Within-plant variability in blueberry (Vaccinium corymbosum L.): maturity at harvest and position within the canopy influence fruit firmness at harvest and postharvest

Lobos, Germán; Bravo, Carolina Pilar Villagra; Valdés, Marcelo; Graell, J.; Lara, Isabel; Beaudry, Randolph M.; Moggia, Claudia

doi:10.1016/j.postharvbio.2018.08.004

Cited by 32 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Intriguingly, we did not find any differences in fruit firmness metrics associated with either harvest timepoint. A previous study examined the metrics between blueberry fruit ripeness and canopy position found that fruit six days post-optimal-ripeness were significantly less firm than optimally-ripe fruit [15]. While our study only evaluated ripe fruit, it is important to note that increased GDD did not impact fruit firmness metrics.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 78%

“…Furthermore, severe weather events such as spring cold spells can cause significant cold injury to low-chill and precocious blueberry cultivars, impacting yield [14]. In addition to cold-related events, yearly differences in temperature fluctuations and precipitation events, including heatwaves, drought, and flooding, affect developing fruits' quality [15,16]. Within a harvest season, weekly climate changes and increased growing degree days (GDD) can impact blueberry fruit maturation rates between sequential harvests within the same plant; exemplified by the and cause observed variation in phenolic, acid, and total soluble solid composition between harvests [17].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Genotype, Environment, Year, and Harvest Effects on Fruit Quality Traits of Five Blueberry (Vaccinium corymbosum L.) Cultivars

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Blueberries (Vaccinium spp.) comprise a broad range of perennial woody species. Introgression of native species into cultivated germplasm has adapted Vaccinium germplasm to a range of climates and growing conditions for cultivated blueberry. Genetic differences signify phenotypic variance that is observed among blueberry accessions. In addition, variability in geographic and climatic growing conditions between environments or within the same environment across different years may further affect fruit and plant phenotypic expression. As a result, a phenotype is a function of genetic background (G), environment (E), and their interaction (G × E). In addition, other temporally regulated factors such as year (Y) and harvest time (H) impact plant and fruit quality phenotypic variation. Our research aimed to assess the genotypic performance of five blueberry cultivars, including ‘Echota’, ‘O’Neal’, ‘Reveille’, ‘Summit’, and ‘Sunrise’. The selected cultivars were phenotyped for various fruit quality-related traits over two sequential harvests in two years and two locations. Our results indicated that genotype was a significant source of variation for most phenotypic characteristics. Further, the effect of Y × H and G × Y × H significantly affected the majority of studied phenotypic traits. Within the studied genotypes, ‘Reveille’ and ‘O’Neal’ phenotypic stability were consistent across locations and years; additionally, ‘Summit’ phenotypic characteristics were stable across years, environments, and harvests. Clonal plant replicates within a genotype, harvest, and environment, in addition to individual fruit measures, were the most significant sources of variability.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 78%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Genotype, Environment, Year, and Harvest Effects on Fruit Quality Traits of Five Blueberry (Vaccinium corymbosum L.) Cultivars

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A great variability has been found in fruit firmness among varieties, even within the same harvest [ 8 , 9 , 10 ]. Different factors have been proposed to mediate the softening rate in blueberries, including maturation stage at harvest [ 11 ], water loss [ 12 ], and fruit orientation within the bunch [ 13 ], among others. Several studies have pointed out that the processes that underlie changes in blueberry firmness have been mainly related to the disassembly of cell wall components combined with an increase in cell wall-degrading enzymatic activities [ 14 , 15 , 16 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cell Wall Calcium and Hemicellulose Have a Role in the Fruit Firmness during Storage of Blueberry (Vaccinium spp.)

Olmedo

Zepeda

Rojas

et al. 2021

Plants

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The firmness of blueberry is one of its most significant quality attributes. Modifications in the composition of the cell wall have been associated with changes in the fruit firmness. In this work, cell wall components and calcium concentration in two blueberry cultivars with contrasting firmness phenotypes were evaluated at harvest and 30 days cold storage (0 °C). High performance anion-exchange chromatography with pulse amperometric detector (HPAEC-PAD) analysis was performed using the “Emerald” (firmer) and “Jewel” (softer) blueberry cultivars, showing increased glucose in the firmer cultivar after cold storage. Moreover, the LM15 antibody, which recognizes xyloglucan domains, displayed an increased signal in the Emerald cultivar after 30 d cold storage. Additionally, the antibody 2F4, recognizing a homogalacturonan calcium-binding domain, showed a greater signal in the firmer Emerald blueberries, which correlates with a higher calcium concentration in the cell wall. These findings suggest that xyloglucan metabolism and a higher concentration of cell wall calcium influenced the firmness of the blueberry fruit. These results open new perspectives regarding the role of cell wall components as xyloglucans and calcium in blueberry firmness.

show abstract

“…Softening of blueberries between harvest (e.g., in the Southern Hemisphere) and delivery to retail markets (e.g., in the Northern Hemisphere) has been closely related to water loss and physiological firmness loss (Paniagua et al, 2013). Although firmness can vary widely among cultivars (Cappai et al, 2018), it is commonly used to estimate perishability (postharvest potential) of a given lot (Lobos et al, 2018).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparison of Firmness Assessment Instruments for Fresh Blueberry Fruit

Moggia

Valdés

Arancibia

et al. 2022

hortte

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fresh fruit from northern highbush blueberry (Vaccinium corymbosum) and rabbiteye blueberry (Vaccinium ashei) are highly perishable, so reaching distant markets while maintaining superior quality and value is a challenge. Although firmness is one of the most critical traits of blueberries (Vaccinium sp.), most of the industry relies on a subjective-tactile assessment or on the use of low-cost texture analyzers, whereas scientists tend to rely on the FirmTech II instrument. In the present study, the FirmTech II was evaluated as a texture analyzer and compared with tactile estimation, two other FirmTech II devices, and three relatively inexpensive durometers (Penefel, Durofel, and DM1600). Tests were run for fruit previously segregated by tactile (T) measurements into three classes of firmness: Soft-T, Moderate-T, and Firm-T; fruit were classified into instrument-based (I) categories of texture: Soft-I, Moderate-I, and Firm-I using the FirmTech II instrument. The level of coincidence between T and I assessments were higher in the soft (90.7% to 92.6%) and moderate (69.6% to 78.2%) classes compared with the firm class (51.6% to 61.4%). Among firmness categories, T and I assessments tended to agree; none of the Soft-T fruit were classed as Firm-I. In comparisons between equivalently calibrated FirmTech II devices, concordance always decreased as fruit firmness increased, indicating that more reproducible readings for a given instrument could be expected from softer fruit. Dual measurements on a single fruit for FirmTech II and a second device yielded variable, but significant correlation coefficients (Penefel: r2 = 0.61 to 0.67; Durofel: r2 = 0.48 to 0.61; DM1600: r2 = 0.08 to 0.49). The highest correlation existed between two FirmTech II devices (r2 = 0.94 to 0.95). However, correlations between the FirmTech II and second devices among the three firmness classes yielded very low correlation coefficients (Penefel: r2 = 0.09 to 0.40; Durofel: r2 = 0.05 to 0.32; DM1600: r2 = 0.00 to 0.25; FirmTech II: 0.03 to 0.33), suggesting that although all instruments were suitable for evaluating across broad ranges of fruit firmness, they were all similarly unsuitable within a narrow firmness range (e.g., for all soft or all firm fruit). Given the subjectivity of the tactile measurement and the range of variability between the evaluated alternatives, both FirmTech II and Penefel performed better in soft fruit but not as well in moderate or firm fruit. Therefore, among the more economical durometer devices, Penefel could be used by the industry to discriminate soft fruit from moderately firm or firm fruit. The results highlight the relevance of studying the predictive capacity of a particular instrument and to understand the performance of that instrument within a particular range of firmness values.

show abstract

Within-plant variability in blueberry (Vaccinium corymbosum L.): maturity at harvest and position within the canopy influence fruit firmness at harvest and postharvest

Abstract: Està subjecte a una llicència de Reconeixement-NoComercial-SenseObraDerivada 4.0 de Creative Commons 1 Within-plant variability in blueberry (Vaccinium corymbosum L.

Cited by 32 publications

References 34 publications

Genotype, Environment, Year, and Harvest Effects on Fruit Quality Traits of Five Blueberry (Vaccinium corymbosum L.) Cultivars

Genotype, Environment, Year, and Harvest Effects on Fruit Quality Traits of Five Blueberry (Vaccinium corymbosum L.) Cultivars

Cell Wall Calcium and Hemicellulose Have a Role in the Fruit Firmness during Storage of Blueberry (Vaccinium spp.)

A Comparison of Firmness Assessment Instruments for Fresh Blueberry Fruit

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About