Next Article in Journal
Optimum Nitrogen Application Promotes Sweetpotato Storage Root Initiation
Next Article in Special Issue
Active Carboxymethyl Cellulose-Based Edible Coatings for the Extension of Fresh Goldenberries Shelf-Life
Previous Article in Journal
From Laboratory to Field: The Effect of Controlling Oscillations in Temperature on the Growth of Crops
Previous Article in Special Issue
Shelf Life of Blackberry Fruits (Rubus fruticosus) with Edible Coatings Based on Candelilla Wax and Guar Gum
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Horticulturae
Volume 8
Issue 8
10.3390/horticulturae8080709
horticulturae-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

Effects of Passive Modified Atmosphere Packaging on Physico-Chemical Traits and Antioxidant Systems of ‘Dottato’ Fresh Fig

by
Giuseppina Adiletta
1,
Milena Petriccione
2 and
Marisa Di Matteo
1,*
1
Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Salerno, Via Giovanni Paolo II, 84084 Fisciano, SA, Italy
2
Council for Agricultural Research and Economics (CREA)—Research Centre for Olive, Fruit and Citrus Crops (OFA), Via Torrino 3, 81100 Caserta, CE, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Horticulturae 2022, 8(8), 709; https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae8080709
Submission received: 6 July 2022 / Revised: 2 August 2022 / Accepted: 4 August 2022 / Published: 6 August 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Edible Coating and Films as Promising and Sustainable Packaging Materials for Horticultural Products)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Fig is a very perishable fruit with short postharvest life. Low-cost postharvest techniques should be employed to reduce fresh fig postharvest losses. The purpose of this study was to design a passive modified atmosphere packaging (PMAP) to extend the shelf-life of fresh ‘Dottato’ figs stored at 4 °C for 21 days. Physico-chemical traits and enzymatic and non-enzymatic antioxidant systems were evaluated. Storage in PMAP reduced the losses of fruit weight as well as maintained physico-chemical traits and nutraceutical traits such as polyphenol and flavonoid contents and the antioxidant activity in fresh figs. PMAP reduced oxidative stress, inducing the activities of antioxidant enzymes such as ascorbate peroxidase and catalase, involved in reactive oxygen species scavenging. A reduction in browning process due to polyphenol oxidase and guaiacol peroxidase activities was observed in PMAP samples. Multivariate analysis indicated that storage conditions and storage time affected the responses of qualitative and enzymatic traits. Fig fruit storage in PMAP was suitable to delay its postharvest decay and to preserve nutraceutical traits and antioxidative enzymes during 21 days of cold storage.

1. Introduction

Fig (Ficus carica L.) belongs to the Moraceae family, and it is the first domesticated fruit tree cultivated for its fruit [1,2]. World fig production is concentrated in the countries of the Mediterranean area, where the majority of fig fruit (about 60%) is dried or used in fig-paste production [3]. Several studies have demonstrated that many fig accessions or cultivars with different agronomic and qualitative traits are cultivated in Mediterranean countries [4,5]. Fig is one of the most important fruit species in the Mediterranean diet, which is one of the most studied and well-known dietary patterns worldwide, associated with a wide range of benefits for health and longevity [6,7]. Phytochemicals in fig fruit are health-promoting compounds that provide protection against several human diseases [8]. The bioactive compounds contained in fresh and dried figs, such as phenols, flavonoids, anthocyanins, have been found to be associated with several health benefits [2].
In the global market, consumer demand is increasing for fresh figs but is stable for dried ones [9]. Fresh figs are harvested when almost fully ripened and showing the optimum flavor and sweetness, but being a climacteric fruit, figs are highly perishable, with a short storage period and market life [10]. Different techniques as well as cold storage, edible coatings, modified atmosphere, 1-MCP, UV-C, and ozone have been proposed to preserve the quality of fresh figs and extend their shelf-life [10,11,12,13,14,15,16].
Among these technologies, MAP is a relatively low-cost alternative to controlled atmosphere storage, and it is proposed by many researchers as an optimal storage condition for selected fresh fruit and vegetables. Active and passive modified atmospheres (MAP) have been used for fig and breba fruit, with the optimal O2 and CO2 levels ranging from 5 to 10% and from 15 to 20%, respectively [17]. Furthermore, MAP (2% O2) allowed the extension of cold storage for fresh figs to up to 29 days at 1 °C, improving firmness and delaying ripening [18]. MAP, alone or combined with natural antimicrobial compounds from soybean meal, extended the cold storage of ‘San Antonio’ and ‘Banane’ breba fruit and the ‘Cuello Dama Blanco’ and ‘Cuello Dama Negro’ figs [19,20]. The cultivars of fig had an important impact on the extension of postharvest life; for example ‘San Antonio’ and ‘Banane’ figs packaged with the same microperforated film (40 µm thick biaxially oriented polypropylene, with one hole per 50 mm, a total of three holes, ø = 100 µm) showed different optimal maximum times of cold storage, of up to 14 and 21 days, respectively [19].
The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of passive modified atmosphere packaging (PMAP) for ‘Dottato’ fresh fig on enzymatic and non-enzymatic antioxidant systems in order to develop a low-cost technology for maintaining physico-chemical and nutraceutical traits during cold storage.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Fruit Samples and Experimental Design

Fig fruit cv. Dottato was harvested from ten trees at ripening stage in mid-September at a commercial orchard located in Castellabate (Salerno-Italy). Figs were transported to the laboratory of the Council for Agricultural Research and Economics—Research Centre for Olive, Fruit and Citrus Crops (CREA-OFA) (Caserta, Italy), and selected for absence of defects and uniformity of color and size.
Fig fruits were placed inside sanitized cellulosic trays with an adsorbent/desorbent material® (EP-1530998-A3) and then packaged in a passive modified atmosphere using a semipermeable film (polyolefins) characterized by the following parameters: thickness, 15 μm; transmission rate of CO2, 41,000 cm3 m−2 day−1; transmission rate of O2, 10,000 cm3 m−2 day−1 at 23 °C and 0% RH; and moisture transmission vapor, 25 g m–2 day−1 at 38 °C and 100% RH. Packaged figs were stored in a controlled chamber at 4 °C and 95% relative humidity for 21 days. The controls were placed in the aforementioned trays without packing.
Three biological replicates containing five figs were prepared per sampling date (0, 7, 14 and 21 days of storage period). All analyses were carried out in triplicate for each biological replicate.

2.2. Physico-Chemical Traits

Each package was weighed with an analytical balance (mod. Gibertini E42, Milano, Italy) at the beginning of the experiment and every 7 days during cold storage. The weight loss (%) was calculated as follows:
Weight loss (%) = [(W0 − Wt)/W0] × 100
where W0 is the weight (g) on day 0 and Wt is the weight (g) on the fixed day of the sample.
Total titratable acidity (g of citric acid/100 g fresh weight (FW)) (TA) was determined by an alkaline solution (0.1 M sodium hydroxide) to the end point at pH 8.1 [14].
Reducing sugars were evaluated by Felhing assay, according to previous established methodologies [21]. The results were expressed in g of reducing sugars (RS) per 100 g of FW.

2.3. Sugar and Acid Analysis

Sugars were determined by HPLC (Hewlett Packard, mod. 79852, Palo Alto, CA, USA) equipped with 4.6 × 250 mm (60 ˚A, 4 μm) carbohydrate cartridge column (Waters, Milford, MA, USA) and a refractive index detector (Hewlett Packard, mod. 100, USA). The quality-quantitative sugar profile was assessed based on procedures described by Adiletta et al. [22].
Fresh figs were mixed with distilled water (1:10 w/v) and homogenized in an Ultra-Turrax blender (T25, IKA Werke, Staufen, Germany) for 2 min and centrifuged at 4000 rpm for 10 min. Supernatant was filtered through 0.45 μm syringe cellulose filter (Millipore, Billerica, MA, USA) before ion exchange chromatography analysis. The apparatus (Di-onex Corp., Sunnyvale, CA USA) was equipped with an ED 500 electrochemical detector, Ionpac AS11 column (mm), and Ionpac AS11 Guard ( mm). The quality-quantitative organic acid profile was assessed as reported by Adiletta et al. [22].

2.4. Bioactive Compounds and Antioxidant Activity

Figs were homogenized in methanolic solution (80% v/v), and supernatant was used to determine bioactive compounds and antioxidant activity. The Folin–Ciocalteu and aluminum chloride colorimetric methods were used to measure total phenol content (POL) and total flavonoid content (FLAV), respectively. The results were expressed as milligrams of gallic acid equivalents (GAE) per 100 g fresh weight (FW) and as milligrams of catechin equivalent (CE) per 100 g fresh weight (FW) for POL and FLAV, respectively [23].
Antioxidant activity (AAN) was determined by 1,1-diphenyl-2-picryl-hydrazil (DPPH) according to the method described by Adiletta et al. [14], and the results were expressed in mg of ascorbic acid (AA) per 100 g fresh weight (FW).

2.5. Enzyme Extraction and Activity Assays

Total soluble proteins were extracted by re-suspending frozen fig fruit powder in extraction buffer (2.5:10 w/v), as described by Adiletta et al. [14]. Supernatant was used to evaluate the activity of catalase (CAT; EC 1.11.1.6), ascorbate peroxidase (APX; EC 1.11.1.11) and guaiacol peroxidase (GPX; EC 1.11.1.7). Bradford assay was used to evaluate total protein content in crude fig extract using bovine serum albumin as standard [24].
CAT activity was assessed by the method described by Pasquariello et al. [25], using 50 mM of potassium phosphate buffer (pH 7.0), 20 mM H2O2 and 200 µL of crude enzyme extract in a final volume of 1.5 mL. The reaction was started by adding H2O2, and the decrease in absorbance at 240 nm, caused by its breakdown, was monitored. The specific activity was expressed as µmol H2O2 per mg proteins.
APX (EC 1.11.1.11) activity was estimated by the method of Petriccione et al. [26], registering the optical density decrease due to ascorbic acid oxidation at 290 nm. The reaction mixture contained 100 mM potassium phosphate buffer (pH 7), 0.33 mM ascorbic acid, 0.35 mM H2O2, 0.66 mM sodium EDTA (pH 7) and 100 µL of crude enzyme extract in a final reaction volume of 1.5 mL. The APX activity was expressed as µmol per mg proteins.
GPX (EC 1.11.1.7) activity was determined according to Petriccione et al. [26], monitoring the development of tetraguaiacol at 470 nm. The reaction mixture contained 100 mM potassium phosphate buffer pH 7.0, 0.20 mM sodium-EDTA pH 7.0, 4.0 mM H2O2, 6.4 mM guaiacol and 200 µL of crude enzyme extract in a final volume of 1 mL. The GPX activity was expressed as µmol per mg proteins.
Polyphenoloxidase activity (PPO) was determined following the extraction and assay described by Adiletta et al. [14]. Fresh figs were homogenized in 100 mM sodium phosphate buffer (pH 6.4) containing 0.125 g PVPP (1: 2.5 w/v). Crude enzyme extract (100 µL) was incubated with 500 mM catechol in 100 mM sodium phosphate buffer (pH 6.4), and the PPO activity was measured by evaluating the absorbance at 398 nm. The specific activity was expressed as µmol catechol per mg protein.

2.6. Statistical Analysis

The data are expressed as the mean ± standard deviation. To determine differences between packaged and un-packaged fig fruit, one-way ANOVA and Tukey test for mean comparisons were used. Differences at p < 0.05 were considered significant and are indicated with different letters. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS v.20.0 statistical software (IBM Corporation, Armonk, NY, USA).
Principal component analysis (PCA) and partial least square discrimination analysis (PLS-DA) were applied to describe the relationship between the physico-chemical and nutraceutical traits and the enzymatic activities to identify the principal components contributing to the majority of the variation within the dataset. Data were mean-centered and scaled to unit variance. These analyses were performed using MetaboAnalyst 4.0 (https://www.metaboanalyst.ca/ accessed on 14 June 2022).

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Physico-Chemical Traits

The changes in physico-chemical traits of packaged fig fruit during 3 weeks of cold storage are shown in Table 1. RS decreased throughout the storage, but in PMAP figs, a significant decrease, by 18% compared to control at the end of experiment, was registered. PMAP maintained the highest moisture content in figs due to creating a modified atmosphere that could inhibit respiration and transpiration, thereby reducing water consumption and evaporation [27]. Furthermore, after 21 days, a decrease in humidity was observed (Table 1).
In postharvest life, high weight loss can negatively influence fruit quality and can also increase susceptibility to postharvest pathogens, surface wrinkling, desiccation and reduced visual appearance [28]. Respiration and water transpiration rates have been described as the major causes of WL during postharvest storage [20]. In fresh fruit, the WL is due to diffusion of moisture from cells into the intercellular spaces until reaching a saturation level [29]. Weight loss increased during cold storage, reaching the highest value of 10.1% and 22.3% in PMAP and control samples, respectively, at the end of the experiment.
Several studies demonstrated that packaged fig fruit with macroperforated films showed different weight loss values at the end of the cold storage (21 days), with the highest values in ‘Cuello Dama Negro’ (11.5%) and ‘Banane’ (13.91%) and the lowest ones in ‘Cuello Dama Blanco’ (6.0%) and ‘San Antonio’ (9.64%) [19,20]. In addition, modified atmosphere in packaged fresh figs reduced water loss by maintaining a relatively high fruit quality.
Our results showed that TA and pH gradually decreased throughout the cold storage in packaged figs (Table 1). A similar trend was reported in minimally processed cactus pears stored under passive atmosphere for 12 days at 5 °C [30]. A low amount of TA in the packaged fig is due to the use of organic acids in metabolic pathways as demonstrated in other postharvest treatments [31]. Several studies have demonstrated that MAP packaging delayed the decrease in TA and pH values, affecting the ripening process in different fruit crops [20,32,33].
Sugars influence taste and consumer acceptance, playing a key role in fruit quality during cold storage [34]. As reported in the literature, in different fig genotypes, sugars showed wide variability in terms of glucose, fructose and sucrose content [35]. During cold storage in PMAP, three free sugars were detected in ‘Dottato’ samples (Table 2). Glucose was the principal sugar (ranging from 55 a 62 mg/100 g FW, at harvest and after 21 days of storage, respectively), followed by fructose and sucrose (Table 2). In this study, fructose and glucose content displayed reduction after 7 days of storage, but did not experience significant reduction over the storage time, while the highest sucrose value (around 2.32) was found at the end of cold storage. The sugar content in PMAP figs was lower than that of the control sample, because its water loss was lower than the control, as suggested by Ma et al. [36]. In cold-stored fruit, carbohydrate metabolism has been extensively studied, and differential responses of individual sugars were found [37]. Generally, higher sucrose content, due to the balance between its degradation and biosynthesis, may contribute to membrane stability [38]. Furthermore, Wang et al. [39] detected higher sucrose content and lower fructose and glucose content in peaches associated with reduced chilling injury induced by postharvest treatments.
Organic acids are involved in fruit flavor and nutritional quality [36]. In fig fruit, the acidity is due to the different concentrations of organic acids such as oxalic, quinic, malic, citric, ascorbic and succinic acids, depending on the cultivar and several agronomic traits [40,41]. In this study, citric acid was the principal acid, followed by malic, ossalic and ascorbic acid. In another study, it was demonstrated that in fig pulp cv. Pingo de mel, the main organic acids were malic (6.85 mg/g) and citric acid (2.28 mg/mg), followed by oxalic, shikimic and fumaric acid [42]. Furthermore, Pande and Akoh [40] demonstrated that organic acids found in the pulp and peel of Brown Turkey fig (Ficus carica cv.) have different concentrations. Organic acid content displayed a higher decrease in the control sample compared to the packaged one throughout storage (Table 2).

3.2. Bioactive Compounds and Antioxidant Activity

Fig fruit is a rich source of health-promoting compounds that provide protection against several human diseases [43].
Bioactive compounds and antioxidant activity decreased throughout cold storage with reductions of 54%, 57% and 50% for POL, FLAV and AAN, respectively, at the end of storage in PMAP samples (Table 3). As compared to the control at each sampling date (Table 3), packaged figs showed a higher POL and FLAV content (p < 0.05) and consequently, higher antioxidant activity. Application of postharvest technologies such as Aloe vera gel treatments and modified atmosphere packaging can delay the aging process in fruit, reducing POL loss during cold storage [44].
Antioxidant activity decreased in proportion to the cold storage time in fig fruit, with the highest value in PMAP samples (Table 3). Several studies have demonstrated that the antioxidant capacity of the fruit is related to different factors such as the storage method, the antioxidant enzyme activity, and the accumulation of bioactive compounds [45,46,47].
The same trend in bioactive compound content was observed in chitosan- and Aloe-based coated fig fruit stored at 4 °C [14,48]. Fig fruit contains several polyphenols belonging to phenolic acids and flavonoids distributed differently in peel and pulp. Furthermore, figs contain good levels of anthocyanins that impart different skin color to the fruit during the ripening process [49,50]. POL content at harvest was comparable to the values reported by Russo et al. [2]. In fig fruit, polyphenol levels are largely influenced by the genotype, ripening stage and environmental conditions [51]. Ascorbic acid is the most important antioxidant, but its combination with oxygen in the air causes autoxidation and ascorbic acid losses during storage [52]. Fig genotypes, with green and purple skin, had different levels of ascorbic acid content, as demonstrated by Veberic et al. [51]. Antioxidant activity was well-correlated with the amounts of POL and FLAV during cold storage. In the current study, AAN gradually decreased during storage, as demonstrated by Dogan [28] in fig cv. Bursa Siyahi stored with different atmospheric compositions. The decrease in antioxidant activity can be due to a decrease in bioactive compound content, as reported by Adiletta et al. [14] in chitosan coated fig.

3.3. Enzymatic Antioxidant System and Enzymatic Browning

Fresh fruit increases ROS production that is quenched by action of the enzymatic antioxidant system during postharvest storage and distribution [53]. Fruit decay is a major issue caused by perturbation of the redox balance, including ROS production [54]. As widely demonstrated, postharvest strategies may have a strong influence on antioxidant enzyme activity in several fruit crops [55,56,57].
During cold storage, PMAP figs showed different trends in CAT and APX activity involved in control of the H2O2 level (Figure 1). CAT decreased throughout the storage period compared to APX; this could be due to different reaction kinetics and substrate affinity [58]. These findings agree with previous studies showing that chitosan-coated fig improved the activity of antioxidant enzymes such as CAT and APX [57].
CAT activity (Figure 1A) slowly decreased, while APX activity (Figure 1B) displayed an increasing trend during storage. PMAP enhanced the activity of these enzymes, with the highest values observed at each sampling date in stored figs.
Our results demonstrate that PMAP had a significant effect on antioxidant enzyme activity in fresh fig, providing protection against the oxidative membrane damage caused by ROS during cold storage [55]. As demonstrated by Sheikhi et al. [58], passive- and active-modified atmosphere packaging reduced the production of ROS, increasing the activity of antioxidant enzymes in fresh in-hull pistachios.
Enzymatic browning is mainly due to PPO and GPX activities, and in this study, was registered as an increase in GPX and PPO activities during cold storage (Figure 2). PMAP reduced the activity of these enzymes compared to control samples. The activity of these enzymes displayed values similar to that found in chitosan-coated fig [14].

3.4. Response of Multivariate Data Analysis

PCA and PLS-DA were performed to assess whether different analyzed traits differentiated two postharvest treatments in fresh fig fruit during cold storage.
In PCA, the first two PCs, with eigenvalue >1.0, together explained 79.8% of the cumulative variance, providing a reasonable summary of the data. PC1 explained 51.9% of the variance in the dataset, whereas PC2 explained an additional 17.9% of the variance. The contributions of scores to the overall variation on individual PCs are given in Figure 3A. The TA, H, organic acids, POL, FLAV, AA and CAT activity were positively correlated with PC1, whereas WL, sucrose, PPO and GPX activity were negatively correlated. PC2 was positively correlated with pH, RS, fructose and glucose, whereas APX activity was negatively correlated (Figure 3B). PCA allowed us to separate the analyzed samples into two different groups; with the progression of cold storage, the response variables diverged along PCs in PMAP and control fruit (Figure 3A).
PLS-DA was applied to evaluate the association of analyzed traits with storage condition and storage duration. In the calculated PLS-DA model, the first two latent components were combined in a bi-plot (Figure 4A). The first two components of PLS-DA accounted for 69.6% of the total variance among samples. This model was evaluated by R2Y and Q2 values, which represent the interpretation rate and the predictive ability of the model, respectively. The generated PLS-DA score model displayed good goodness of fit (R2Y = 0.845) and predictability (Q2 (cum) = 0.750). The PPO, RS, FRU and pH were more closely associated with storage conditions, while APX was associated with storage time (Figure 4B).
Hierarchical cluster analysis (HCA) was carried out on the dataset of analyzed traits to visualize clusters of samples with similar features associated with different postharvest treatments (Figure 4C). Heatmaps compared the levels of low- and high values of analyzed traits and generated a matrix for each sample. A cladogram placed at the top of the heatmap displayed two major clusters in the PLS-DA plot. The first cluster consisted of control samples after 14 and 21 days of cold storage, while the second cluster was composed of two subgroups: the first consisted of only harvest sample, while the other consisted of PMAP samples and control sample after 7 days of cold storage. These results showed that the HCA dendrogram was able to discriminate between postharvest treatments in a timing-dependent manner.
The values of variable importance (VIP) scores for all analyzed traits were calculated to identify those with values > 1.0 that could be influential and statistically significant in the PLS-DA discriminant process and explain separation of two postharvest treatments in fresh fig fruits during cold storage. The top five analyzed traits with VIP scores greater than 1 were PPO, RS, FRU, pH and humidity (Figure 4D).
PCA and PLS-DA showed a clear separation between PMAP and control groups, indicating that there were visible differences in the analyzed traits between postharvest treatments, and these traits were correlated with storage time and conditions.
Several studies have demonstrated that multivariate analysis is a power tool to elucidate the physiological properties of different fruit crops and responses of targeted metabolites during cold storage [59,60,61].

4. Conclusions

Fresh figs are a highly perishable fruit, and to retain the marketability of this fruit, a cold chain system was implemented. PMAP is a valid a low-cost postharvest technology to prolong the postharvest life of fresh figs. Compared with the control group, PMAP showed lower weight loss, RS, and TA, as well as higher sugar content during storage. PMAP mitigated the oxidative stress in fresh fig fruit by regulating the enzyme activity of the antioxidant system and promoting the content of antioxidant compounds such as polyphenol, flavonoids, and ascorbic acid. Furthermore, it delayed the browning processes and prolonged the storage period of postharvest fruit. Multivariate analysis highlighted that PMAP affected the responses of physiological traits during cold storage, but this low-cost technology could be used to retain the freshness of figs for up to 21 days of cold storage.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, G.A. and M.P.; methodology, G.A. and M.P.; software, G.A. and M.P.; validation, G.A. and M.P.; formal analysis, G.A. and M.P.; investigation, G.A. and M.P.; data curation, G.A. and M.P.; writing—original draft preparation, G.A., M.P. and M.D.M.; writing—review and editing, G.A., M.P. and M.D.M.; supervision, M.D.M. 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.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Stover, E.W.; Aradhya, M.K.; Crisosto, C.; Ferguson, L. The fig: Overview of an ancient fruit. HortScience 2007, 42, 1083–1087. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Russo, F.; Caporaso, N.; Paduano, A.; Sacchi, R. Phenolic Compounds in Fresh and Dried Figs from Cilento (Italy), by Considering Breba Crop and Full Crop, in Comparison to Turkish and Greek Dried Figs. J. Food Sci. 2014, 79, 7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  3. Burfield, T. Burfield Large Fig Crop Expected. 2020. Available online: https://www.thepacker.com/markets/marketing-news/produce-crops/large-fig-crop-expected (accessed on 14 June 2022).
  4. Crisosto, C.H.; Bremer, V.; Ferguson, L.; Crisosto, G.M. Evaluating quality attributes of four fresh fig (Ficus carica L.) cultivars harvested at two maturity stages. HortScience 2010, 45, 707–710. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  5. Yemis, O.; Bakkalbas, E.; Artık, N. Changes in pigment profile and surface colour of fig (Ficus carica L.) during drying. Int. J. Food Sci. 2012, 47, 1710–1719. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Solomon, A.; Golubowicz, S.; Yablowicz, Z.; Grossman, S.; Bergman, M.; Gottlieb, H.; Altman, A.; Kerem, Z.; Flaishman, M.A. Antioxidant activities and anthocyanin content of fresh fruit of common fig (Ficus carica L.). J. Agric. Food Chem. 2006, 54, 7717–7723. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Caliskan, O.; Polat, A.A. Phytochemical and antioxidant properties of selected fig (Ficus carica L.) accessions from the eastern Mediterranean region of Turkey. Sci. Hortic. 2011, 128, 473–478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Caliskan, O. Mediterranean Figs (Ficus carica L.) Functional Food Properties. In The Mediterranean Diet: An Evidence-Based Approach, 1st ed.; Preedy, V.R., Watson, R.R., Eds.; Academic Press: London, UK, 2015; pp. 629–637. [Google Scholar]
  9. Kong, M.; Lampinen, B.; Shackel, K.; Crisosto, C.H. Fruit skin side cracking and ostiole end splitting shorten postharvest life in fresh figs (Ficus carica L.), but are reduced by deficit irrigation. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 2013, 85, 154–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Afsah-Hejri, L.; Toudeshki, A.; Homayouni, T.; Mehrazi, S.; Pareh, A.G.; Gordon, P.; Ehsani, R. Potential of ozonated-air (OA) application to reduce the weight and volume loss in fresh figs (Ficus carica L.). Postharvest Biol. Technol. 2021, 180, 111631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Bouzo, C.A.; Travaercicdelo, M.; Gariglio, N.F. Effect of different packaging materials on postharvest quality of fresh fig fruit. Int. J. Agric. Biol. 2012, 14, 821–825. [Google Scholar]
  12. Allegra, A.; Gallotta, A.; Carimi, F.; Mercati, F.; Inglese, P.; Martinelli, F. Metabolic profiling and post-harvest behavior of “Dottato” fig (Ficus carica L.) fruit covered with an edible coating from O. ficus-indica. Front. Plant Sci. 2018, 9, 1321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Allegra, A.; Sortino, G.; Inglese, P.; Settanni, L.; Todaro, A.; Gallotta, A. The effectiveness of Opuntia ficus-indica mucilage edible coating on postharvest maintenance of ‘Dottato’ fig (Ficus carica L.) fruit. Food Packag. Shelf Life 2017, 12, 135–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Adiletta, G.; Zampella, L.; Coletta, C.; Petriccione, M. Chitosan coating to preserve the qualitative traits and improve antioxidant system in fresh figs (Ficus carica L.). Agriculture 2019, 9, 84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  15. Hamanaka, D.; Norimura, N.; Baba, N.; Mano, K.; Kakiuchi, M.; Tanaka, F.; Uchino, T. Surface decontamination of fig fruit by combination of infrared radiation heating with ultraviolet irradiation. Food Control 2011, 22, 375–380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Song, C.; Li, A.; Chai, Y.; Li, Q.; Lin, Q.; Duan, Y. Effects of 1-Methylcyclopropene Combined with Modified Atmosphere on Quality of Fig (Ficus carica L.) during Postharvest Storage. J. Food Qual. 2019, 2019, 2134924. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  17. Crisosto, C.H.Y.; Kader, A.A. Figs. Postharvest Quality Maintenance Guidelines Postharvest Information for fruit and Nuts. 2007. Available online: http://www.uckac.edu/postharv (accessed on 14 June 2022).
  18. Tsantili, E.; Paraskos, G.; Pontikis, C. Storage of fresh figs in low oxygen atmosphere. Hort. Sci. Biotechnol. 2003, 78, 56–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Villalobos, M.C.; Serradilla, M.J.; Martín, A.; Ruiz-Moyano, S.; Pereira, C.; Córdoba, M.G. Use of equilibrium modified atmosphere packaging for preservation of ‘San Antonio’ and ‘Banane’ breba crops (Ficus carica L.). Postharvest Biol. Technol. 2014, 98, 14–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Villalobos, M.C.; Serradilla, M.J.; Martín, A.; Ruiz-Moyano, S.; Pereira, C.; Córdoba, M.G. Synergism of defatted soybean meal extract and modified atmosphere packaging to preserve the quality of figs (Ficus carica L.). Postharvest Biol. Technol. 2016, 111, 264–273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Adiletta, G.; Petriccione, M.; Liguori, L.; Pizzolongo, F.; Romano, R.; Di Matteo, M. Study of pomological traits and physico-chemical quality of pomegranate (Punica granatum L.) genotypes grown in Italy. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 2018, 244, 1427–1438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Adiletta, G.; Senadeera, W.; Liguori, L.; Crescitelli, A.; Albanese, D.; Russo, P. The Influence of Abrasive Pretreatment on Hot Air Drying of Grape. Nutr. Food Sci. 2015, 6, 355–364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  23. Adiletta, G.; Di Matteo, M.; Albanese, D.; Farina, V.; Cinquanta, L.; Corona, O.; Magri, A.; Petriccione, M. Changes in physico-chemical traits and enzymes oxidative system during cold storage of ‘Formosa’ papaya fresh cut fruits grown in the Mediterranean area (Sicily). Ital. J. Food. Sci. 2020, 32, 845–857. [Google Scholar]
  24. Bradford, M.M. A dye binding assay for protein. Anal. Biochem. 1976, 72, 248–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Pasquariello, M.S.; Di Patre, D.; Mastrobuoni, F.; Zampella, L.; Scortichini, M.; Petriccione, M. Influence of postharvest chitosan treatment on enzymatic browning and antioxidant enzyme activity in sweet cherry fruit. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 2015, 109, 45–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Petriccione, M.; Mastrobuoni, F.; Pasquariello, M.S.; Zampella, L.; Nobis, E.; Capriolo, G.; Scortichini, M. Effect of chitosan coating on the postharvest quality and antioxidant enzyme system response of strawberry fruit during cold storage. Foods 2015, 4, 501–523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  27. Liu, H.; Li, D.; Xu, W.; Fu, Y.; Liao, R.; Shi, J.; Chen, Y. Application of passive modified atmosphere packaging in the preservation of sweet corns at ambient temperature. LWT 2021, 136, 110295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Dogan, A. Effects of different oxygen levels with high-carbon dioxide atmosphere on postharvest quality of fresh fig under palliflex storage systems. Horticulturae 2022, 8, 353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Belay, Z.A.; Caleb, O.J.; Opara, U.L. Influence of initial gas modification on physicochemical quality attributes and molecular changes in fresh and fresh-cut fruit during modified atmosphere packaging. Food Packag. Shelf Life 2019, 21, 100359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Allegra, A.; Sortino, G.; Miciletta, G.; Riotto, M.; Fasciana, T.; Inglese, P. The influence of harvest period and fruit ripeness at harvest on minimally processed cactus pears (Opuntia ficus-indica L. Mill.) stored under passive atmosphere. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 2015, 104, 57–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Chen, J.; Du, J.; Ge, Z.Z.; Zhu, W.; Nie, R.; Li, C.M. Comparison of sensory and compositions of five selected persimmon cultivars (Diospyros kaki L.) and correlations between chemical components and processing characteristics. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2016, 53, 1597–1607. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  32. Ayhan, Z.; Kara Cay, E. Preservation of the ‘Bursa siyahı’ fresh fig under modified atmosphere packaging (MAP) and cold storage. Int. J. Agric. Sci. 2011, 1, 1–9. [Google Scholar]
  33. Díaz-Mula, H.M.; Martínez-Romero, D.; Castillo, S.; Serrano, M.; Valero, D. Modified atmosphere packaging of yellow and purple plum cultivars.1. Effect on organoleptic quality. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 2011, 6, 103–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Durán-Soria, S.; Pott, D.M.; Osorio, S.; Vallarino, J.G. Sugar Signaling During Fruit Ripening. Front Plant Sci. 2020, 11, 564917. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Aljane, F.; Neily, M.H.; Msaddak, A. Phytochemical Characteristics and Antioxidant Activity of Several Fig (Ficus carica L.) Ecotypes. Ital. J. Food Sci. 2020, 32, 755–768. [Google Scholar]
  36. Ma, J.; Li, D.; Yang, D.; Xu, W.; Fu, Y.; Liao, R.; Shi, J.; Wang, J.; Wang, Y.; He, X. Effects of packaging designs with multiple pieces of function films on the quality of figs stored at ambient temperature. Sci. Hortic. 2019, 251, 32–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Brizzolara, S.; Manganaris, G.A.; Fotopoulos, V.; Watkins, C.B.; Tonutti, P. Primary metabolism in fresh fruit during storage. Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 11, 80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  38. Wang, K.; Shao, X.F.; Gong, Y.F.; Zhu, Y.; Wang, H.F.; Zhang, X.L.; Yu, D.; Yu, F.; Qiu, Z.; Lu, H. The metabolism of soluble carbohydrates related to chilling injury in peach fruit exposed to cold stress. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 2013, 86, 53–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Wang, L.; Shan, T.M.; Xie, B.; Ling, C.; Shao, S.; Jin, P.; Zheng, Y. Glycine betaine reduces chilling injury in peach fruit by enhancing phenolic and sugar metabolisms. Food Chem. 2019, 272, 530–538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Pande, G.; Akoh, C.C. Organic acids, antioxidant capacity, phenolic content and lipid characterisation of Georgia-grown underutilized fruit crops. Food Chem 2010, 120, 1067–1075. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Palmeira, L.; Pereira, C.; Dias, M.I.; Abreu, R.M.V.; Corrêa, R.C.G.; Pires, T.C.S.P.; Ferreira, I.C.F.R. Nutritional, chemical and bioactive profiles of different parts of a Portuguese common fig (Ficus carica L.) variety. Food Res. Int. 2019, 108572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  42. Oliveira, A.P.; Valentão, P.; Pereira, J.A.; Silva, B.M.; Tavares, F.; Andrade, P.B. Ficus carica L.: Metabolic and biological screening. Food Chem. Toxicol. 2009, 47, 2841–2846. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Oliveira, A.P.; Silva, R.L.; Andrade, P.B.; Valentão, P.; Silva, B.M.; Pereira, J.A.; de Pinho, D.G. Determination of low molecular weight volatiles in Ficus carica using HSSPME and GC/FID. Food Chem. 2010, 121, 1289–1295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Islam, A.; Acıkalın, R.; Ozturk, B.; Aglar, E.; Kaiser, C. Combined effects of Aloe vera gel and modified atmosphere packaging treatments on fruit quality traits and bioactive compounds of jujube (Ziziphus jujuba Mill.) fruit during cold storage and shelf life. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 2022, 187, 111855. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Liu, H.; Jiang, W.; Cao, J.; Ma, L. A combination of 1-methylcyclopropene treatment and intermittent warming alleviates chilling injury and affects phenolics and antioxidant activity of peach fruit during storage. Sci. Hortic. 2018, 229, 175–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Adiletta, G.; Liguori, L.; Albanese, D.; Russo, P.; Di Matteo, M.; Crescitelli, A. Soft-Seeded Pomegranate (Punica granatum L.) Varieties: Preliminary Characterization and Quality Changes of Minimally Processed Arils during Storage. Food Bioprocess. Technol. 2017, 10, 1631–1641. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Adiletta, G.; Magri, A.; Albanese, D.; Liguori, L.; Sodo, M.; Di Matteo, M.; Petriccione, M. Overall quality and oxidative damage in packaged freshly shelled walnut kernels during cold storage. J. Food Meas. Charact. 2020, 14, 3483–3492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Mirshekari, A.; Madani, B.; Wall, M.; Biggs, A.R. Aloe vera coatings maintain antioxidants of fig (Ficus carica L.) fruit during storage. Adv. Hortic. Sci. 2020, 34, 205–212. [Google Scholar]
  49. Hssaini, L.; Hernandez, F.; Viuda-Martos, M.; Charafi, J.; Razouk, R.; Houmanat, K.; Hanine, H. Survey of phenolic acids, flavonoids and in vitro antioxidant potency between fig peels and pulps: Chemical and chemometric approach. Molecules 2021, 26, 2574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Singh, J.P.; Singh, B.; Kaur, A. Polyphenols in fig: A review on their characterisation, biochemistry during ripening, antioxidant activity and health benefits. Int. J. Food Sci. 2022, 57, 3333–3342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Veberic, R.; Mikulic-Petkovsek, M. Phytochemical composition of common figs (Ficus carica L.) cultivars. In Nutrional Composition of Fruit Cultivars, 1st ed.; Simmonds, M.S.J., Preedy, V.R., Eds.; American Press: London, UK, 2016; pp. 235–255. [Google Scholar]
  52. Baraiya, N.S.; Rao, T.V.R.; Thakkar, V.R. Improvement of postharvest quality and storability of jamun fruit (Syzygium cumini L. var. Paras) by zein coating enriched with antioxidants. Food Bioprocess. Technol. 2015, 11, 2225–2234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Meitha, K.; Pramesti, Y.; Suhandono, S. Reactive Oxygen Species and Antioxidants in Postharvest Vegetables and fruits. Int. Food Sci. 2020, 2020, 8817778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Pétriacq, P.; López, A.; Luna, E. Fruit decay to diseases: Can induced resistance and priming help? Plants 2018, 7, 77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  55. Adiletta, G.; Di Matteo, M.; Petriccione, M. Multifunctional Role of Chitosan Edible Coatings on Antioxidant Systems in Fruit Crops: A Review. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021, 22, 2633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Modesti, M.; Zampella, L.; Petriccione, M. Chitosan mono- and bilayer edible coatings for preserving postharvest quality of fresh fruit. In Polymers for Agri-Food Applications; Gutiérrez, T.J., Ed.; Editorial Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 465–486. [Google Scholar]
  57. Adiletta, G.; Petriccione, M.; Liguori, L.; Zampella, L.; Mastrobuoni, F.; Di Matteo, M. Overall quality and antioxidant enzymes of ready-to-eat ‘Purple Queen’ pomegranate arils during cold storage. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 2019, 155, 20–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. De Gara, L.; Paciolla, C.; De Tullio, M.C.; Motto, M.; Arrigoni, O. Ascorbate-dependent hydrogen peroxide detoxification and ascorbate regeneration during germination of a highly productive maize hybrid: Evidence of an improved detoxification mechanism against reactive oxygen species. Physiol. Plant. 2000, 109, 7–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  59. Sheikhi, A.; Mirdehghan, S.H.; Karimi, H.R.; Ferguson, L. Effects of Passive- and Active-Modified Atmosphere Packaging on Physio-Chemical and Quality Attributes of Fresh In-Hull Pistachios (Pistacia vera L. cv. Badami). Foods 2019, 8, 564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  60. Byeon, S.; Lee, J. Fruit maturity differentially affect fruit quality and responses of targeted metabolites in cold-stored figs (Ficus carica L.). J. Sci. Food Agric. 2021, 101, 673–683. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Cozzolino, R.; Cefola, M.; Laurino, C.; Pellicano, M.P.; Palumbo, M.; Stocchero, M.; Pace, B. Electronic-Nose as non-destructive tool to discriminate “Ferrovia” sweet cherries cold stored in air or packed in high CO2 modified atmospheres. Front. Nutr. 2021, 8, 671. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Horticulturae 08 00709 g001 550
Figure 1. Effect of passive-modified atmosphere packaging (PMAP) compared to control on catalase (A) and ascorbate peroxidase (B) activity in fig fruit at harvest and after 7, 14 and 21 days of cold storage at 4 °C. Different letters indicate significant differences between different packaging groups (p < 0.05).
Figure 1. Effect of passive-modified atmosphere packaging (PMAP) compared to control on catalase (A) and ascorbate peroxidase (B) activity in fig fruit at harvest and after 7, 14 and 21 days of cold storage at 4 °C. Different letters indicate significant differences between different packaging groups (p < 0.05).
Horticulturae 08 00709 g001
Horticulturae 08 00709 g002 550
Figure 2. Effect of passive-modified atmosphere packaging (PMAP) compared to control on guaiacol polyphenol oxidase (A) and guaiacol peroxidase (B) activity in fig fruit at harvest and after 7, 14 and 21 days of cold storage at 4 °C. Different letters indicate significant differences between different packaging groups (p < 0.05).
Figure 2. Effect of passive-modified atmosphere packaging (PMAP) compared to control on guaiacol polyphenol oxidase (A) and guaiacol peroxidase (B) activity in fig fruit at harvest and after 7, 14 and 21 days of cold storage at 4 °C. Different letters indicate significant differences between different packaging groups (p < 0.05).
Horticulturae 08 00709 g002
Horticulturae 08 00709 g003 550
Figure 3. PCA score (A) and loading plot (B) of fig fruit at harvest and after 7, 14 and 21 days of cold storage at 4 °C (C: control, and T: PMAP).
Figure 3. PCA score (A) and loading plot (B) of fig fruit at harvest and after 7, 14 and 21 days of cold storage at 4 °C (C: control, and T: PMAP).
Horticulturae 08 00709 g003
Horticulturae 08 00709 g004 550
Figure 4. PLS-DA score plot showing all samples clustered into three groups (A); PLS-DA score plots loaded with different analyzed traits (B); normalized heatmap (high red levels indicate high levels and low blue levels indicate low levels) and dendrogram based on hierarchical clustering analysis of PLS-DA data (colored boxes on the right show the relative concentration of each analyzed trait) (C); VIP scores (D).
Figure 4. PLS-DA score plot showing all samples clustered into three groups (A); PLS-DA score plots loaded with different analyzed traits (B); normalized heatmap (high red levels indicate high levels and low blue levels indicate low levels) and dendrogram based on hierarchical clustering analysis of PLS-DA data (colored boxes on the right show the relative concentration of each analyzed trait) (C); VIP scores (D).
Horticulturae 08 00709 g004
Table
Table 1. Effect of passive-modified atmosphere packaging (PMAP) compared to control on physico-chemical traits (RS: reducing sugar (%); pH; TA: titratable acidity (mg citric acid/100 g FW); WL: weight loss (%), H: humidity (%)) in fig fruit at harvest and after 7, 14 and 21 days of cold storage at 4 °C.
Table 1. Effect of passive-modified atmosphere packaging (PMAP) compared to control on physico-chemical traits (RS: reducing sugar (%); pH; TA: titratable acidity (mg citric acid/100 g FW); WL: weight loss (%), H: humidity (%)) in fig fruit at harvest and after 7, 14 and 21 days of cold storage at 4 °C.
DaysRSpHTAWLH
Control
Harvest 19.1 c5.2 b0.12 a-85.0 c
719.8 cd5.1 b0.12 a7.0 b77.6 abc
1420.6 de5.3 b0.11 a14.5 d73.9 ab
2121.8 e5.3 b0.09 a22.3 e70.3 a
PMAP
Harvest 19.1 c5.2 b0.12 a-85.0 c
718.6 bc5.0 ab0.12 a3.2 a82.4 c
1417.6 b5.0 ab0.11 a6.2 b81.7 bc
2115.7 a4.8 a0.12 a10.1 c82.3 c
Means followed by the same letter do not differ significantly at p < 0.05 (Tukey test).
Table
Table 2. Effect of passive-modified atmosphere packaging (PMAP) compared to control on malic acid (MA), citric acid (CA), ossalic acid (OA), ascorbic acid (AA), fructose, glucose and sucrose content in fig fruit at harvest and after 7, 14 and 21 days of cold storage at 4 °C.
Table 2. Effect of passive-modified atmosphere packaging (PMAP) compared to control on malic acid (MA), citric acid (CA), ossalic acid (OA), ascorbic acid (AA), fructose, glucose and sucrose content in fig fruit at harvest and after 7, 14 and 21 days of cold storage at 4 °C.
DaysMACAOAAAFruGluSuc
Control
Harvest 0.12 ab0.17 b0.03 a0.01 a42.13 bc54.87 c1.47 a
70.14 b0.14 ab0.03 a0.01 a40.71 bc42.90 ab1.86 b
140.11 ab0.13 ab0.03 a0.01 a41.72 bc43.68 ab2.28 c
210.08 a0.11 a0.02 a0.01 a42.71 c45.55 b2.67 d
PMAP
Harvest0.12 ab0.17 b0.03 a0.01 a42.13 bc54.87 c1.47 a
70.12 ab0.14 ab0.03 a0.01 a35.74 a41.47 a1.33 a
140.11 ab0.14 ab0.02 a0.01 a37.96 ab41.24 a1.47 a
210.12 ab0.15 ab0.03 a0.01 a38.76 abc42.34 ab2.32 c
Means followed by the same letter do not differ significantly at p < 0.05 (Tukey test).
Table
Table 3. Effect of passive-modified atmosphere packaging (PMAP) (A) compared to control (B) on polyphenol (POL; mg GAE/100 g FW) and flavonoids (FLAV; mg CE/100 g FW) content and antioxidant activity (AAN; mg AA/100 g FW) in fig fruit at harvest and after 7, 14 and 21 days of cold storage. at 4 °C.
Table 3. Effect of passive-modified atmosphere packaging (PMAP) (A) compared to control (B) on polyphenol (POL; mg GAE/100 g FW) and flavonoids (FLAV; mg CE/100 g FW) content and antioxidant activity (AAN; mg AA/100 g FW) in fig fruit at harvest and after 7, 14 and 21 days of cold storage. at 4 °C.
DaysPOLFLAVANN
Control
Harvest 112.29 f42.91 f72.71 e
790.17 d28.50 d51.13 c
1466.40 c16.81 b38.79 b
2133.32 a10.03 a27.88 a
PMAP
Harvest 112.29 f42.91 f72.71 e
7101.64 e34.30 e61.80 d
1480.67 d22.79 c48.40 c
2151.27 b18.39 bc36.36 b
Means followed by the same letter do not differ significantly at p < 0.05 (Tukey test).
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Adiletta, G.; Petriccione, M.; Di Matteo, M. Effects of Passive Modified Atmosphere Packaging on Physico-Chemical Traits and Antioxidant Systems of ‘Dottato’ Fresh Fig. Horticulturae 2022, 8, 709. https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae8080709

AMA Style

Adiletta G, Petriccione M, Di Matteo M. Effects of Passive Modified Atmosphere Packaging on Physico-Chemical Traits and Antioxidant Systems of ‘Dottato’ Fresh Fig. Horticulturae. 2022; 8(8):709. https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae8080709

Chicago/Turabian Style

Adiletta, Giuseppina, Milena Petriccione, and Marisa Di Matteo. 2022. "Effects of Passive Modified Atmosphere Packaging on Physico-Chemical Traits and Antioxidant Systems of ‘Dottato’ Fresh Fig" Horticulturae 8, no. 8: 709. https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae8080709

APA Style

Adiletta, G., Petriccione, M., & Di Matteo, M. (2022). Effects of Passive Modified Atmosphere Packaging on Physico-Chemical Traits and Antioxidant Systems of ‘Dottato’ Fresh Fig. Horticulturae, 8(8), 709. https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae8080709

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