin Clay on Post-Bloom Thinning Efficacy, Cropping, and Fruit Quality in ‘Gala Vill’ Apple (Malus × domestica) Cultivation
Previous Article in Journal
The Impact of High-Standard Farmland Construction (HSFC) Policy on Green Agricultural Development (GAD): Evidence from China
Previous Article in Special Issue
Effect of Biodegradable Mulch and Different Synthetic Mulches on Growth and Yield of Field-Grown Small-Fruited Tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.)
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Agriculture
Volume 15
Issue 3
10.3390/agriculture15030253
agriculture-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:
Article

Effect of Short-Term Storage in Modified Atmosphere Packaging (MAP) and Controlled Atmosphere (CA) on Total Polyphenol Content and Antioxidant Activity in Juices from Haskap Berry (Lonicera caerulea L.)

by
Barbara Anna Kowalczyk
1,*,
Monika Bieniasz
2 and
Jan Błaszczyk
2
1
Department of Ornamental Plants and Garden Art, Faculty of Biotechnology and Horticulture, Agricultural University in Krakow, Al. 29-Listopada 54, 31-425 Cracow, Poland
2
Department of Horticulture, Faculty of Biotechnology and Horticulture, Agricultural University in Krakow, Al. 29-Listopada 54, 31-425 Krakow, Poland
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Agriculture 2025, 15(3), 253; https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture15030253
Submission received: 16 December 2024 / Revised: 9 January 2025 / Accepted: 17 January 2025 / Published: 24 January 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue The Impact of Environmental Factors on the Quality of Horticultural Commodities)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
This article focuses on analysing the properties of six varieties of haskap berry (honeyberry) as a valuable raw material for producing health-promoting juices. Significant differences in the content of bioactive compounds were observed between juices derived from fruits of the same species. This study demonstrated that controlled atmosphere (CA) conditions (20% CO2 and 5% O2) and modified atmosphere packaging (MAP) in Xtend bags affected juice quality by minimising nutritional losses. The analysis of polyphenol content in the juices revealed significant differences between varieties and years (2021 and 2022), primarily due to varying weather conditions. In 2022, the polyphenol content of the varieties ‘Usłada’, ‘Candy Blue’, ‘Boreal Beauty’, and ‘Boreal Beast’ was from 69% to twice as high compared to values recorded in 2021. CA and MAP storage conditions were found to be more effective than normal atmosphere (NA) in preserving bioactive components, and thus the antioxidant activity of the fruits, as measured by the DPPH method. The variety ‘Sinij Utes’ had the highest total polyphenol contents and their lowest loss during storage. Conversely, the variety ‘Boreal Beauty’ contained the lowest polyphenol levels both after harvest and storage. This study confirmed the importance of proper storage conditions for maintaining the antioxidant properties of haskap berries.

1. Introduction

Fruit juices are a popular alternative for consumers seeking fresh fruit substitutes, appreciated for their freshness, taste, and nutritional value. Increased awareness and growing consumer expectations regarding modern fruit and vegetable processing technologies drive the development of the fresh juice industry. The contemporary food market relies heavily on innovative products that not only promote health but also reduce the risk of certain diseases. While consumers continue to value familiar and well-liked ingredients, they are increasingly attentive to the health benefits of products made from novel and less commonly used raw materials [1].
Haskap berry (Lonicera caerulea L.) is a species that has recently gained popularity in Poland. This perennial leafy shrub from the family Caprifoliaceae was originally cultivated in Russia, Japan, and China [2,3,4,5,6,7,8]. It is now also grown in many other countries, including Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Lithuania, Belarus, Slovenia, the United States [2,9,10], Switzerland [11], Ukraine [12], Estonia, and Romania [3,6]. Controlled crossbreeding and intensive selection in breeding centres have resulted in the development of new varieties that lack the bitterness originally present in the fruit. Advantages of this species include early fruiting (before strawberries), resistance to diseases and pests, frost tolerance, suitability for mechanical harvesting [13,14,15], and adaptability to a broader pH range of the substrate [13,16]. In Poland, the harvest period typically begins in June (sometimes May) and lasts, depending on the variety, until mid-August [17].
After harvesting, the berries are mainly used for juice, jam, or wine production [5,6,18,19,20]. Due to their content of vitamins, phenols, organic acids, and above all, high levels of bioactive compounds, haskap berries are gaining popularity and are considered a superfruit [2,6,13]. Phenolic compounds in haskap berries have been extensively studied, identified, and described, and their high concentration is considered one of the most important characteristics of this species. Berries are rich in anthocyanins, flavonoids, phenolic acids, and tannins, which collectively contribute to their health-promoting properties. Anthocyanins, such as cyanidin, delphinidin and malvidin, are powerful antioxidants that support healthy vision, exert anti-inflammatory effects, and protect the cardiovascular system. Flavonoids, including quercetin and catechins, provide antioxidant and anti-inflammatory benefits, helping to protect cells from oxidative stress. Phenolic acids, such as caffeic and coumaric acids, additionally enhance vascular endothelium function, positively affecting circulatory system condition. Tannins, on the other hand, show antibacterial properties and support the health of the digestive system, alleviating gastrointestinal complaints. The joint action of these phenolic compounds makes berries a valuable component of a health-promoting diet [7,13,15]. The levels of polyphenols primarily depend on factors such as variety, geographic location [21], climatic conditions, cultivation techniques [2,11,22], and harvest period [21]. Foods rich in polyphenols are known to prevent neurodegenerative diseases, age-related disorders, and other civilisational diseases, while also exerting antimutagenic and anticancer properties [5,8,9,11,19,23]. In Japan, on Hokkaido Island, haskap berry juice producers market their product as a ‘golden remedy for eternal youth and longevity’ [16]. Factors such as fruit origin, variety, climate conditions, maturity level, and post-harvest conditions significantly affect juice quality, including bioactive compound contents [10,24,25].
Haskap berries (Lonicera caerulea L.) deteriorate rapidly at room temperature [5,17], with a shelf life of approximately two days for consumption or processing [17]. After this period, damaged berries are often infected with the most common pathogen of soft fruits, grey mould (Botrytis cinerea) [26]. Harvesting on plantations can extend over a month, which is particularly challenging for smaller growers who do not use harvesters. Smaller batches are frequently frozen, which increases production costs [27,28]. Freezing causes cell rupture in the berries, triggering enzymatic reactions that may degrade anthocyanins and other phenolic compounds. This degradation is particularly pronounced during thawing due to interactions with oxidising enzymes [28].
Extending the limited storage period to at least 14 days would allow for processing of larger fruit batches. This can be achieved by slowing metabolic processes through more advanced storage methods of fruits and vegetables, such as controlled atmosphere (CA), which involves reducing the temperature to −1 to +2 °C at 95% relative humidity [3,29,30]. Another effective approach is the use of modified atmosphere packaging (MAP) in the form of Xtend bags [3,26,31,32]. The controlled atmosphere (CA) method reduces oxygen levels to approx. 5% and increases carbon dioxide levels to 20%. This adjustment lowers respiration rates in fruits and vegetables, slows ripening and aging processes, and extends their freshness. Similarly, the Xtend bag method, a form of modified atmosphere packaging (MAP) modifies the internal packaging atmosphere to desired gas proportions (e.g., 5–10% O2, 15–20% CO2, and 70–80% N2), lowering metabolic activity, limiting pathogen growth, and preventing spoilage. This technique is commonly applied to seasonal fruits and vegetables such as berries, tomatoes, or lettuce. Both methods have proven effective in extending shelf life and preserving the nutritional quality of agricultural products, contributing to reduced food waste and improved food security [30,33,34].
Considering the growing scale of haskap berry cultivation in Poland and its increased availability for industry, this fruit is emerging as an attractive raw material to produce both single-ingredient and mixed juices. While previous research has primarily examined the effects of frozen storage on the health benefits of juices, the present study aimed to assess the impact of short-term storage under controlled and modified atmosphere conditions on the total polyphenol content and antioxidant activity in one of the final products, i.e., haskap berry juice. Determining health-promoting substances in dry or fresh matter does not always reflect the actual content of bioactive compounds in consumer-ready products.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Materials

The research material for the two-year experiment consisted of juices derived from six varieties of haskap berry (Lonicera caerulea L.): three Canadian varieties, ‘Boreal Beast’, ‘Boreal Beauty’, and ‘Boreal Blizzard’, and three Russian varieties, ‘Candy Blue’, ‘Sinij Utes’, and ‘Usłada’. The Boreal series is a new line of haskap varieties developed through hybridisation of germplasm from Russia, Japan, and the Kuril Islands [35].
The berries were sourced from a commercial honeysuckle plantation located in southern Poland, in the Lesser Poland Voivodeship, approx. 20 km from Krakow (coordinates: altitude 360 m above sea level; latitude 50°14′06″ N; longitude 19°53′15″ E). The plants were spaced 1.2 m apart in rows and 4 m apart between rows on a gentle slope. Agricultural fabric was placed beneath the plants, and an irrigation system was installed with watering frequency adjusted to weather conditions. All agronomic practices during the experiment were carried out in accordance with the current guidelines for haskap berry cultivation.

2.1.1. Harvest Timing

The harvest period of haskap berries depended on the variety (Table 1). The Russian varieties, which ripened first, were harvested in the second week of June; the Canadian varieties ‘Boreal Beauty’ and ‘Boreal Beast’ were harvested in the third week of July; while the variety ‘Boreal Blizzard’ was harvested in the first week of August. All fruits were harvested at full ripeness, as they are non-climacteric.

2.1.2. Weather Conditions

Temperatures remained stable during flowering, growth, and ripening. Precipitation varied, with higher rainfall recorded in May, June, and July of 2021—months critical for berry growth and ripening (Figure 1).

2.2. Storage Treatments

Berries of each variety (four replicates, approx. 300 g each) were stored for 7 and 14 days in separate containers under the following conditions:
  • Normal atmosphere (NA): Stored in a cold room (temperature 2 °C, relative humidity 90–92%).
  • Controlled atmosphere (CA): 20% CO2 and 5% O2 (temperature 2 °C, relative humidity 90–92%).
  • Modified atmosphere packaging (MAP): Xtend packaging (StePac LA Ltd., Johnson Matthey, Tefen, Israel/USA (Chicago, IL 60181)).

2.3. Juice Preparation

Directly after harvest, and on day 7 and 14 of storage, the bioactive compound contents and antioxidant activity of the berries were determined. For this purpose, a 100 g sample from each of the four replicates was pressed using a laboratory manual basket press. The resulting juice was analysed for total polyphenol contents using the Folin–Ciocalteu method and for their ability to scavenge DPPH radicals.

2.4. The Content of Bioactive Compounds and Antioxidant Activity

2.4.1. Total Polyphenols Content (TPC)

The quantification of phenolic compounds in the extracts was performed under laboratory conditions by reaction with Folin–Ciocalteu reagent. To this end, a juice sample (0.25 mL) was mixed with 0.25 mL of 25% Na2CO3; 0.125 mL of Folin–Ciocalteu reagent (Sigma-Aldrich, Darmstadt, Germany), diluted twice with water prior to the analysis; and 2.25 mL of water, which was incubated for 15 min. The absorbance was measured at 760 nm using a JASCO V-530 UV-Vis spectrophotometer (Tokyo, Japan). The final results were expressed as mg of gallic acid (Sigma-Aldrich, Darmstadt, Germany) per litre (gallic acid equivalents, GAE mg L−1) [36,37].

2.4.2. Radical Scavenging Capacity (RSC)—A DPPH Assay

The radical scavenging capacity of the extracts was determined under laboratory conditions by measuring the reduction of the synthetic, stable free radical 2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH). The colorimetric method measures the change in absorbance of a DPPH solution at 517 nm, reflecting the antioxidant activity of the sample. Briefly, 2.8 mL of 0.1 mM DPPH (Sigma-Aldrich) solution in 96% ethanol was mixed with 0.2 mL of juice sample. DPPH absorbance was measured after 10 min, with RSC results expressed in micromoles of Trolox (Sigma-Aldrich) equivalents per litre (TE µmol L−1) [38].

2.5. Fruit Firmness

Fruit firmness (N) was measured using a TA 500 Lloyd Texture Analyzer equipped with a 6.35 mm diameter tip (AMETEK Test & Calibration Instruments; Fareham, Hampshire, UK).

2.6. Statistical Analysis

The results were processed using a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). Fisher’s least significant difference (LSD) test was applied to determine the significance of differences between the means at a significance level of α = 0.05. All the statistical calculations were performed using Statistica 13.3 software.

3. Results and Discussion

The use of modern storage methods, such as modified atmosphere packaging (MAP) and controlled atmosphere (CA), as well as the analysis of their effects on juice quality, provides valuable information that can help producers optimise storage processes and extend product freshness without compromising nutritional value. Additionally, such research can support the development of more sustainable and efficient fruit storage and processing methods, addressing global challenges associated with food security and sustainable development.

3.1. Polyphenol Content

The total polyphenol content of the juices was analysed using a spectrophotometer and the Folin–Ciocalteu method. In 2021, significant variations in polyphenol content were observed between the varieties tested. The highest concentrations were recorded for the variety ‘Sinij Utes’, while the lowest were found in the variety ‘Boreal Beauty’ (Table 2). Shevchuk et al. [12] conducted studies on the same varieties from the Borealis group, demonstrating that they were among the richest in polyphenols compared to other varieties studied. The latter authors conducted their analyses on raw mass rather than extracted juice, obtaining polyphenol content of 908 mg/L g for ‘Boreal Blizzard’, 849 mg/L for ‘Boreal Beast’, and 813 mg/L for ‘Boreal Beauty’. Corresponding juice samples from their study showed significantly higher values, reaching 2340, 1463, and 1036 mg/L, respectively.
Wang et al. [39] have argued that the method of juice extraction from haskap berries significantly affects their characteristics. Similarly, Senica et al. [40] have found that the concentration of phenolic compounds and tannins changes based on a complex combination of temperature, light, and other factors affecting berry metabolism. Kalisz et al. [23] highlighted the role of post-harvest conditions and processing methods in shaping these differences. The latter authors found that polyphenol content in haskap berry juice ranged from 200.8 to 416.0 mg/L, likely due to pre-freezing the fruit and subsequent pasteurisation of the juice at 85 °C. Research by Khattab et al. [28] showed a reduction in biological activity after juice preservation by heating [41] and freezing [28], respectively. Comparable polyphenol levels were obtained by Szajdek et al. [42] in juices without maceration from chokeberries, bilberries, and blackcurrants, amounting to 1926, 1237, and 2624 mg/L, respectively.
In the current study, after seven days of storage, a significant percentage decrease in polyphenol content was observed in the variety ‘Boreal Blizzard’ (an average of 25.6%) regardless of the method used (Figure 2). The largest reduction occurred during the second week of storage, except for the variety ‘Boreal Blizzard’, which showed a significant decrease in the first week. After 14 days, the highest percentage losses were recorded for the variety ‘Candy Blue’, with an average reduction of 39.4%. Previous studies have shown that polyphenol content in fruits tends to decrease during storage. For instance, research on red raspberries demonstrated a gradual decline in total polyphenol content during fruit ripening and storage, mainly due to changes in the activity of biosynthetic enzymes and an increase in the content of other compounds, such as anthocyanins. Similar trends have been reported in apples and various berries, with storage conditions playing a critical role in the stability of polyphenols [43,44].
The stability of polyphenols during storage depends on many factors, including temperature, light, and the presence of oxygen. Polyphenols are sensitive to oxidative stress and enzymatic activity, which can lead to their degradation during storage [45].
After the first and second weeks, the highest polyphenol content in honeysuckle juice was recorded for the variety ‘Sinij Utes’ (2380 mg/L) under controlled atmosphere (CA) conditions, and the lowest in the variety ‘Boreal Beauty’ in normal atmosphere (NA) storage (928 mg/L) (Table 3). Fruits continue to undergo biochemical changes after harvest, including polyphenol synthesis. The polyphenol content in fruits is also influenced by the composition of the storage atmosphere, particularly CO2 concentration, which can either inhibit or promote polyphenol synthesis depending on conditions [3].
In 2022, the total polyphenol content in juices also showed significant variation across varieties; however, the differences between varieties were significantly smaller than in 2021 (Table 4). The highest polyphenol concentration was recorded in the variety ‘Usłada’ (2898 mg/L), while the lowest was recorded in ‘Boreal Beauty’ (2120 mg/L).
The lowest polyphenol concentration after both seven and fourteen days of storage was recorded in the ‘Boreal Beauty’ cultivar under NA (Table 5). The cultivar with the highest polyphenol content, similar to the previous year, was ‘Sinij Utes’.
The total polyphenol content in berry juice differed between 2021 and 2022. The varieties ‘Usłada’, ‘Candy Blue’, ‘Boreal Beauty’, and ‘Boreal Beast’ demonstrated increases ranging from 69% to more than double the polyphenol content in 2022 compared to 2021 (Figure 3). This variation can be attributed to differences in weather conditions between the two growing seasons, particularly due to increased rainfall during growth and ripening phases in 2021 (Table 1). For instance, Wu et al. [46] demonstrated that intense ultraviolet radiation, high growth temperatures, and low rainfall promoted the formation and accumulation of polyphenols and anthocyanins in plants. Similarly, Senica et al. [40] noted that additional stress caused by reduced temperatures led to the accumulation of secondary metabolites, such as polyphenols.
In 2022, the most significant changes in polyphenol content occurred during the first week of storage (Figure 4). The greatest losses were observed in the variety ‘Candy Blue’ stored in normal atmosphere (55.4%), followed by modified atmosphere packaging (MAP) (44.5%), and the Borealis group under CA conditions (40%). The lowest percentage loss was recorded in the cultivar ‘Sinij Utes’ (25.5%). After 14 days of storage, the worst results were recorded for the variety ‘Candy Blue’ in NA (65.7%) and ‘Usłada’ in CA (45%) and MAP (53.3%). These findings were consistent with those of López et al. [47], who reported that post-harvest handling of fruits and vegetables, including storage under controlled or modified atmospheres and minimal processing, can influence the synthesis or degradation of phenolic compounds.
The lowest polyphenol concentration after both storage periods was recorded in the variety ‘Boreal Beauty’ under NA conditions (Table 5). The variety with the highest polyphenol content, as in the previous year, was ‘Sinij Utes’.

3.2. Antioxidant Activity (DPPH)

Antioxidant activity, assessed using DPPH tests, was comparable between individual varieties in 2021 and 2022 (Table 2 and Table 4). Interestingly, juice samples with the highest polyphenol content did not always show the highest antioxidant activity. After the first week of storage, the results varied depending on the variety and storage conditions (Table 2, Table 3, Table 4 and Table 5), reflecting findings by Dziedzic et al. [3]. Conversely, Kalisz et al. [48] reported a strong correlation between total polyphenol content and antioxidant activity in processed products. Polyphenols are largely responsible for antioxidant properties of fruits, but other factors can also influence their effects. Therefore, maintaining appropriate storage conditions for haskap berries is essential to preserve their nutritional value. Polyphenols are key compounds determining the antioxidant properties of honeysuckle berries, further emphasising the importance of optimised storage conditions.
In 2021, the DPPH test showed the highest inhibition percentage in the variety ‘Boreal Beast’ (81.77%) and the lowest in ‘Boreal Beauty’ (76.43%) and ‘Boreal Blizzard’ (76.95%) (Table 2). Lee et al. [49] demonstrated in vitro antioxidant activity of 86.1% for Korean haskap berries and 92.9% for Chinese berries at a concentration of 300 μg/mL against oxidative stress induced by tert-butyl hydroperoxide in HepG2 human liver cancer cells.
After one week of storage, the most significant declines in the antioxidant activity were observed in the varieties ‘Boreal Blizzard’ and ‘Usłada’ under normal atmosphere (NA) (decreases of 15.82% and 13.70%, respectively) and under controlled atmosphere (CA) conditions (13.84% and 13.70%, respectively). Modified atmosphere packaging (MAP) caused a lower decrease in antioxidant activity (10.51%) in ‘Boreal Blizzard’ (Figure 5), while the smallest losses occurred in the variety ‘Candy Blue’ under NA (6.77%), and in ‘Boreal Beauty’ under CA and MAP conditions (0.96% and 0.38%, respectively).
After two weeks of storage, the smallest changes in radical scavenging capacity, compared to the first week, were noted in ‘Boreal Blizzard’ under NA and CA (4.45% and 3.19%, respectively) and in ‘Sinij Utes’ under MAP conditions (2.54%) (Figure 5). The most significant changes occurred in ‘Sinij Utes’ and ‘Candy Blue’ under NA conditions (9.15% and 9.10%, respectively). The lowest percentage changes in antioxidant activity relative to post-harvest values were recorded for varieties ‘Boreal Beast’ and ‘Candy Blue’ under NA (15.17% and 15.87%), in ‘Boreal Beauty’ and ‘Usłada’ under CA (6.23% and 6.48%), and in ‘Boreal Beauty’ under MAP conditions (5.92%). In contrast, the most pronounced alteration was observed in the variety ‘Usłada’ under NA conditions (20.70%).
In 2022, the DPPH test results were consistent with the previous year, with ‘Boreal Beast’ showing the highest inhibition percentage (81.78%), while ‘Boreal Beauty’ (76.24%) and ‘Boreal Blizzard’ (76.96%) showed the lowest (Table 3). Zehfus et al. [50], studying five Canadian honeysuckle varieties, including ‘Boreal Blizzard’, classified it among varieties with lower antioxidant capacity. After seven days of storage, the highest radical scavenging capacity was observed in ‘Usłada’ under CA and MAP conditions (77.46% and 77.31%), while the lowest was recorded in ‘Boreal Beast’ in NA (72.03%) (Table 5). After 14 days, the variety ‘Usłada’ showed a 5.22% decline in antioxidant capacity during NA storage (Figure 6). The lowest value was recorded in ‘Boreal Beauty’ (68.95%), and the highest in ‘Sinij Utes’ under CA and MAP conditions (75.55% and 75.50%).
Changes in antioxidant potential mirrored the variations in total polyphenol content (TPC) and followed similar trends. According to the existing literature, the most significant changes in TAC and DPPH occur during freezing [51], thermal processing, and oxygen exposure [42,48]. Research by Grobelna et al. [1] also indicated that a four-month storage period of haskap berry juice resulted in a decrease in both polyphenol content and antioxidant activity.
The scientific literature indicates that biochemical processes, such as the synthesis of polyphenolic compounds, continue in fruits after harvest, influencing their radical scavenging capacity. It is also well established that polyphenol content in stored fruits and vegetables depends on atmospheric composition, particularly CO2 concentration [3]. The current study found that controlled atmosphere (CA) and modified atmosphere (MAP) storage conditions were more favourable than normal atmosphere (NA), especially in the context of haskap berry juice production, as previously demonstrated by Krupa et al. [32]. This is reflected in the amplitude of changes in polyphenol content (Figure 7A–C) and antioxidant activity (Figure 7D–F) under different storage conditions, averaged for 2021 and 2022.

3.3. Qualitative Measurements

Depending on the variety, stage of maturity, and growing region, honeysuckle berries are characterised by firmness ranging from 2.9 to 4.9 N at harvest [3,29]. In both years, differences in fruit firmness rates between fruit varieties may explain changes in polyphenol and anthocyanin contents during storage under different conditions, further supporting the advantages of CA and MAP over NA (Figure 8). However, determining the optimal storage method remains complex, as different fruit varieties respond uniquely to varying conditions, significantly affecting the quality of haskap berry juice produced from a single variety. In 2022, the most significant changes in firmness were observed after 14 days in the variety ‘Boreal Blizzard’, regardless of storage method.
Cluster analysis involving total polyphenol content and antioxidant activity identified two groups in 2021 (Figure 9) and 2022 (Figure 10). The composition of these groups varied between the years, supporting earlier findings that total polyphenol content does not always correlate with high antioxidant activity.

4. Conclusions

This study evaluated the impact of short-term storage of haskap berry juices under modified atmosphere (MAP) and controlled atmosphere (CA) conditions on their polyphenol content and antioxidant activity. The results confirmed that storage conditions play a significant role in influencing these parameters, which are critical for preserving the quality of food products. The use of advanced storage methods, such as CA and MAP, was shown to effectively stabilise polyphenol content in juices, as evidenced by differences in fruit respiration rates and biochemical changes.
The observed variability in polyphenol content between 2021 and 2022 reflects the impact of weather conditions on the synthesis of phenolic compounds in fruits. Rainfall and temperature play a key role in these processes, which is important for planning harvests and raw material storage.
DPPH test results demonstrated that high polyphenol content does not necessarily translates into the highest antioxidant activity.
The stability of polyphenols in juices depends on storage conditions such as temperature, humidity, and atmospheric composition. Optimising these factors is essential for preserving the nutritional and sensory qualities of the products, which is vital for haskap berry juice producers aiming to offer high-quality, health-promoting products to the food market.
Differences between varieties and storage conditions highlight the need for further research into polyphenol stabilisation mechanisms and their functionality in haskap berry juices, and the relationship between antioxidant activity and the quality and nutritional value of the fruit. Such studies can significantly increase practical value by providing insights on how to improve shelf life and preserve the health-promoting properties of fruit juices.

Author Contributions

B.A.K.: conceptualisation, data care, experimental design, methodology, writing, preparation of original draft, software, project administration; M.B.: reviewing, methodology; J.B.: funding acquisition, methodology. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable for studies not involving humans or animals.

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in this study are included in the article. Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results.

References

  1. Grobelna, A.; Kalisz, S.; Kieliszek, M. The Effect of the Addition of Blue Honeysuckle Berry Juice to Apple Juice on the Selected Quality Characteristics, Anthocyanin Stability, and Antioxidant Properties. Biomolecules 2019, 9, 744. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Česonienė, L.; Labokas, J.; Jasutienė, I.; Šarkinas, A.; Kaškonienė, V.; Kaškonas, P.; Kazernavičiūtė, R.; Pažereckaitė, A.; Daubaras, R. Bioactive Compounds, Antioxidant, and Antibacterial Properties of Lonicera caerulea Berries: Evaluation of 11 Cultivars. Plants 2021, 10, 624. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Dziedzic, E.; Błaszczyk, J.; Bieniasz, M.; Dziadek, K.; Kopeć, A. Effect of Modified (MAP) and Controlled Atmosphere (CA) Storage on the Quality and Bioactive Compounds of Blue Honeysuckle Fruits (Lonicera caerulea L.). Sci. Hortic. 2020, 265, 109226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Li, F.; Zhao, H.; Xu, R.; Zhang, X.; Zhang, W.; Du, M.; Liu, X.; Fan, L. Simultaneous Optimization of the Acidified Water Extraction for Total Anthocyanin Content, Total Phenolic Content, and Antioxidant Activity of Blue Honeysuckle Berries (Lonicera caerulea L.) Using Response Surface Methodology. Food Sci. Nutr. 2019, 7, 2968–2976. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Luo, J.; Fan, Z.; Yang, X.; Bao, Y.H.; Liang, M.; Guo, Y. Anthocyanins and Antioxidant Activity of Lonicera caerulea Berry Wine during Different Processes. Food Sci. Technol. 2021, 42, e25121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Negreanu-Pirjol, B.S.; Oprea, O.C.; Negreanu-Pirjol, T.; Roncea, F.N.; Prelipcean, A.M.; Craciunescu, O.; Iosageanu, A.; Artem, V.; Ranca, A.; Motelica, L.; et al. Health Benefits of Antioxidant Bioactive Compounds in the Fruits and Leaves of Lonicera caerulea L. and Aronia melanocarpa (Michx.) Elliot. Antioxidants 2023, 12, 951. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Piekarska, J.; Szczypka, M.; Gorczykowski, M.; Sokół-łętowska, A.; Kucharska, A.Z. Evaluation of Immunotropic Activity of Iridoid-Anthocyanin Extract of Honeysuckle Berries (Lonicera caerulea L.) in the Course of Experimental Trichinellosis in Mice. Molecules 2022, 27, 1949. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Raudonė, L.; Liaudanskas, M.; Vilkickytė, G.; Kviklys, D.; Žvikas, V.; Viškelis, J.; Viškelis, P. Phenolic Profiles, Antioxidant Activity and Phenotypic Characterization of Lonicera caerulea L. Berries, Cultivated in Lithuania. Antioxidants 2021, 10, 115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Oszmiański, J.; Kucharska, A.Z. Effect of Pre-Treatment of Blue Honeysuckle Berries on Bioactive Iridoid Content. Food Chem. 2018, 240, 1087–1091. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Sharma, A.; Lee, H.J. Lonicera caerulea: An Updated Account of Its Phytoconstituents and Health-Promoting Activities. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2021, 107, 130–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Auzanneau, N.; Weber, P.; Kosińska-Cagnazzo, A.; Andlauer, W. Bioactive Compounds and Antioxidant Capacity of Lonicera caerulea Berries: Comparison of Seven Cultivars over Three Harvesting Years. J. Food Compos. Anal. 2018, 66, 81–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Shevchuk, L.; Tereshchenko, Y.; Vintskovska, Y.; Levchuk, L.; Babenko, S.; Hrynyk, R. Yield and Content of Biologically Active Substances in Blue Honeysuckle Fruit (Lonicera caerulea L.) Grown in the Forest Steppe of Ukraine. Agron. Res. 2022, 20, 814–826. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Becker, R.; Szakiel, A. Phytochemical Characteristics and Potential Therapeutic Properties of Blue Honeysuckle Lonicera caerulea L. (Caprifoliaceae). J. Herb. Med. 2019, 16, 100237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Bors, B. Breeding the Boreal Series of Haskap (Lonicera Caerulea). 2017, p. 2017. Available online: https://research-groups.usask.ca/fruit/documents/haskap/cshs-Poster-2017.pdf (accessed on 4 June 2024).
  15. De Silva, A.B.K.H.; Rupasinghe, H.P.V. Polyphenols Composition and Anti-Diabetic Properties in Vitro of Haskap (Lonicera caerulea L.) Berries in Relation to Cultivar and Harvesting Date. J. Food Compos. Anal. 2020, 88, 103402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Celli, G.B.; Ghanem, A.; Brooks, M.S.L. Haskap Berries (Lonicera caerulea L.)—A Critical Review of Antioxidant Capacity and Health-Related Studies for Potential Value-Added Products. Food Bioprocess Technol. 2014, 7, 1541–1554. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Ochmian, I.; Grajkowski, J.; Skupień, K. Field Performance, fruit chemical composition and firmness under cold storage and simulated “shelf-life” conditions of three blue honey suckle cultigens (Lonicera caerulea). J. Fruit Ornam. Plant Res. 2008, 16, 83–91. Available online: https://www.inhort.pl/files/journal_pdf/journal_2008/full9%202008.pdf (accessed on 18 July 2024).
  18. Levon, V.; Grygorieva, O.; Antoniewska-Krzeska, A.; Šramková, K.F.; Zhurba, M. Variation of Fruits Morphometric Parameters and Iridoid Content of Lonicera caerulea L. Germplasm Collection. Agrobiodivers. Improv. Nutr. Health Life Qual. 2022, 6, 262–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Khattab, R.; Brooks, M.S.-L.; Ghanem, A. Phenolic Analyses of Haskap Berries (Lonicera caerulea L.): Spectrophotometry Versus High Performance Liquid Chromatography. Int. J. Food Prop. 2016, 19, 1708–1725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Rupasinghe, H.P.V.; Arumuggam, N.; Amararathna, M.; De Silva, A.B.K.H. The Potential Health Benefits of Haskap (Lonicera caerulea L.): Role of Cyanidin-3-O-Glucoside. J. Funct. Foods. 2018, 44, 24–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Gerbrandt, E.M.; Bors, R.H.; Meyer, D.; Wilen, R.; Chibbar, R.N. Fruit Quality of Japanese, Kuril and Russian Blue Honeysuckle (Lonicera caerulea L.) Germplasm Compared to Blueberry, Raspberry and Strawberry. Euphytica 2020, 216, 59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Gazdik, Z.; Reznicek, V.; Adam, V.; Zitka, O.; Jurikova, T.; Krska, B.; Matuskovic, J.; Plsek, J.; Saloun, J.; Horna, A.; et al. Use of Liquid Chromatography with Electrochemical Detection for the Determination of Antioxidants in Less Common Fruits. Molecules 2008, 13, 2823–2836. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Kalisz, S.; Polak, N.; Jodłowska, M. Wpływ Odmiany Surowca Na Wybrane Wyróżniki Jakościowe Soków z Jagody Kamczackiej. Przemysł Spożywczy 2022, 76, 26–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Małodobry, M.; Bieniasz, M.; Dziedzic, E. Evaluation of the Yield and Some Components in the Fruit of Blue Honeysuckle (Lonicera caerulea Var. Edulis Turcz. Freyn.). Folia Hortic. 2010, 22, 45–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Koort, A.; Moor, U.; Põldma, P.; Kaiser, C.; Starast, M. Comparison of Regular Atmospheric Storage versus Modified Atmospheric Packaging on Postharvest Quality of Organically Grown Lowbush and Half-Highbush Blueberries. Sustainability 2018, 10, 3916. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Yan, H.; Mi, Y.; Li, Y.; Zang, H.; Guo, L.; Huo, J.; Man, Z.; Chen, Z.; Zhang, B.; Sang, M.; et al. First Report of Postharvest Fruit Rot Caused by Botrytis Cinerea on Blue Honeysuckle (Lonicera caerulea) Fruit in China. Plant Dis. 2024, 108, 527. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Jurikova, T.; Ercişli, S.; Rop, O.; Mlcek, J.; Balla, S.; Zitny, R.; Sochor, J.; Hegedusova, A.; Benedikova, D.; Ďurišová, L. The Evaluation of Anthocyanin Content of Honeyberry (Lonicera kamtschatica) Clones during Freezing in Relation to Antioxidant Activity and Parameters of Nutritional Value. Zemdirb. Agric. 2014, 101, 215–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Khattab, R.; Celli, G.B.; Ghanem, A.; Brooks, M.S.L. Effect of Frozen Storage on Polyphenol Content and Antioxidant Activity of Haskap Berries (Lonicera caerulea L.). J. Berry Res. 2015, 5, 231–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Leisso, R.; Jarrett, B.; Richter, R.; Miller, Z. Fresh Haskap Berry Postharvest Quality Characteristics and Storage Life. Can. J. Plant Sci. 2021, 101, 1051–1063. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Ziv, C.; Fallik, E. Postharvest Storage Techniques and Quality Evaluation of Fruits and Vegetables for Reducing Food Loss. Agronomy 2021, 11, 1133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Błaszczyk, J.; Bieniasz, M.; Nawrocki, J.; Kopeć, M.; Mierzwa-Hersztek, M.; Gondek, K.; Zaleski, T.; Knaga, J.; Bogdał, S. The Effect of Harvest Date and Storage Conditions on the Quality of Remontant Strawberry Cultivars Grown in a Gutter System under Covers. Agriculture 2022, 12, 1193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Krupa, T.; Klimek, K.; Zaraś-Januszkiewicz, E. Nutritional Values of Minikiwi Fruit (Actinidia arguta) after Storage: Comparison between DCA New Technology and ULO and CA. Molecules 2022, 27, 4313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Bishop, D. Controlled Atmosphere Storage. In Cold and Chilled Storage Technology; Springer: Boston, MA, USA, 1997; pp. 53–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Fang, Y.; Wakisaka, M. A Review on the Modified Atmosphere Preservation of Fruits and Vegetables with Cutting-Edge Technologies. Agriculture 2021, 11, 992. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Bors, B.; Sawchuk, E.; Dawson, J.; Sawatzky, R. Breeding and Selecting Haskap for Nutraceutical and Agronomic Suitability; Final Report on Saskatchewan Ministry of Agriculture: Saskatoon, SK, Canada, 2015; pp. 1–84. Available online: https://research-groups.usask.ca/fruit/documents/haskap/20080042.pdf (accessed on 26 July 2024).
  36. Singleton, V.L.; Orthofer, R.; Lamuela-Raventós, R.M. Analysis of Total Phenols and Other Oxidation Substrates and Antioxidants by Means of Folin-Ciocalteu Reagent. Methods Enzymol. 1999, 299, 152–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Sánchez-Rangel, J.C.; Benavides, J.; Heredia, J.B.; Cisneros-Zevallos, L.; Jacobo-Velázquez, D.A. The Folin–Ciocalteu Assay Revisited: Improvement of Its Specificity for Total Phenolic Content Determination. Anal. Methods 2013, 5, 5990–5999. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Brand-Williams, W.; Cuvelier, M.E.; Berset, C. Use of a Free Radical Method to Evaluate Antioxidant Activity. LWT Food Sci. Technol. 1995, 28, 25–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Wang, Z.; Svyantek, A.; Miller, Z.; Jarrett, B.; Kapus, A. Haskap Juicing Method Effects on Haskap Juice Quality. Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 10784. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Senica, M.; Bavec, M.; Stampar, F.; Mikulic-Petkovsek, M. Blue Honeysuckle (Lonicera caerulea Subsp. Edulis (Turcz. Ex Herder) Hultén.) Berries and Changes in Their Ingredients across Different Locations. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2018, 98, 3333–3342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Piasek, A.; Kusznierewicz, B.; Grzybowska, I.; Malinowska-Pańczyk, E.; Piekarska, A.; Azqueta, A.; Collins, A.R.; Namieśnik, J.; Bartoszek, A. The Influence of Sterilization with EnbioJet® Microwave Flow Pasteurizer on Composition and Bioactivity of Aronia and Blue-Berried Honeysuckle Juices. J. Food Compos. Anal. 2011, 24, 880–888. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Szajdek, A.; Dąbkowska, E.; Borowska, E.J. Wpływ obróbki enzymatycznej miazgi owoców jagodowych na zawartość polifenoli i aktywność przeciwutleniającą soku. Żywność 2006, 4, 59–67. Available online: https://wydawnictwo.pttz.org/magazine-archive/agnieszka-szajdek-ewa-dabkowska-eulalia-j-borowska-wplyw-obrobki-enzymatycznej-miazgi-owocow-jagodowych-na-zawartosc-polifenoli-i-aktywnosc-przeciwutleniajaca-soku/ (accessed on 18 July 2024).
  43. Kobori, R.; Yakami, S.; Kawasaki, T.; Saito, A.; Popovi´c, J.; Djordjevi´c, P.-D.; Fernando, L.; De Oliveira, C. Changes in the Polyphenol Content of Red Raspberry Fruits during Ripening. Horticulturae 2021, 7, 569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Łysiak, G. The Sum of Active Temperatures as a Method of Determining the Optimum Harvest Date of “Šampion” and “Ligol” Apple Cultivars Impact of Transport Conditions on Storage and Shelf Life of Fruit View Project Impact of Climatic Conditions on the Quality of Frui. Acta Sci. Pol. Hortorum Cultus. 2012, 11, 3–13. Available online: https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/11542008.pdf (accessed on 24 March 2022).
  45. Zhang, Y.; Truzzi, F.; D’amen, E.; Dinelli, G. Effect of Storage Conditions and Time on the Polyphenol Content of Wheat Flours. Processes 2021, 9, 248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Wu, X.; Zhang, S.; Li, X.; Zhang, F.; Fan, Y.; Liu, Q.; Wan, X.; Lin, T. Postharvest UV-B Radiation Increases Enzyme Activity, Polysaccharide and Secondary Metabolites in Honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica Thunb.). Ind. Crops Prod. 2021, 171, 113907. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. López, N.; Puértolas, E.; Condón, S.; Álvarez, I.; Raso, J. Application of Pulsed Electric Fields for Improving the Maceration Process during Vinification of Red Wine: Influence of Grape Variety. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 2008, 227, 1099–1107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Kalisz, S.; Polak, N.; Cacak-Pietrzak, G.; Cendrowski, A.; Kruszewski, B. Impact of Production Methods and Storage Time on the Bioactive Compounds and Antioxidant Activity of Confitures Made from Blue Honeysuckle Berry (Lonicera caerulea L.). Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 12999. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Lee, Y.S.; Cho, I.J.; Kim, J.W.; Lee, S.K.; Ku, S.K.; Lee, H.J. Evaluation of in Vitro Anti-Oxidant and Anti-Inflammatory Activities of Korean and Chinese Lonicera Caerulea. Nutr. Res. Pract. 2018, 12, 486–493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Zehfus, L.R.; Eskiw, C.; Low, N.H. Phenolic Profiles and Antioxidant Activities of Saskatchewan (Canada) Bred Haskap (Lonicera caerulea) Berries. BioRxiv. 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Khattab, R.; Ghanem, A.; Brooks, M.S.-L. Stability of Haskap Berry (Lonicera caerulea L.) Anthocyanins at Different Storage and Processing Conditions. J. Field Robot. 2016, 5, 67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Agriculture 15 00253 g001
Figure 1. Weather patterns during flowering, growth, and ripening of berries in 2021 and 2022.
Figure 1. Weather patterns during flowering, growth, and ripening of berries in 2021 and 2022.
Agriculture 15 00253 g001
Agriculture 15 00253 g002
Figure 2. Percent change in polyphenol content (mg/L GAE) after seven days and after fourteen days of berry storage, relative to post-harvest values for individual varieties and storage methods in 2021.
Figure 2. Percent change in polyphenol content (mg/L GAE) after seven days and after fourteen days of berry storage, relative to post-harvest values for individual varieties and storage methods in 2021.
Agriculture 15 00253 g002
Agriculture 15 00253 g003
Figure 3. Percentage change in total polyphenol content in 2022 compared to 2021.
Figure 3. Percentage change in total polyphenol content in 2022 compared to 2021.
Agriculture 15 00253 g003
Agriculture 15 00253 g004
Figure 4. Percentage change in polyphenol content (TPC, mg/L GAE) after seven and fourteen days of berry storage relative to post-harvest values in 2022 based on variety and storage method.
Figure 4. Percentage change in polyphenol content (TPC, mg/L GAE) after seven and fourteen days of berry storage relative to post-harvest values in 2022 based on variety and storage method.
Agriculture 15 00253 g004
Agriculture 15 00253 g005
Figure 5. Percentage changes in radical scavenging capacity in juice after seven and fourteen days of storage in 2021 depending on the variety.
Figure 5. Percentage changes in radical scavenging capacity in juice after seven and fourteen days of storage in 2021 depending on the variety.
Agriculture 15 00253 g005
Agriculture 15 00253 g006
Figure 6. Percentage changes in radical scavenging capacity in juice after seven and fourteen days of storage in 2022 depending on the variety.
Figure 6. Percentage changes in radical scavenging capacity in juice after seven and fourteen days of storage in 2022 depending on the variety.
Agriculture 15 00253 g006
Agriculture 15 00253 g007
Figure 7. Amplitude of changes in polyphenol content (A–C) and antioxidant activity (D–F) under various storage conditions, averaged for 2021 and 2022.
Figure 7. Amplitude of changes in polyphenol content (A–C) and antioxidant activity (D–F) under various storage conditions, averaged for 2021 and 2022.
Agriculture 15 00253 g007
Agriculture 15 00253 g008
Figure 8. Percentage changes in fruit firmness based on storage method (NA—(A), CA—(B), or MAP—(C)) in 2021 and 2022.
Figure 8. Percentage changes in fruit firmness based on storage method (NA—(A), CA—(B), or MAP—(C)) in 2021 and 2022.
Agriculture 15 00253 g008
Agriculture 15 00253 g009
Figure 9. Similarity of storage method combinations and varieties in terms of total polyphenol content and antioxidant activity in 2021.
Figure 9. Similarity of storage method combinations and varieties in terms of total polyphenol content and antioxidant activity in 2021.
Agriculture 15 00253 g009
Agriculture 15 00253 g010
Figure 10. Similarity of storage method combinations and varieties in terms of total polyphenol content and antioxidant activity in 2022.
Figure 10. Similarity of storage method combinations and varieties in terms of total polyphenol content and antioxidant activity in 2022.
Agriculture 15 00253 g010
Table 1. Flowering and fruiting dates of six haskap berry varieties.
Table 1. Flowering and fruiting dates of six haskap berry varieties.
JuneJulyAugust
Week123412341234
‘Usłada’ Agriculture 15 00253 i001
‘Sinij Utes’Agriculture 15 00253 i002
‘Candy Blue’Agriculture 15 00253 i003
‘Boreal Beauty’ Agriculture 15 00253 i004
‘Boreal Beast’ Agriculture 15 00253 i005
‘Boreal Blizzard’ Agriculture 15 00253 i006
Table 2. Total polyphenol content (TPC, mg/L GAE) and antioxidant activity (DPPH, % inhibition) of post-harvest juice by variety in 2021.
Table 2. Total polyphenol content (TPC, mg/L GAE) and antioxidant activity (DPPH, % inhibition) of post-harvest juice by variety in 2021.
Total Polyphenols
[mg GAE/L]		Antioxidant Activity
[%]
‘Usłada’1708.66 ± 6.47 d79.93 ± 0.49 b
‘Sinij Utes’2506.57 ± 2.36 a77.52 ± 0.07 cd
‘Candy Blue’1895.16 ± 5.84 c78.15 ± 0.04 c
‘Boreal Beauty’1036.20 ± 2.84 f76.43 ± 0.25 e
‘Boreal Beast’1463.77 ± 7.79 e81.77 ± 0.54 a
‘Boreal Blizzard’2340.74 ± 31.84 b76.95 ± 0.13 de
Values are given as means ± standard deviations, followed by letters a–f to indicate statistical significance. The values marked with the same letters in the same column, depending on the number of days of storage, are not statistically different at the α < 0.05 level.
Table 3. Total polyphenols content (TPC, mg/L GAE) and antioxidant activity (DPPH, % inhibition) in juice after harvest, after seven and fourteen days of berry storage in 2021, depending on variety and storage method.
Table 3. Total polyphenols content (TPC, mg/L GAE) and antioxidant activity (DPPH, % inhibition) in juice after harvest, after seven and fourteen days of berry storage in 2021, depending on variety and storage method.
CultivarsStorage ConditionsTotal Polyphenols
[mg GAE/L]		Antioxidant
Activity [%]		Total Polyphenols
[mg GAE/100 mL]		Antioxidant
Activity [%]
7 days7 days14 days14 days
‘Usłada’Na1498.13 ± 1.03 i68.81 ± 0.04 f1082.61 ± 1.52 h63.24 ± 0.04 g
Ca1693.56 ± 2.19 g77.21 ± 0.07 b1364.72 ± 0.82 e74.58 ± 0.06 a
MAP1610.66 ± 1.55 h75.46 ± 0.14 c1356.66 ± 6.23 e69.66 ± 0.05 d
‘Sinij Utes’Na2219.28 ± 5.31 c68.78 ± 0.05 f1411.02 ± 4.25 d61.68 ± 0.11 h
Ca2426.57 ± 2.14 a 75.42 ± 0.10 c1853.21 ± 3.07 a69.60 ± 0.09 d
MAP2380.02 ± 2.37 b73.57 ± 0.03 d1659.06 ± 3.86 b71.60 ± 0.19 c
‘Candy Blue’ Na1767.37 ± 3.24 f72.73 ± 0.15 e999.5 ± 3.65 j65.64 ± 0.21 e
Ca1776.62 ± 5.04 e73.44 ± 0.23 d1209.11 ± 3.94 f69.33 ± 0.08 d
MAP1764.09 ± 2.23 f73.48 ± 0.11 d1124.78 ± 1.59 g69.55 ± 0.02 d
‘Boreal Beauty’Na927.76 ± 2.25 l68.90 ± 0.15 f 865.58 ± 1.68 l63.15 ± 0.11 g
Ca1031.40 ± 2.94 k75.95 ± 0.24 c961.67 ± 5.19 k 71.49 ± 0.03 c
MAP1035.28 ± 4.41 k75.51 ± 0.12 c962.08 ± 0.64 k71.73 ± 0.07 c
‘Boreal Beast’Na1407.35 ± 1.02 j75.61 ± 0.22 c1040.87 ± 1.59 i69.37 ± 0.09 d
Ca1409.35 ± 1.61 j78.78 ± 0.20 a1367.23 ± 5.26 e72.54 ± 0.07 b
MAP1410.85 ± 1.91 j78.78 ± 0.14 a984.49 ± 4.90 jk74.28 ± 0.07 a
‘Boreal Blizzard’Na1495.29 ± 2.05 i64.78 ± 0.09 h1385.24 ± 1.24 de61.36 ± 0.05 h
Ca1764.92 ± 4.93 f66.30 ± 0.21 g1673.07 ± 5.11 b63.85 ± 0.10 f
MAP2039.25 ± 2.95 d68.87 ± 0.23 f1455.62 ± 4.73 c63.24 ± 0.03 g
Values are given as means ± standard deviations, followed by letters a–l to indicate statistical significance. The values marked with the same letters in the same column, depending on the number of days of storage, are not statistically different at the α < 0.05 level.
Table 4. Total polyphenols content (TPC, mg/L GAE) and antioxidant activity (DPPH, % inhibition) in juice post-harvest by variety in 2022.
Table 4. Total polyphenols content (TPC, mg/L GAE) and antioxidant activity (DPPH, % inhibition) in juice post-harvest by variety in 2022.
Total Polyphenols
[mg GAE/L]		Antioxidant
Activity [%]
‘Usłada’2898.76 ± 3.63 a79.74 ± 0.13 b
‘Sinij Utes’2710.15 ± 2.91 b77.53 ± 0.13 c
‘Candy Blue’2544.46 ± 2.84 c78.02 ± 0.32 c
‘Boreal Beauty’2120.75 ± 9.35 f76.24 ± 0.28 e
‘Boreal Beast’2467.37 ± 8.40 d81.78 ± 0.14 a
‘Boreal Blizzard’2448.64 ± 1.54 e76.96 ± 0.05 d
Values are given as means ± standard deviations, followed by letters a–f to indicate statistical significance. The values marked with the same letters in the same column, depending on the number of days of storage, are not statistically different at the α < 0.05 level.
Table 5. Total polyphenol content (TPC, mg/L GAE) and antioxidant activity (DPPH, % inhibition) in juice after harvest, after seven and fourteen days of berry storage in 2022 depending on variety and storage method.
Table 5. Total polyphenol content (TPC, mg/L GAE) and antioxidant activity (DPPH, % inhibition) in juice after harvest, after seven and fourteen days of berry storage in 2022 depending on variety and storage method.
CultivarsStorage ConditionsTotal Polyphenols [mg GAE/L]Antioxidant Activity [%]Total Polyphenols [mg GAE/L]Antioxidant Activity [%]
7 days7 days14 days14 days
‘Usłada’Na1485.86 ± 2.29 e74.01 ± 0.16 b1250.60 ± 4.32 e 69.98 ± 0.06 e
Ca2230.19 ± 4.01 c77.46 ± 0.08 a1592.26 ± 4.95 c75.55 ± 0.14 a
MAP1925.93 ± 2.51 c77.31 ± 0.17 a1353.04 ± 3.52 d75.50 ± 0.34 a
‘Sinij Utes’Na1924.21 ± 1.74 c74.09 ± 0.05 b1591.35 ± 2.38 c70.04 ± 0.01 e
Ca2208.92 ± 3.96 b76.69 ± 0.16 b1757.58 ± 1.92 a75.59 ± 0.28 a
MAP1922.67 ± 3.80 c76.51± 0.12 b1653.99 ± 4.12 b73.95 ± 0.16 b
‘Candy Blue’ Na1133.70 ± 2.99 h72.32 ± 0.23 g924.64 ± 1.43 h69.12 ± 0.17 e
Ca1889.79 ± 6.04 d75.56 ± 0.09 c1351.92 ± 1.53 d75.47 ± 0.10 a
MAP1413.54 ± 4.84 f74.06 ± 0.01 e1252.52 ± 2.03 e73.25 ± 0.11 b
‘Boreal Beauty’Na1112.99 ± 5.33 i72.25 ± 0.04 g916.86 ± 3.25 h68.95 ± 0.12 e
Ca1260.68 ± 5.48 g73.43 ± 0.07 f1194.44 ± 3.29 f72.02 ± 0.01 c
MAP1250.73 ± 2.74 g73.50 ± 0.09 f1196.23 ± 2.72 f71.48 ± 0.06 c
‘Boreal Beast’Na1410.06 ± 0.45 f 72.03 ± 0.02 g1350.58 ± 1.89 d69.09 ± 0.14 e
Ca1480.46 ± 5.99 e74.64 ± 0.08 d1357.90 ± 3.84 d73.61 ± 0.28 b
MAP1415.36 ± 7.01 f74.04 ± 0.01 e1253.43 ± 8.66 e73.32 ± 0.21 b
‘Boreal Blizzard’Na1252.60 ± 3.68 g73.36 ± 0.14 f920.81 ± 6.07 h 70.59 ± 0.08 e
Ca1488.64 ± 7.27 d75.57 ± 0.13 c1109.42 ± 1.11 g74.05 ± 0.14 b
MAP1894.66 ± 3.68 d76.41 ± 0.09 b1255.87 ± 2.33 e75.59 ± 0.05 a
Values are given as means ± standard deviations, followed by letters a–i to indicate statistical significance. The values marked with the same letters in the same column, depending on the number of days of storage, are not statistically different at the α < 0.05 level.
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

Kowalczyk, B.A.; Bieniasz, M.; Błaszczyk, J. Effect of Short-Term Storage in Modified Atmosphere Packaging (MAP) and Controlled Atmosphere (CA) on Total Polyphenol Content and Antioxidant Activity in Juices from Haskap Berry (Lonicera caerulea L.). Agriculture 2025, 15, 253. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture15030253

AMA Style

Kowalczyk BA, Bieniasz M, Błaszczyk J. Effect of Short-Term Storage in Modified Atmosphere Packaging (MAP) and Controlled Atmosphere (CA) on Total Polyphenol Content and Antioxidant Activity in Juices from Haskap Berry (Lonicera caerulea L.). Agriculture. 2025; 15(3):253. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture15030253

Chicago/Turabian Style

Kowalczyk, Barbara Anna, Monika Bieniasz, and Jan Błaszczyk. 2025. "Effect of Short-Term Storage in Modified Atmosphere Packaging (MAP) and Controlled Atmosphere (CA) on Total Polyphenol Content and Antioxidant Activity in Juices from Haskap Berry (Lonicera caerulea L.)" Agriculture 15, no. 3: 253. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture15030253

APA Style

Kowalczyk, B. A., Bieniasz, M., & Błaszczyk, J. (2025). Effect of Short-Term Storage in Modified Atmosphere Packaging (MAP) and Controlled Atmosphere (CA) on Total Polyphenol Content and Antioxidant Activity in Juices from Haskap Berry (Lonicera caerulea L.). Agriculture, 15(3), 253. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture15030253

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