This article was downloaded by: [University of Agriculture - Faisalabad], [A. S. Khan]On: 02 May 2014, At: 22:13Publisher: Taylor & FrancisInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

International Journal of Fruit SciencePublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wsfr20

Locality and Orchard ManagementInfluence Fruit Quality of LowTemperature Stored MangoesAhmad Sattar Khana, Aman Ullah Malika, Syed Ali Razaa, Habat UllahAsada, Muhammad Amina & Kashif Razzaqa

a Postharvest Research and Training Centre, Institute of HorticulturalSciences, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad, PakistanPublished online: 28 Apr 2014.

To cite this article: Ahmad Sattar Khan, Aman Ullah Malik, Syed Ali Raza, Habat Ullah Asad,Muhammad Amin & Kashif Razzaq (2014): Locality and Orchard Management Influence FruitQuality of Low Temperature Stored Mangoes, International Journal of Fruit Science, DOI:10.1080/15538362.2013.819739

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15538362.2013.819739

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

International Journal of Fruit Science, 14:1–14, 2014Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLCISSN: 1553-8362 print/1553-8621 onlineDOI: 10.1080/15538362.2013.819739

Locality and Orchard Management InfluenceFruit Quality of Low Temperature Stored

Mangoes

AHMAD SATTAR KHAN, AMAN ULLAH MALIK, SYED ALI RAZA,HABAT ULLAH ASAD, MUHAMMAD AMIN, and KASHIF RAZZAQPostharvest Research and Training Centre, Institute of Horticultural Sciences, University of

Agriculture, Faisalabad, Pakistan

To investigate the impact of locality and orchard management onfruit quality, ‘Samar Bahisht Chaunsa’ fruit harvested from twocommercial orchards were stored at 11◦C and 80%–85% RH for4 weeks. Physical fruit quality, fruit rot, and disorders were notinfluenced by locality. However, at the ripe stage, fruit harvestedfrom orchard-1 exhibited reduced respiration rate (5.84 mmolekg−1 h−1), higher peel color (3.35), pulp color (7.33), aroma(6.66), taste (7.33), flavor (7.33), SSC:TA ratio (139.1), reducing(4.06%), non-reducing (10.38%), and total sugar (14.99%) con-tents. In conclusion, quality of mango fruit following cold storageis significantly influenced by locality and orchard management.

KEYWORDS soil and leaf mineral status, cold storage, fruit respi-ration, sensory quality

INTRODUCTION

The mango (Mangifera indica L.) is well known for its flavor and versa-tility and is in some localities considered the king of fruit. Pakistan, with1.784 million tons of production and 84.9 thousand tons exported (worth US$29.3 million), is ranked as the fifth and fourth largest mango producing andexporting country in the world (FAOSTAT, 2010; Anonymous, 2010).

Address correspondence to Ahmad Sattar Khan, Postharvest Research and TrainingCentre, Institute of Horticultural Sciences, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad 38040,Pakistan. E-mail: ahmad_khan157@yahoo.com

1

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

gric

ultu

re -

Fai

sala

bad]

, [A

. S. K

han]

at 2

2:13

02

May

201

4

2 A. S. Khan et al.

Currently, fruit quality is a major concern of consumers in the domes-tic as well as international markets. There is significant variability in thefruit qualitative attributes, which leads to reduction in profitability for mangoproducers. Successful marketing of fresh fruit is aided by predictable, consis-tent, and uniform produce quality. Undesirable variation in the fruit qualitydevalues consumer acceptability due to a lack of uniformity (Papadakiset al., 2008; Ben-Hong et al., 2002). Variability in fruit quality is identifiedalong the mango supply chain in relation to shape, size, weight, color, taste,flavor, and aroma. According to Kader (2002), quality and postharvest perfor-mance of mangoes depends on both external and internal quality parameters.Several production factors, including production locality, climatic conditions,soil type, and cultural practices, have been found to influence fruit qual-ity (Ferguson, 1980; Beverly et al., 1993; Anwar and Malik, 2007). Preharvestcultural practices play a key role in delivering the fruit to the consumers withthe optimal acceptability, cosmetic, and physico-chemical quality attributes.

Increased green skin color of ripe mango fruit is linked to high soilnitrogen (N) (Oosthuyse, 1993), and several internal disorders in mangohave also been reported to be associated with soil type (Young and Miner,1961; Burdon et al., 1991). In fruit crops preharvest nutrition, particularlyexcess N, can enhance postharvest disease development, such as brownrot in pears (Daane et al., 1996) and anthracnose in avocado and mango(Abou-Aziz et al., 1975; Nguyen et al., 2004). Irrigation management also hasa significant impact on the physico-chemical fruit quality characteristics ofmango. SSC and SSC:TA ratio has a linear relationship with irrigation intervals(Nasir and Mian, 1993). Various harvesting practices in ‘Tommy Atkins’ and‘Keitt’ mangoes have been found to influence the development of lenticelsin mango fruit (Cronje, 2009).

The role of the climatic features of the production locality and orchardmanagement practices on fruit quality has been reported on various fruitcrops (Hofman, 1996; Salvador et al., 1998). However, to the best of ourknowledge this is the first article indicating the potential role of produc-tion site and orchard management on the quality of ‘Samar Bahisht Chaunsa’mango fruit. Hence, the current study was planned to determine the influ-ence of production localities and different orchard management schemes onthe postharvest fruit quality of mango cv. Samar Bahisht Chaunsa, ripenedafter 4 weeks of low temperature storage.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Orchard Selection

‘Samar Bahisht Chaunsa’ mangoes were sourced from two commercialmango producing orchards (orchard-1 with traditional orchard management

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

gric

ultu

re -

Fai

sala

bad]

, [A

. S. K

han]

at 2

2:13

02

May

201

4

Orchard Management Influences Quality of Cold Stored Mangoes 3

and orchard-2 with improved management) located at two districts ofMultan (30◦ 11′ 52′′ N; 71◦ 28′ 11′′ E) and Lodhran (29◦ 32′ N; 71◦ 38′E), Pakistan. Climatic conditions of the Multan district are characterized byhigher mean monthly maximum, minimum temperature and lower relativehumidity throughout mango fruit growth and harvest period in compar-ison with Lodhran district (Fig. 1). The orchard selected in Multan wasmanaged by conventional farmer practices (i.e., poor disease and pest man-agement, no/less canopy management, cultivation under tree canopy, floodirrigation system and conventional harvest practices) (Orchard-1), whileimproved orchard management (i.e., improved disease and pest manage-ment, improved orchard canopy and floor management, modern irrigationsystem installation and standard harvest practices) was being practiced at anorchard selected in Lodhran district (Orchard-2).

Fruit Sampling

Uniform sized, well-developed, healthy and disease-free mango fruit wererandomly harvested at commercial maturity from the two commercial mangoorchards. The fruit were treated with fungicide (0.5 ml/L Sportak), com-pletely air dried (30 ± 2◦C; 50–60% RH), packed in the corrugated cardboardboxes, and were shifted to Postharvest Research and Training Centre (PRTC),Institute of Horticultural Sciences, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad,Pakistan in a reefer van (18◦C). The experiment was planned according to thecompletely randomized design (CRD) replicated thrice and nine fruit werekept as the replication unit. Fruit were stored at 11 ± 1◦C and 80–85% RHfor 4 weeks. Following cold storage, fruit were allowed to ripen at ambienttemperature (30 ± 2◦C; 50–60% RH).

Soil, Leaf, and Fruit Mineral Analysis

Soil samples were taken at harvest from the soil of the selected trees betweenthe trunk and the outer edge of the tree canopy. One sample per tree wastaken from the soil surface to a depth of 15–20 cm with a soil auger. SoilN was determined by Ginning and Hibbard’s method of H2SO4 digestionand distillation was made with macro Kjeldhal’s apparatus (Jackson, 1962).Soil P was determined by following the protocol of Watanabe and Olsen(1965). Potassium contents in the soil were determined by flame photometer(Sherwood, Model 410, Scientific Laboratory Supplies, Nottingham, UK)(Ryan et al., 2001). Leaf sampling was done to determine the status of dif-ferent nutrients in the tree at harvest stage. The leaf samples comprised of15–20 mature and healthy leaves that were collected around the canopy ofselected trees at shoulder height. N, phosphorus (P), and potassium (K)status of the mango leaves and fruit peel and pulp was determined by

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

gric

ultu

re -

Fai

sala

bad]

, [A

. S. K

han]

at 2

2:13

02

May

201

4

4 A. S. Khan et al.

FIGURE 1 Mean maximum monthly temperature (A), mean minimum monthly tempera-ture (B), and relative humidity (C) of selected orchards in Multan (orchard-1) and Lodhran(orchard-2) districts during period of mango fruit growth.

using the method outlined by Chapman and Parker (1961). Calcium con-tents in leaves were determined by Flame Photometer as summarized bySobkowska and Basinska (1975). Magnesium contents were determined byAtomic Absorption Spectrophotometer (Analyst-100, Perkin Elmer, Waltham,

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

gric

ultu

re -

Fai

sala

bad]

, [A

. S. K

han]

at 2

2:13

02

May

201

4

Orchard Management Influences Quality of Cold Stored Mangoes 5

MA, USA) at 318.4 nm wave length (di-nitrogen oxide-acetylene flame) asdescribed by Vargas et al. (1994). Mineral (N, P, K, Ca, and Mg) contents inthe peel and pulp of harvested mango fruit were determined by using themethodology described earlier for leaf mineral analysis at the harvest stage.

Physiological Weight Loss and Respiration Rate

Physiological weight loss (%) of the fruit was determined at two stages: afterstorage and at the ripe stage as reported by Bhattarai and Gautam (2006) byusing the following formula:

Weight loss (%) = [(Initial weight − Final weight)/Initial weight] × 100.

The respiration rate of mango fruit was determined by using a CO2

analyzer (Vaisala MI 70, Vaisala Inc., Helsinki, Finland) and was expressedas mmole CO2 kg−1 h−1 (Hafeez et al., 2012).

Fruit Quality

Fruit skin color development, textural softness, and shriveling were scored byfollowing scales used by Malik and Singh (2005). Fruit rots and disorder wereestimated by a scale developed by Akhtar and Alam (2002). Organolepticquality attributes of the fruit were evaluated at fully the ripe stage using the9-point hedonic scale given by Peryam and Pilgrim (1957).

A hand-held refractometer (RX 5000, Atago, Tokyo, Japan) was usedfor the estimation of SSC. Titratable acidity and sugar (total, reducing, andnon-reducing) contents were determined by method of Hortwitz (1960).Ascorbic acid contents were estimated by using the method reported byRuck (1969) and total carotenoids were determined by the method outlinedby Lalel et al. (2003).

Statistical Analysis

The experiment was conducted using a completely randomized design(CRD). Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to test the significance ofthe data, while treatment means were compared by the Least SignificantDifference test at 5% level of significance (Steel et al., 1997).

RESULTS

Orchard Soil and Foliage Mineral Status

The soil analysis of orchards revealed non-significant results for soil N, P, andK contents. Soils of both the orchards were deficient in N (1.38%–1.60%) and

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

gric

ultu

re -

Fai

sala

bad]

, [A

. S. K

han]

at 2

2:13

02

May

201

4

6 A. S. Khan et al.

P (6.50%–7.45%) while soil K contents (145.3–170.0 ppm) were in sufficientconcentration.

Mineral analysis of leaves sourced from the mango orchards indicateddeficiency in N (0.52%) and P (0.01%–0.04%) and Mg (0.22%–0.28%) while K(0.80%–0.84%) and Ca (1.64%–1.69%) contents were in optimum range. LeafP, K, and Mg contents differed significantly in both the orchards. Orchard-1 [Pcontents (0.040%); Mg contents (0.28%)] exhibited 4-fold and 1.3-fold higherleaf P and Mg contents than in orchard-2 [P contents (0.010%); Mg contents(0.22%)]. However, trees in orchard-2 had 1.1-fold higher leaf K contents ascompared to orchard-1 (Table 1).

Fruit Quality

MINERAL STATUS IN FRUIT PEEL AND PULP TISSUES

Mineral analysis of the fruit peel revealed that fruit peel mineral contentswere found to be non-significant except P with respect to orchards. Pcontents in the peel of fruit harvested from orchard-2 (0.020%) were 40-fold higher than orchard-1 (0.05%). Among pulp mineral contents, N, P,and K were found significantly different between the two orchards. Fruitharvested from orchard-1 exhibited 2.5-fold and 1.8-fold higher N and P con-tents in fruit pulp tissues as compared to orchard-2, respectively (Table 2).Whereas, fruit pulp K contents were 1.12-fold higher in fruit harvest fromorchard-2 than orchard-1 (Table 2).

FRUIT WEIGHT LOSS AND RESPIRATION

Fruit harvested from orchard-2 showed significantly better result regardingfruit weight loss during storage with 7.26% lower weight loss as comparedwith orchard-1. However, non significant difference was found betweenfruit of both orchards regarding post-storage weight loss at the ripe stage(Table 3). Fruit respiration rate also differed significantly at both stages (atremoval and at the fully ripe stage) in both orchards. Fruit harvested from

TABLE 1 Status of Mineral Elements in the Orchard Soil and Foliage of Experimental Trees atHarvest

Soil Foliage

Orchard N (%) P (ppm) K (ppm) N (%) P (%) K (%) Ca (%) Mg(%)

Orchard-1 1.60 7.43 145.3 0.52 0.040az 0.80b 1.69 0.28aOrchard-2 1.38 6.50 170.0 0.52 0.010b 0.84a 1.64 0.22bLSD (P ≤ 0.05) NS NS NS NS 0.0072 0.0403 NS 0.0324

zMeans not sharing similar letters are significantly different (P ≤ 0.05). NS = non-significant.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

gric

ultu

re -

Fai

sala

bad]

, [A

. S. K

han]

at 2

2:13

02

May

201

4

Orchard Management Influences Quality of Cold Stored Mangoes 7

TABLE 2 Status of Mineral Elements in the Fruit Peel and Fruit Pulp Tissues of ExperimentalOrchards at Harvest

Peel Pulp

Orchard N (%) P (%) K (%) Ca (%) Mg (%) N (%) P (%) K (%) Ca (%) Mg (%)

Orchard-1 0.52 0.005bz 1.83 0.72 0.20 0.87a 0.016a 1.02b 0.58 0.23Orchard-2 0.52 0.020a 2.19 0.88 0.22 0.35b 0.009b 1.14a 0.55 0.21LSD (P ≤ 0.05) NS 0.0016 NS NS NS 0.2806 0.0113 0.0708 NS NS

zMeans not sharing similar letters are significantly different (P ≤ 0.05). NS = non-significant.

Orchard-1 (3.89 mm kg−1 h−1) exhibited 1.31-times lesser respiration rate ascompared to Orchard-2 (5.08 mm kg−1 h−1) after removal from cold storage.Similarly at the fully ripe stage, Orchard-1 (5.84 mm kg−1 h−1) exhibited1.39-times reduced fruit respiration rate compared to orchard-2 (8.13 mmkg−1 h−1) (Fig. 2).

Physical Fruit Quality

Non-significant differences were observed with respect to orchards regardingmost physical fruit characteristics (textural softness, shriveling and lenticels)after cold storage and at the ripe stage. Peel color development was signifi-cantly higher in orchard-1 at the ripe stage and while fruit of both orchardsshowed non-significant differences for peel color just after cold storage(Table 3).

POSTHARVEST FRUIT ROT AND DISORDERS

The fruit from both orchards did not develop postharvest fruit rot both atremoval and the ripe stage. Disorders such as soft nose and stem end cavitywere also absent in the mango fruit. The fruit of both orchards showednon-significant differences regarding jelly seed development (Table 4).

Biochemical Fruit Quality

SSC:TA ratio, ascorbic acid contents, and sugar contents (reducing and totalsugar) differed significantly with respect to the orchards. Fruit of orchard-1 exhibited 1.38-fold higher SSC:TA ratio, 1.69-fold more reducing sugarcontents and 1.22-fold higher total sugar contents as compared to orchard-2(Table 5 and Fig. 3), while ascorbic acid contents were found to be 1.46 timeshigher in fruit of orchard-2 as compared to orchard-1. Remaining biochem-ical fruit treats (SSC, TA and total carotenoids) remained non-significant inrelation to orchards (Table 5).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

gric

ultu

re -

Fai

sala

bad]

, [A

. S. K

han]

at 2

2:13

02

May

201

4

TAB

LE3

Fruit

Qual

ityof

Man

gocv

.Sa

mar

Bah

isht

Chau

nsa

inRel

atio

nto

Exp

erim

enta

lO

rchar

ds

afte

rCold

Stora

gean

dat

the

Fully

Rip

eSt

age

After

stora

geA

tripe

stag

e

Orc

har

dW

eigh

tlo

ss(%

)Pee

lco

lor

(sco

re)

Softnes

s(s

core

)Sh

rive

ling

(sco

re)

Lentic

els

(sco

re)

Wei

ght

loss

(%)

Pee

lco

lor

(sco

re)

Softnes

s(s

core

)Sh

rive

ling

(sco

re)

Lentic

els

(sco

re)

Orc

har

d-1

6.33

az1.

001.

481.

001.

009.

633.

35a

3.97

2.33

1.00

Orc

har

d-2

5.87

b1.

001.

481.

001.

009.

402.

52b

4.00

2.05

1.00

LSD

(P≤

0.05

)0.

1404

NS

NS

NS

NS

NS

0.46

53N

SN

SN

S

z Mea

ns

notsh

arin

gsi

mila

rle

tter

sar

esi

gnifi

cantly

diffe

rent(P

≤0.

05).

NS

=non-s

ignifi

cant.

8

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

gric

ultu

re -

Fai

sala

bad]

, [A

. S. K

han]

at 2

2:13

02

May

201

4

Orchard Management Influences Quality of Cold Stored Mangoes 9

0.0

1.9

3.8

5.7

7.6

9.5

After storage At ripe stage

Res

pira

tion

(mm

ole

Kg–1

h–1)

Orchard-1 Orchard-2

FIGURE 2 Respiration of mango cv. Samar Bahisht Chaunsa in relation to experimentalorchards after cold storage and at the ripe stage. Vertical bars indicate ± SE of means; n = 3replicates.

TABLE 4 Postharvest Fruit Rot and Disorders in Mango cv. Samar Bahisht Chaunsa in Relationto Experimental Orchards at the Ripe Stage

OrchardsSoft nose(score)

Jelly seed(score)

Stem end cavity(score)

Rot(score)

Orchard-1 1.0 1.57 1.0 1.0Orchard-2 1.0 2.51 1.0 1.0LSD (P ≤ 0.05) NSz NS NS NS

zNS = non-significant (P ≤ 0.05).

TABLE 5 Biochemical Fruit Quality of Mango cv. Samar Bahisht Chaunsa in Relation toExperimental Orchards

Orchards SSC (◦Brix) TA (%) SSC:TA (ratio)Ascorbic acid(mg 100 ml−1)

Total carotenoids(µg g−1)

Orchard-1 19.8 0.14 139.1az 78.09b 32.59Orchard-2 19.4 0.20 100.5b 114.28a 42.12LSD (P ≤ 0.05) NS NS 24.464 19.206 NS

zMeans not sharing similar letters are significantly different (P ≤ 0.05). NS = non-significant.

Organoleptic Fruit Quality

Data regarding organoleptic fruit quality revealed significant differencesregarding taste, pulp texture and aroma with respect to orchards. Fruit har-vested from orchard-1 performed better; scoring 1.29 times higher for taste,1.24 times higher for texture and aroma compared to orchard-2, while fla-vor and pulp color were found non-significant between the two orchards(Fig. 4).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

gric

ultu

re -

Fai

sala

bad]

, [A

. S. K

han]

at 2

2:13

02

May

201

4

10 A. S. Khan et al.

0

4

8

12

16

20

ReducingSugars

Non-ReducingSugars

TotalSugars

Perc

enta

ge

Orchard-1 Orchard-2

FIGURE 3 Fruit sugar contents of mango cv. Samar Bahisht Chaunsa in relation toexperimental orchards. Vertical bars indicate ± SE of means; n = 3 replicates.

1

3

5

7

9

Taste Flavor Pulp color Texture Aroma

scor

e

Orchard-1 Orchard-2

FIGURE 4 Organoleptic fruit quality of mango cv. Samar Bahisht Chaunsa in relation toexperimental orchards. Vertical bars indicate ± SE of means; n = 3 replicates.

DISCUSSION

Production Locality and Orchard Management

The current study demonstrated the significant impact of orchard man-agement as well as production locality on the fruit quality as well asphysiological processes within the fruit, i.e., physiological weight loss andrespiration rate. The study indicated that the climatic features of the produc-tion locality have significant importance to be considered besides orchardmanagement practices in regulating mango fruit quality (Hofman, 1996).Significant differences in fruit quality in both districts demonstrated the sig-nificant influence of production locality on mango fruit quality irrespectiveof level of orchard management.

Orchard Soil and Foliage Mineral Status

Soil mineral analysis revealed that the soils of both orchards exhibited non-significant behaviour for N and P, while K was found to be significantlydifferent between the two orchards. According to mineral analysis, soils of

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

gric

ultu

re -

Fai

sala

bad]

, [A

. S. K

han]

at 2

2:13

02

May

201

4

Orchard Management Influences Quality of Cold Stored Mangoes 11

both orchards were deficient in N and P contents whereas soil K contentswere in adequate amount. The optimum range for soil P and K for bet-ter mango production ranged from >125 mg kg−1 and 15–100 mg kg−1,respectively (Biswas and Kumar, 2011). Deficiency in foliage N and P andMg contents was described by analysis of mango leaves sampled from bothorchards. However, foliage K and Ca contents were at optimum levels.Orchard-1 had significantly higher foliage N and P contents while K contentswere significantly greater in orchard-2. Optimum range for foliage N, P, K,Ca, and Mg for 0.78%–1.65%, 0.02%–0.33%, 0.77%–1.73%, and 0.40%–0.65%,respectively, for sustainable mango production (Ganeshamurthy et al., 2010).Better foliage mineral contents may be characterized with soil texture, treevigor, and climatic conditions for orchard-1.

Fruit Quality

Among physical fruit characteristics, fruit harvested from both orchardsexhibited significant differences in fruit weight loss during storage and peelcolor development at the ripe stage (Table 3). Fruit of both orchards had poorpost-storage color development, which seems to be a varietal characteristic,and it necessitates developing special protocol for post-storage ripening for‘Samar Bahisht Chaunsa’ mango.

The biochemical characteristics including SSC:TA ratio, ascorbic acidcontents, reducing and total sugar contents of mango fruit exhibited signifi-cant variation regarding production locality and orchard management. HigherSSC:TA ratio and sugar contents (reducing and total) may be attributed tohigher pulp mineral contents (N, P, and K) in orchard-1 due to orchardmanagement and. The results were in agreement with results of Ghosh andChattopadhyay (1999) observed that higher N lead to higher TSS, TSS/TAratio, and total sugar contents in mango. Significant differences in ascorbicacid contents may be due to differences in cultivation practices and climate.Manthey and Perkins-Veazie (2009) has also observed variability in ascorbicacid contents with respect to production location in different mango cultivarswith different harvest dates.

The sensory quality attributes like taste, texture, and aroma were sig-nificantly influenced by production locality and orchard management. Thehigher score for these sensory traits may be due to higher fruit pulp N and Pcontents in orchard-1. Taste is determined by SSC: TA ratio and higher ratiodetermines better taste. The better taste may be attributed to higher min-eral contents which improves the SSC: TA ratio (Wright and Harris, 1985).Higher pulp color may be due to higher pulp N contents in orchard-1 asdescribed by Olienyk et al. (1997). Higher aroma contents in fruit harvestedfrom orchard-1 may be ascribed to the higher mineral contents in their pulp.Higher mineral status influenced aroma with emphasis on the production

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

gric

ultu

re -

Fai

sala

bad]

, [A

. S. K

han]

at 2

2:13

02

May

201

4

12 A. S. Khan et al.

of esters which are considered major component of the characteristic aromaand flavour in most fruit crops (Fellman et al., 2000).

CONCLUSIONS

Biochemical aspects of fruit quality, consumer acceptability, and respirationrate of ‘Samar Bahisht Chaunsa’ mango are significantly influenced by theproduction locality as well as orchard management.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We thank the staff at the Soil and Water Testing Laboratory, Sargodha, fortechnical assistance regarding orchards soil analysis.

FUNDING

We gratefully acknowledge the Australian Centre for InternationalAgricultural Research (ACIAR) for the financial support to carry out thisresearch work under Pakistan–Australia Agriculture Sector Linkages Program(ASLP) Phase-I, Mango Supply Chain Management Project.

LITERATURE CITED

Abou-Aziz, A.B., I. Desouki, and M.M. El-Tanahy. 1975. Effect of nitrogen fertilizationon yield and fruit oil content of avocado tree. Gartenbauwissenschaft 3: 89–94.

Akhtar, K.P. and S.S. Alam. 2002. Assessment keys for some important diseases ofmango. Pakistan J. Biol. Sci. 5: 246–250.

Anonymous. 2010. Statistical year book of Pakistan. Federal Bureau of Statistics,Islamabad, Pakistan.

Anwar, R. and A.U. Malik. 2007. Hot water treatment affects ripening quality andstorage life of mango (Mangifera indica L.). Pakistan J. Agr. Sci. 44: 304–311.

Ben-Hong, W., G. Michel, L. Francoise, G. Laurent, and S. Li. 2002. Influenceof assimilate and water supply on seasonal variation of acids in peach (cv.Suncrest). J. Sci. Food Agr. 82: 1829–1836.

Beverly, R.B., J.G. Latimer, and D.A. Smittle. 1993. Preharvest physiological andcultural effects on postharvest quality, p. 74–98. In: R.L. Shewfelt and S.E. Prussia(eds.). Postharvest handling: A systems approach. Academic Press, San Diego.

Bhattarai, D.R. and D.M. Gautam. 2006. Effect of harvesting method and calcium onpostharvest physiology of tomato. Nepal Agr. Res. J. 7: 37–41.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

gric

ultu

re -

Fai

sala

bad]

, [A

. S. K

han]

at 2

2:13

02

May

201

4

Orchard Management Influences Quality of Cold Stored Mangoes 13

Biswas, B.C. and L. Kumar. 2011. Revolution in Mango production: Success storiesof some farmers. In: Fertiliser Marketing News. Fert. Assoc. India (FAI), NewDelhi, India.

Burdon, J.N., K.G. Moore, and H. Wainwright. 1991. Mineral distribution in mangofruit susceptible to the physiological disorder soft-nose. Sci. Hort. 48: 329–36.

Chapman, H.D. and F. Parker. 1961. Determination of NPK method of analysis forsoil, plant and waters, p. 150–179. Pub. Div. Agri. Univ. California, Riverside,CA, USA.

Cronje, R.B. 2009. Effect of harvesting practices and pre-packing storage on lenticeldiscolouration of mangoes. Acta Hort. 820: 653–664.

Daane, K.M., J.W. Dlott, G.Y. Yokota, R.S. Johnson, C.H. Crisosto, D.P. Morgan, T.J.Michailides, and H.T. Ramirez. 1996. Influence of nitrogen fertilization on thesusceptibility of nectarines to pathogens and pests. Rivista di Frutticoltura e diOrtofloricoltura 58: 41–45.

FAOSTAT. 2010. Food and Agricultural Commodities Production. 24 February 2012.<http://faostat.fao.org/site/339/default.aspx>.

Fellman, J.K., T.W. Miller, D.S. Mattinson, and J.P. Mattheis. 2000. Factors that influ-ence biosynthesis of volatile flavour compounds in apple fruit. HortScience 35:1026–1033.

Ferguson, I.B. 1980. Mineral composition of fruit and vegetables in relation to storagelife. CSIRO Food Res. Qrtly. 40: 94–100.

Ganeshamurthy, A.N., H.B. Raghupathi, and L.R. Varalakshmi. 2010. Soil testing andtissue analysis for perennial horticultural crops. Indian J. Fert. 11: 152–158.

Ghosh, S.N. and N. Chattopadhyay. 1999. Foliar application of urea on yield andphysico-chemical composition of mango fruits cv. Himasagar under rainfedcondition. Hort. J. 12: 21–24.

Hafeez, O., A.U. Malik, A.S. Khan, A. Rehman, and Q.A. Javaid. 2012. Impact of dif-ferent packaging types and low temperature shipping durations on fruit qualityand marketability of Pakistani mangoes. Int. J. Agr. Biol. 14: 47–54.

Hofman, P.J. 1996. Pre-harvest effects on postharvest quality of subtropical andtropical fruit. Proc. Intl. Conf. Trop. Fruits: Global Commercial. Trop. Fruits.,Malaysian Agr. Res. and Dev. Inst., Kuala Lumpur, 23–26 Jul. 1996, p. 323–341.

Hortwitz, W. 1960. Official and tentative methods of analysis, 9th ed., p. 320–341.Association of the Official Agriculture Chemist, Washington, D.C.

Jackson, M.L. 1962. Soil chemical analysis. Prentice Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NewJersey.

Kader, A.A. 2002. Quality and safety factors: Definition and evaluation for freshhorticultural crops, p. 279–285. In: A.A. Kader (ed.). Postharvest technology ofhorticultural crops. University of California, Oakland, CA, USA.

Lalel, H.J.D., Z. Singh, and S.C. Tan. 2003. Distribution of aroma volatile compoundsin different parts of mango fruit. J. Hort. Sci. Biotechnol. 78: 131–138.

Malik, A.U. and Z. Singh. 2005. Prestorage application of polyamines improves shelflife and fruit quality of mango. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 129: 280–286.

Manthey, J.A. and P.E. Perkins-Veazie. 2009. Influences of harvest date and loca-tion on the levels of β-carotene, ascorbic acid, total phenols, the in vitroantioxidant capacity, and phenolic profiles of five commercial varieties ofmango (Mangifera indica L.). J. Agr. Food Chem. 57: 10825–10830.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

gric

ultu

re -

Fai

sala

bad]

, [A

. S. K

han]

at 2

2:13

02

May

201

4

14 A. S. Khan et al.

Nasir, M.A. and I. Mian. 1993. Fruit yield and quality as affected by irrigation intervals.Pakistan J. Agr. Res. 4: 324–328.

Nguyen, H., P. Hofman, R. Holmes, I.S.E. Bally, B. Stubbings, and R. Mcconchie.2004. Effect of nitrogen on the skin colour and other quality attributes of ripe‘Kensington Pride’ mango (Mangifera indica L.) fruit. J. Hort. Sci. Biotechnol.79: 204–210.

Olienyk, P., A.R. Gonzalez, A. Mauromoustakos, W.K. Patterson, C.R. Rom, and J.Clark. 1997. Nitrogen fertilization affects quality of peach puree. HortScience32: 284–287.

Oosthuyse, S.A. 1993. Ripening behaviour and quality on ripening of Sensationmango in relation to cold-storage temperature and tree fertilization. South AfricaMango Growers’ Assn. Yrbk. 13: 67–75.

Papadakis E.I., E.E. Protopapadakis, and I.N. Therios. 2008. Yield and fruit qualityof two late-maturing Valencia orange tree varieties as affected by harvest date.Fruits 63: 327–334.

Peryam, D.R. and F.J. Pilgrim. 1957. Hedonic scale method of measuring foodpreferences. Food Technol. 11: 9–14.

Ruck, J.A. 1969. Chemical methods for analysis of fruit and vegetables. ResearchStation Summerland, Canada Dept. Agri., Publ. No. 1154.

Ryan, J., G. Estefan, and A. Rashid. 2001. Soil and plant analysis laboratory man-ual, second ed. International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas(ICARDA), Aleppo, Syria.

Salvador, M.E., L.A. Lizana, L.E. Luchsinger, E. Alonso, and E. Loyola. 1998. Localityeffect on some fruit quality parameters in peaches and nectarines. Acta Hort.465: 447–454

Sobkowska, A. and M. Basinska. 1975. Flame photometry determination of Na, K, Li,and Ca traces in Cr-Ni steel. Microchimica Acta 64: 227–234.

Steel, R.G.D., J.H. Torrie, and D.A. Dicky. 1997. Principles and procedures ofstatistics: A biological approach, 3rd ed. McGraw Hill Book Co. Inc., New York.

Vargas, M.C., H.L. Medina, and K. Araujo. 1994. Determination of metals in sedimentsof Sinamaica Lagoon, Venezuela by atomic absorption spectrometry. Analyst119: 623–625.

Watanabe, F.S. and S.R. Olsen. 1965. Test of an ascorbic acid method for determin-ing phosphorus in water and NaHCO3 extracts. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc. 29:677–678.

Wright, D.H. and N.D. Harris. 1985. Effect of nitrogen and potassium fertilization ontomato flavour. J. Agr. Food Chem. 33: 355–358.

Young, T.W. and J.T. Miner. 1961. Relationship of nitrogen and calcium to ‘soft-nose’disorder in mango fruits. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 78: 201–208.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

gric

ultu

re -

Fai

sala

bad]

, [A

. S. K

han]

at 2

2:13

02

May

201

4