Quality of Formosa Papaya: Effect of Peracetic Acid and Modified Atmosphere

Abstract

The present work aimed to evaluate the use of modified atmosphere and peracetic acid on the quality and postharvest conservation of organic Formosa 'Tainung I' papaya. The experimental design was completely randomized (DIC) in a (2 x 3) x 5 split-plot scheme, with peracetic acid treatments (with and without 500ppm application) and packaging (Xtend® 815-pp64, Xtend® 815-pp65, and without packaging) in the plot, and days of storage (0, 10, 18, 26, 34 days) in the subplot, with five replicates of one fruit each. Peracetic acid treatment in combination with packaging maintained the postharvest quality attributes of organic Formosa 'Tainung I' papaya during storage. Peracetic acid-treated fruits stored in Packaging 1 (Xtend® 815 pp64) maintained their vitamin C, soluble solids, sugars, and beta-carotene contents. In Packaging 2 (Xtend® 815 pp65), fruits showed better external appearance, maintaining acceptable commercial quality for up to 26 days.

Keywords:
Carica papaya; packaging; quality; sanitizer agent

HIGHLIGHTS

Modified atmosphere and peracetic acid on the quality and postharvest conservation of organic Formosa 'Tainung I' papaya.

Treatment with peracetic acid can decrease the appearance of diseases in papaya fruits.

The use of plastic packaging can be an alternative to extend the shelf life of fruits.

Packaging 1 (Xtend® 815 pp64) maintained their vitamin C, soluble solids, sugars, and beta-carotene contents.

INTRODUCION

Papaya (Carica papaya) is a tropical fruit belonging to the Caricaceae family, it has excellent acceptance in the world market due to its high nutritional value, low calorie content and presence of antioxidant substances [¹]. However, being a climacteric fruit, papaya can deteriorate both due to high ethylene production and increased respiratory rate, as well as due to infections caused by various pathogens that grow in the fruit before and during post-harvest [²], these processes can be minimized by using a modified atmosphere and applying fungicides.

Conservation in a modified atmosphere establishes a gaseous composition inside the package different from the normal composition of the external environment, by reducing the concentration of O₂ and increasing the CO₂, which reduces the respiratory rate and the production of ethylene in the fruit, delaying its senescence [³]. Polyethylene bag packaging combined with refrigerated storage by evaporation maintained papaya quality for a period of more than 21 days [⁴]. As well as the use of airtight plastic packaging under ambient conditions (T= ±25°C and RH= 48%) were efficient in maintaining the quality characteristics of Hawaii papaya and prolonging its shelf life [⁵].

The use of plastic packaging can be an alternative to extend the shelf life of fruits, but they do not control the appearance of pathogenic infections. The application of fungicides, although an important pathogen control strategy, leaves residues on fruits, and has been a matter of concern due to its negative effects on human health and the environment [⁶]. Thus, the development of new alternative measures for disease control and maintenance of fruit quality is crucial [⁷].

The application of peracetic acid (sanitizing agent) can be an effective alternative to replace chemical fungicides, as it does not generate toxic by-products when it decomposes, producing only water, oxygen and acetic acid as residues, and it is accepted for use in organic production [⁸-⁹]. In addition, it has no carcinogenic or mutagenic effect, being sustainable, environmentally safe and with a broad spectrum of action, and it is effective in the presence of organic matter and hard water [¹⁰].

In view of this, it is believed that the use of plastic packaging associated with the application of peracetic acid can be an alternative to delay the senescence of the fruits and reduce the incidence of fungal attack, thus contributing to the increase in the shelf life of the fruits. Thus, the present work aimed to evaluate the effect of the use of modified atmosphere and peracetic acid on the postharvest quality and conservation of organic 'Tainung I' papaya.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Experiment samples and installation

Formosa papaya fruits (cv. 'Tainung I') were acquired from an organic orchard from a fruit exporting company located in Baixo-Jaguaribe Microregion, municipality of Jaguaruana, Ceará, Brazil. According to the Köppen classification, the climate of the region is Aw, tropical with dry winter season [¹¹].

Fruits were harvested at the maturation stage II, when they presented 15 to 25% yellowing of their peel (the maturation stage used for export). Then, fruits were transported to packing house for cleaning and classification according to quality standards established by the foreign market.

Treatments were: (1) fruits treated with peracetic acid (500ppm) and stored in Packaging 1 (Xtend® 815 pp64); (2) fruits without peracetic acid application and stored in Packaging 1 (Xtend® 815 pp64); (3) fruits treated with peracetic acid and stored in Packaging 2 (Xtend® 815 pp65); (4) fruits without peracetic acid application and stored in Packaging 2 (Xtend® 815 pp65); (5) fruits treated with peracetic acid and stored without packaging; and (6) fruits without peracetic acid application and stored without packaging. Before packaging, fruits were pre-cooled in a cold chamber at 15 °C and 90% relative humidity (RH), until pulp temperature reached 15 °C by monitoring with a digital skewer thermometer (Incoterm®).

Fruits were then stored in a cold chamber (10 ± 2°C and 92 ± 2% RH) for 32 days. Every eight days during storage, five fruits per treatment were removed from the cold chamber and transported to the Postharvest Physiology and Technology Laboratory at Federal Rural University of Semiarid (UFERSA), Mossoró-RN, where they were kept for two days at room temperature (24 ± 2°C and 60 ± 2% RH) without packaging, and subsequently evaluated for quality attributes.

Traits evaluated

Weight loss was determined by weighing fruits at harvest (initial weight) and at every evaluation day of storage and expressed as percentage loss of the initial weight. Data were expressed as a percentage of weight loss. Fruit external appearance was assessed using a rating scale from 1 to 5 according to defect severity [¹²]: 1 = extremely deteriorated fruit; 2 = severe deterioration; 3 = medium deterioration; 4 = slight deterioration; 5 = no deterioration. For external appearance evaluation, the absence or presence of depressions, dark spots, wilting, and pathogen attack was observed. Fruits showing a score less than or equal to 3.0 were considered improper for consumption and, therefore, were not evaluated.

Postharvest disease was evaluated using a visual rating scale from 1 to 4: 1 = 0% of fruit surface infected; 2 = 1 to 10% of fruit surface infected; 3 = more than 10% and less than 20% of fruit surface infected; and 4 = more than 20% of fruit surface infected. Fruits displaying a score equal to or greater than 2 were considered unsuitable for commercialization [¹³]. Fungi that attacked the fruits were identified by optical microscope.

Fruit peel color was determined using a digital colorimeter (CR400 illuminant D65, Konica Minolta) positioned at two equidistant points on the peel surface, and values were expressed as L, C, and °h.

Peel and pulp firmness were measured using a digital texturometer (TA.XT Express/TA.XT2 icon, Stable Micro Systems) equipped with a 6 mm diameter stainless steel cylindrical probe (model P/6) pre-configured to 1.0, 2.0, and 10.0 mm s^-1 pre-test, test, and post-test speeds, respectively, 10 mm penetration depth, and 10 kg load cell. Two measurements were made on opposite sides of the equatorial region of the fruits, in the epicarp and mesocarp, and values were expressed as Newton (N).

Then, fruit pulp (mesocarp) was homogenized using a food processor (BL450BR, Nutri Ninja® Auto-IQ®) for further analysis.

Soluble solids content (SSC) was determined by direct refractometry (PR-100, Palette, Atago Co, LTD., Japan), and results were expressed as ºBrix [¹⁴]. Titratable acidity (TA) was determined by titration with 0.1 N NaOH and expressed as percentage of citric acid (IAL, 2008). pH was directly determined in the homogenized pulp using a pHmeter (mPA-210, Tecnal®) according to AOAC (2002).

Total sugars content was determined by the Antrona reagent method as described by Yemn and Willys [¹⁵] (1954), and reducing sugars according to Miller [¹⁶] (1959), and both were expressed as % fresh weight (FW). Vitamin C was determined by titration with Tillman's solution according to Strohecker and Henning [¹⁷] (1967) and results expressed as mg ascorbic acid 100 g^-1 FW. β-carotene content was determined using and adapted methodology described by Nagata and Yamashita [¹⁸] (1992) and results were expressed as mg 100 ml^-1 pulp and converted to µg ml^-1 pulp.

Statistical analysis

The experimental design was completely randomized (DIC), in a (2 × 3) × 5 split-plot scheme, with peracetic acid treatment and packaging in the plot, and days of storage in the subplot, with five replicates of one fruit each. Data were submitted to analysis of variance (p <0.05) and means were grouped by the Tukey’s test (p <0.05). For external and internal appearance and disease severity, data were evaluated by the Kruskal-Wallis test (p <0.05) and means were grouped by the Bonferroni test (p <0.05). All statistical analyzes were performed in Sisvar software version 5.7.

RESULTS

External appearance and disease severity index

A significant interaction was observed for peracetic acid treatment, packaging, and storage time for the external appearance of papayas. Fruits treated with peracetic acid and stored in the Packaging 1 and 2 showed reduced appearance after 18 days of storage. However, they became improper for consumption after 34 days of storage, when scores were equal to or less than 3.0. On the other hand, non-packaged fruits lost quality after 10 days, becoming unfit for consumption after 26 days of storage (Figure 1A).

Without acid treatment, packaged and non-packaged fruits lost quality after 10 days of storage. Non-packed fruits displayed a score equal to 3.0 after 18 days of storage, while packaged fruits reached this score at the end of storage. Damages observed were depression, wilting, deformation, and fungal attack (Figure 1B).

Figure 1
External appearance (A, B) and disease severity index (C, D) in Formosa 'Tainung I' papaya submitted to peracetic acid treatment, type of packaging and cold storage. Packaging 1: Xtend® 815 pp64; Packaging 2: Xtend® 815 pp65.

Severity analysis revealed that the acid-treated fruits and stored in Packaging 2 showed less than 10% of their surfaces infected by fungi and were considered marketable up to 26 days of storage, while the other fruits maintained low symptom severity for up to 18 days (Figure 1C). However, without acid treatment, packaged and non-packaged fruits showed no fungal attack until 18 days (Figure 1D). At the end of storage, acid-treated and non-treated fruits showed more than 10% of their surface infected, becoming improper for consumption and, therefore, no quality analyzes were performed during this period (Figure 1C and 1D). Through microbiological analysis, fungi from the genero Alternaria, Cladosporium, Colletotrichum, and Fusarium were identified.

A significant interaction between peracetic acid and storage (p <0.01) and between packaging and storage (p <0.05) was observed for weight loss. Fruits treated and non-treated with the sanitizer had the same weight loss (6.5%) until 26 days of storage. However, at the end of storage, treated fruits lost less mass (8%) than non-treated fruits (10%) (Figure 2A). Regarding packaging, weight loss was lower in packaged than in non-packaged fruits during the storage. At 34 days, non-packaged fruits lost 11% of their weight, while packaged fruits lost 8% (Figure 2B).

Figure 2
Weigth loss in Formosa 'Tainung I' papaya treated with peracetic acid (A) and use of packaging (B) depending on storage time. Packaging 1: Xtend® 815 pp64; Packaging 2: Xtend® 815 pp65. Values are mean ± standard error (n = 5). CV1 = 16.92% and CV2 = 16.43%.

For peel color, luminosity and chromaticity change significantly during the storage (p <0.05). However, the main effects of packaging and storage were significant for hue angle (p <0.05).

Peel luminosity increased during storage; thus, fruits became lighter at the end of storage. Similarly, chroma values increased and fruits showed higher yellow intensity at the end of storage. In contrast, hue angle decreased during storage, indicating loss of green color and yellowing (Table 1).

Table 1
Average pH values, soluble solids content (SSC) and peel color according to Luminosity (L), Chromaticity (C) and Hue angle (°h) in Formosa 'Tainung I' papaya evaluated at harvest (0) and after 8, 16 and 24 days of cold storage (110 ± 2 °C and 92 ± 2% RH), plus 2 days at room temperature (24 ± 2 °C and 60 ± 2% RH).

Storage time (days)	pH	SSC	Peel color
			L	C	°h
0	5.35a	12.80a	45.38c	24.81d	114.23a
10	5.30a	12.72a	51.34b	34.28c	99.01b
18	5.29a	11.89b	52.15b	37.95b	95.35b
26	5.12b	11.71b	58.39a	44.86a	87.19c

• Means with same letter in column are not significantly different by the Tukey's test (p <0.05). L: CV1 = 7.97% and CV2 = 8.02%; C: CV1 = 14.38% and CV2 = 13.94%; °h: CV1 = 5.05% and CV2 = 6.61%.

However, hue ​​was higher in fruits stored in Packaging 1, not differing from those in Packaging 2, indicating that packaging reduced green change in peel color and, therefore, delayed ripening during storage (Table 2).

Table 2
Mean of Hue angle (°h) in peel of Formosa 'Tainung I' papaya submitted to use of packaging.

Packaging	°h
Packaging 1	100.79 a
Packaging 2	99.70 ab
Without packaging	96.44 b

• Means with same letter in column are not significantly different by the Tukey's test (p <0.05). Packaging 1: Xtend® 815 pp64; Packaging 2: Xtend® 815 pp65.

Significant interaction among peracetic acid treatment, packaging, and storage was observed for fruit firmness (p <0.01), while for pulp firmness, there was significant interaction between peracetic acid treatment and storage (p <0.05). Fruit firmness decreased significantly in the first 10 days of storage for all treatments, varying from 78.06 N to 20 N (Figure 3).

Figure 3
Fruit firmness (A, B), vitamin C content (C, D) and reducing sugars (E, F) in Formosa 'Tainung I' papaya submitted to peracetic acid treatment, type of packaging and cold storage. Packaging 1: Xtend® 815 pp64; Packaging 2: Xtend® 815 pp65. Values are mean ± standard error (n = 5). CV1 = 11.04% and CV2 = 10.19%.

However, peracetic acid-treated fruits and stored in Packaging 2 maintained their firmness from 10 (18.73 N) to 26 days (14.93 N) without significant change, while in Packaging 1 fruits maintained their firmness after 18 days (12.31 N). Differently, firmness in non-packaged decreased continuously to 8.77 N (Figure 3A). On the other hand, firmness decreased continuously during storage in all fruits without peracetic acid treatment, but it decreased less in the first 10 days in packaged fruits, declining from 78.06 to 29.9 N with Packaging 1, to 23.8 N with Packaging 2, and to 17.6 N without packaging in the same period (Figure 3B). At the end of storage, firmness was greater in packaged and acid-treated fruits.

Pulp firmness intensely reduced in the first 10 days of storage in all fruits. Nevertheless, it was less reduced in fruits treated with peracetic acid (30.62 N to 10.29 N) than in non-treated fruits (30.62 N to 4.07 N). After 18 days of storage, firmness remained around 4.07 N, similar in treated and non-treated fruits (Figure 4A).

Interaction between peracetic acid treatment and storage time (p <0.05) was significant for titratable acidity. During storage, both acid-treated and non-treated fruits increased acidity up to 10 days, reduced up to 18 days, then increase up to 26 days. Sanitized fruits showed less acidity at 10 days of storage (0.139%) compared to non-sanitized fruits (0.154%). At the end of storage, fruits showed similar acidity (0.119%) (Figure 4B).

Figure 4
Pulp firmness (A) and titratable acidity (B) in Formosa 'Tainung I' papaya treated with peracetic acid. Values are mean ± standard error (n = 5). CV1 = 30.58% and CV2 = 30.52%.

Differently, pH was affected only by storage (p <0.05). Fruit pH was remained constant until 18 days of storage, decreasing slightly at 26 days (Table 1), as expected due to the slight increase in acidity at the end of storage.

Significant interaction among peracetic acid treatment, packaging, and storage was observed for vitamin C content (p <0.01). The vitamin C content varied during storage (Figure 3C and 3D). In peracetic acid-treated fruits, vitamin C content was different between packaged and non-packaged fruits only after 10 days of storage, when fruits without packaging had lower vitamin C content than packaged fruits. On the other hand, vitamin C content remained around 60 mg 100 g^-1 throughout the storage in fruits stored in Packaging 1 (Figure 3C). Without treatment with peracetic acid, vitamin C content was higher at 10 days in fruits in Package 1, while it did not vary during storage in fruits in Package 2 and without packaging, remaining between 60 and 50 mg 100 g^-1 (Figure 3D).

The content of soluble solids was influenced only by the storage time (p <0.05). Values were maintained until 10 days of storage, with a slight reduction after 18 days of storage (Table 1).

A significant interaction between packaging and storage (p <0.05) was observed for total soluble sugars content. Fruits stored in Packaging 1 showed higher sugar content after 18 days (10.24%) than fruits in Packaging 2 (9.54%) or without packaging (8.87%). However, at the end of storage, sugar content of fruits in Packaging 1 was similar to that of fruits without packaging (8.94%), and higher than fruits in Packaging 2 (7.78%) (Figure 5A).

Figure 4
Total soluble sugars (A) and β-carotene (B) in Formosa 'Tainung I' papaya submitted to use of packaging depending on storage time. Packaging 1: Xtend® 815 pp64; Packaging 2: Xtend® 815 pp65. Values are mean ± standard error (n = 5). CV1 = 8, 89% and CV2 = 10.70%.

For reducing sugars, a significant interaction among treatment with peracetic acid, packaging, and storage (p <0.01) was observed. Reducing sugars varied from 5.25 to 7.58% during storage (Figures 3E and 3F). For the acid-treated fruits, using Packaging 1 maintained the reducing sugar content throughout the storage period. On the other hand, fruits in Packaging 2 showed lower reducing sugar content at 10 days (5.71%) than fruits in Packaging 1 (7.24%) or non-packaged fruits (6.52%). Also, reducing sugars in non-packaged fruits decreased until 18 days (Figure 3E). For non-treated fruits, reducing sugars decreased after 10 days of storage, declining from 7.58% to 5.78% in fruits stored in Packaging 1 or non-packaged. In packaging 2, reducing sugars reduced only after 18 days of storage (Figure 3F).

For the -carotene content, there was a significant effect of packaging during storage (p <0.05). -carotene content increased slightly up to 10 days of storage in packaged fruits, while in fruits without packaging β-carotene did not vary until 18 days. Fruits stored in Packaging 1 had higher β-carotene content at 10 days (146.28 µg 100 g^-1) and 18 days (131.91 µg 100 g^-1), compared to fruits in Packaging 2 (127, 42 and 83.38 µg 100 g^-1) or without packaging (116.04 and 101.04 µg 100 g^-1). (Figure 5B).

DISCUSSION

In this study, we showed that treatment with peracetic acid and use of packaging can delay loss of quality and disease development in organic 'Tainung I' papaya. Fungi from the genera Alternaria, Cladosporium, Colletotrichum, Fusarium, and other species, have caused postharvest diseases in papaya worldwide, leading to significant losses during storage and transport [¹⁹, ²⁰]. Several technologies have been used to control the postharvest attack of pathogens. Peracetic acid treatment associated with the use of packaging reduced the attack of fungi, especially using Packaging 2 (Xtend® 815 pp65). Lower rot incidence under these conditions may be due to the sanitizing action of peracetic acid. This compound can oxidize cellular components of microorganisms, with rapid action in low concentrations over a wide spectrum of pathogens [²¹]. Also, lower rot incidence with Packaging 2 was possibly due to CO2 accumulation inside, which has antifungal action [²²], being more effective than Packaging 1 (Xtend® 815 pp64).

Peracetic acid treatment reduced weight loss of fruits during storage. This may be due to less fungal attack on treated fruits, which would lead to an increase in metabolism and transpiration, due to destruction of tissues causing openings that would facilitate water loss [²³]. On the other hand, lower weight loss in packaged fruits occurred because the modified atmosphere allowed the formation of a moisture-saturated microenvironment, reducing the vapor pressure gradient between the fruit and the atmosphere inside the packaging, thus reducing fruit transpiration [²⁴].

During ripening, chlorophyll degradation occurs in the peel of papaya fruits and the pre-existence of carotenoid pigments is visible [²⁵]. In this study, the use of packaging significantly influenced the evolution of the fruit color, with less change in the green color in packaged fruits compared to control. Lower depigmentation may be due to packaging changing the atmosphere around the fruit, resulting in slow respiration and reduced ethylene production. This, in turn, delays fruit ripening and senescence, resulting in less color change [²⁶].

Fruit softening is one of the main transformations that occur during ripening, due to the degradation of cell wall polysaccharides, such as pectins, cellulose and hemicellulose [²⁷, ²⁸]. In the present study, fruit and pulp firmness decreased significantly after harvest. However, using packaging delayed peel softening as compared to non-packaged fruits. Also, packaging reduced fruit transpiration and metabolism because of modified atmosphere of gases, concentrating CO₂ and reducing O₂. Modified atmosphere also reduces the activity of cell wall degradation enzymes, such as pectinamethylesterase and polygalacturonase, that cause fruit softening during ripening [²⁹,³⁰]. Higher firmness in peracetic acid-treated fruits can also be associated with reduced fungal attack by the sanitization treatment. Fungal hyphae colonize tissues by destroying cell walls, thereby reducing fruit firmness [³¹].

According to Bron and Jacomino [³²], cell wall degradation provides substrates for ascorbic acid synthesis. However, with the course of ripening, the oxidation of acids occurs with a consequent reduction in ascorbic acid content, indicating the fruit senescence [³³]. Packaged fruits had a higher vitamin C content due to the lower concentration of O₂ inside the packaging. According to Widodo and coauthors [³⁴] (2016), modified atmosphere around the fruit results in increased ascorbic acid content, mainly due to O₂ availability inside the packaging, thus reducing oxidative processes.

TA represents the concentration of organic acids in fruits. An increase of acids during ripening can contribute to decrease pulp pH [³⁵, ³⁶]. According to John and coauthors [³⁷] (2018), the increase in acidity during ripening may be associated with release of galacturonic acid resulted from cell wall degradation. It may have occurred in the present study, since the reduction in firmness was more pronounced in the first 10 days of storage, coinciding with the slight increase in acidity. Reduction in firmness then can be explained by increased consumption of these acids as a substrate for respiration during ripening [³⁸]. In addition, lower fungal attack on acid treated fruits may explain the lower acidity in the fruits, due to the lower formation of acids resulting from cell wall degradation [³¹].

During storage, sugar content may decrease as it can be consumed during respiratory metabolism of the fruits [³⁹]. The higher concentration of sugars in packaged fruits can be explained by the beneficial effects of the modified atmosphere. As sugars are the main substrates used in the respiratory process, the modified atmosphere reduces fruit respiration by reducing gas exchange, prolonging the postharvest shelf-life, which may explain the higher sugar content in packaged fruits during storage [⁴⁰].

Carotenoid content in papaya increases during ripening, contributing to fruit coloring, then decreasing during senescence [⁴¹, ³⁵]. However, these compounds are sensitive to light and oxygen Janzantti and coauthors (2012) [⁴²]. Thus, the higher content of carotenoids in packaged fruits may be associated with low concentrations of O₂ inside the packaging, reducing the metabolism of the fruits and minimizing the degradation of the carotenoids [⁴³]. The Xtend® 815 pp64 packaging was more effective in delaying β-carotene loss during storage.

CONCLUSION

Peracetic acid treatment associated with packaging during storage maintains the postharvest quality of organic Formosa 'Tainung I' papaya.

Peracetic acid treatment and use of the Xtend® 815 pp64 packaging maintain the contents of vitamin C, soluble solids, sugars, and β-carotene content during storage.

Peracetic acid treatment and use of the Xtend® 815 pp65 packaging maintain better external appearance of the organic Formosa 'Tainung I' papaya with an acceptable commercial standard for up to 26 days.

REFERENCES

• ¹
  Gunde MC, Amnerkar ND. [Nutritional, medicinal and pharmacological properties of papaya (Carica papaya L.): A review]. J. innov. pharm. biol. sci. 2016; 3 (1):162-9.
• ²
  Tan GH, Ali A, Siddiqui Y. [Review: Current strategies, perspectives and challenges in management and control os postharvest diseases of papaya: A review]. Sci. Hortic. 2010 jul; 301 (2022). 111139.
• ³
  Kader AA. [Future of Modified Atmosphere Research]. Acta Hortic. 2010; 857: 212-7.
• ⁴
  Azene M, Workneh TS, Woldetsadik K. [Effect of packaging materials and storage environment on postharvest quality of papaya fruit]. J Food Sci Technol. 2011 Dec; 51(6):1041-55.
• ⁵
  Aguiar FIS, Freitas Júnior FGBF, Silva MDC, Costa Neta CM, Macedo KBC, Almeida EIB, et al. [Use of Packaging for 'Hawaii' Papaya Conservation, Sold at CEASA of São Luís, Maranhão, Brazil]. J. Agric. Stud; 2020 Mar; 8(3): 384-96.
• ⁶
  Reis HF, Bacchi LMA.; Scalon SPQ, Flores JKP. [In vitro antimicrobial activity and alternative control of anthracnose in papaya]. Arq. Inst. Biol. 2018 Ago; 85:1-8.
• ⁷
  Chen T, Ji D, Zhang Z, Li B, Qin G, Tian S. [Advances and Strategies for Controlling the Quality and Safety of Postharvest Fruit]. Engineering. 2011; 7:1177-84.
• ⁸
  Kitis M. [Disinfection of wastewater with peracetic acid: a review]. Environ Int. 2004 Mar; 30: 47-55.
• ⁹
  Zoellner C, Aguayo-Acosta A, Siddiqui MW, D ́avila-Aviña JE. [Peracetic acid in disinfection of fruits and vegetables], p.53-66. In M. W. Siddiqui (Ed.), Postharvest disinfection of fruits and vegetables. 2018; San Diego, CA: Elsevier Academic.
• ¹⁰
  Encarna A, Perla G, Francisco AH, Francisco A. [Chemical disinfectant treatments for fresh-cut vegetables: ozone, electrolyzed water and peracetic acid]. Agrociencia Uruguay, 2017. 21:7-14.
• ¹¹
  INMET, Instituto Nacional de Meteorologia. BDMEP - Banco de Dados Meteorológicos para Ensino e Pesquisa. Disponível em: http://www.inmet.gov.br (Acesso em: 16 outubro 2020).
  » http://www.inmet.gov.br
• ¹²
  Rocha RHC, Nascimento SRC, Menezes JB, Nunes GHS, Silva EO. [Post-colheit quality of the formed breast assembled under refrigeration]. Rev. Bras. Frutic. 2005. 27:386-9.
• ¹³
  Peixoto AMS. [Pathogen control and postharvest shelf life extension of Formosa mother ‘Tainung I’ through biological and chemical control]. 2005. 68f. Dissertation (Master in Plant Science) - Universidade Federal Rural do Semi-Árido (UFERSA), Mossoró-RN.
• ¹⁴
  Association Of Official Analytical Chemistry (AOAC) (2002). [Official methods of analysis: 17ª edição], Washington, EUA.
• ¹⁵
  Yemn EW and Willis AJ. [The estimation of carbohydrate in plant extracts by anthrone]. Biochem. J. 1954. 57:508-14.
• ¹⁶
  Miller GL. [Use of dinitrosalicylicacid reagente for determination of reducing sugars]. Anal. Chem. 1959; 31:426-8.
• ¹⁷
  Strohecker R. and Henning HM. [Vitamin analysis, proven methods]. 5ª edição.1967.
• ¹⁸
  Nagata M. and Yamashita I. [Simple method for simultaneous determination of chlorophyll and carotenoids in tomato fruit] Nippon Shokuhin Kogyo Gakkaish. 1992; 39:925-8.
• ¹⁹
  Singh P. [Advances in control of post-harvest diseases of papaya fruit-a Review]. Agric. Rev. 2010; 31:194-202.
• ²⁰
  Bautista-Baños S. [A review of the management alternatives for controlling fungi on papaya fruit during the postharvest supply chain]. J. Crop Prot., 2013; 49:8-20.
• ²¹
  Srebernich SM. [Use of chlorine dioxide and peracetic acid as substitutes for sodium hypochlorite in the sanitization of minimally processed chives]. Ciênc. Tecnol. Aliment. 2007; 27:744-50.
• ²²
  Oliveira J. de; Silva IG, Silva PPM da; Spoto MHF. [Modified atmosphere and refrigeration for post-harvest conservation of camu-camu]. Ciênc. Rural. 2014; 44:1126-33.
• ²³
  Zoellner C, Aguayo-Acosta A, Siddiqui MW, Dávila-Aviña JE. [Peracetic Acid in Disinfection of Fruits and Vegetables]. Postharvest Disinfection of Fruits and Vegetables. 2018. 53-66.
• ²⁴
  Fonseca SC, Oliveira FA, Lino IB, Brecht JK, Chau KV. [Modelling O2 and CO2 exchange for development of perforation-mediated modified atmosphere packaging]. J Food Eng. 2000; 43:9-15.
• ²⁵
  Silva WB, Silva GMC, Silva LRD, Waldman WR, Oliveira JGD. [Post-colheit treatment with calcium chloride slows the deterioration and loss of firmness of the breast UENF/Caliman01]. Rev. Bras. Frutic. 2015; 37:588-99.
• ²⁶
  Bhanushree L, Vasudeva KR, Suresha GJ, Sadananda GK, Tayeebulla HM, Halesh GK. [Influence of chitosan on postharvest behavior of papaya (Carica papaya L.) Fruits under different storage conditions]. J Pharmacogn Phytochem. 2018; 7:2010-4.
• ²⁷
  Irtwange SV. [Application of modified atmosphere packaging and related technology in postharvest handling of fresh fruits and vegetables]. Int. Agric. Eng. J.: CIGR Journal. 2006.
• ²⁸
  Gapper NE, Mcquinn RP, Giovannoni JJ. [Molecular and genetic regulation of fruit ripening]. Plant Mol. Biol. 2013; 82:575-91.
• ²⁹
  Fontes RV, Santos MP, Falqueto AR, Silva DM. [Activity of pectinmethylesterase and its relationship with loss of firmness of breast breast cv. Sunrise Solo e Tainung]. Rev. Bras. Frutic. 2008; 30:54-8.
• ³⁰
  Dias TC, Mota WF, Otoni BS, Mizobutsi GP, Santos MGP. [Post-colheit conservation of formed breast with PVC film and refrigeration]. Rev. Bras. 2011; 33: 666-70.
• ³¹
  Hewajulige IGN and Wijeratnam SW. [Alternative postharvest treatments to control anthracnose disease in papaya during storage]. Fresh Prod. 2010; 1:15-20.
• ³²
  Bron IU and Jacomino AP. [Ripening and quality of 'Golden' papaya fruit harvested at different maturity stages]. Braz. J. Plant Physiol. 2006; 18:389-96.
• ³³
  Tucker GA. [Introduction]. In: Seymour, GB, JE Taylor, GA Tucker, (Ed.). Biochemistry of fruit ripening. London: Chapman & Hall, 1993; 2-51.
• ³⁴
  Widodo SE, Zulferiyenni N, Dirmawati SR, Wardhana RA, Sunarti N, Wahyuni ML. [Effects of chitosan and plastic wrapping on fruit shelf-life and qualities of ‘California’ papaya]. In: Proceedings Of The 6 Th Annual Basic Science International Conference. Faculty of Mathematics and Sciences Brawijaya University, 2016; 183-86.
• ³⁵
  Sancho LEGG, Yahia EM, González-Aguilar GA. [Identification and quantification of phenols, carotenoids, and vitamin C from papaya (Carica papaya L., cv. Maradol) fruit determined by HPLC-DAD-MS/MS-ESI]. Food Res. Int. 2011, 44:1284-91.
• ³⁶
  Ovando-Martinez M, Teros VML, Garcia HA, Zavala JFA, Ochoa MAV, Aguilar GAG. [Effect of ripening on physico-chemical properties and bioactive compounds in papaya pilp, skin and seeds]. Indian J Nat Prod Resour. 2018; 9:47-59.
• ³⁷
  John A, Yanga J, Liu J, Jiang Y, Yang B. [The structure changes of water-soluble polysaccharides in papaya during ripening]. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2018; 115:152-6.
• ³⁸
  El Gharras, H. [Polyphenols: food sources, properties and applications-a review]. Int. J. Food Sci. 2009; 44:2512-18.
• ³⁹
  Almeida-Castro A, Pimentel JDR, Souza DS, Oliveira TV, Oliveira MC. Study of the conservation of papaya (Carica papaya L.) associated with the application of edible films. RVCTA, 2011; 2:49-60.
• ⁴⁰
  Yahia E, Carrillo-Lopez A. [Chapter 9 - Carbohydrates]. In: Postharvest Physiology and Biochemistry of Fruits and Vegetables. 2018; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/C2016-0-04653-3
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/C2016-0-04653-3
• ⁴¹
  Yahia EM, Ornelas-Paz JJ. [Chemistry, stability, and biological actions of carotenoids]. In: Fruit and vegetable phytochemicals: Chemistry, nutritional value and stability. Ames, 2010; 177-222.
• ⁴²
  Janzantti NS, Macoris MS, Garruti DS, Monteiro M. [Influence of the cultivation system in the aroma of the volatile compounds and total antioxidant activity of passion fruit]. LWT. 2012; 46:511-8.
• ⁴³
  Maniwara P, Boonyakiat D, Poonlarp PB, Natwichai J, Nakano K. [Changes of postharvest quality in passion fruit (Passiflora edulis Sims) under modified atmosphere packaging conditions]. Food Res. Int. 2015;22(4):1596-606.

• Funding:

  This research was funded by Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior - Brasil (CAPES), grant number 001.

Edited by

Editor-in-Chief:

Bill Jorge Costa

Associate Editor:

Bill Jorge Costa

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  11 Oct 2024
• Date of issue
  2024

History

• Received
  15 Aug 2023
• Accepted
  30 July 2024